🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in British politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when throwing a boomerang in opposition, because when you reach government, it could come back to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a legislator and a rule-breaker and it's time for him to go," he declared.

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a curry and beer at a political gathering, he made a significant political wager and promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily for him, he was cleared.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Upholding such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, especially in the imperfect realm of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his failure to recognize that taking free glasses, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, although they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity over a missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being harmed by the uproar over her strong connections to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she breached the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the gravest setback yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be out. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner row, acted decisively, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £945 licence demanded by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had already spoken with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were confident that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which required a licence. She had promptly corrected the error by submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are believed to have originated the story, was determined to get a scalp. "This entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has violated legislation, show courage and sack her," she posted.

Proof Surfaces

Fortunately for Reeves, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to rent out their home. Just before they were published, the agent issued a statement saying it had apologised to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor appears to be in the clear, although there are remaining queries over why her story changed overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would apply on their behalf.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law clearly states it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when measured against numerous ones committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on morality.

His goal of restoring broken public faith in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the political consequences return – are evident: people are fallible.