🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in British politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when throwing a boomerang in opposition, since when you achieve power, it could come back to strike you in the face.

During Opposition

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You cannot be a legislator and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and promised he would quit if found guilty. Fortunately for him, he was exonerated.

Establishing an Ethical Persona

At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Upholding such levels of probity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be 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 spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, although they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been convicted of fraud over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being damaged by the furore over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she violated the ministerial code over her underpayment of stamp duty on her £800,000 coastal apartment was the most serious blow yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will truly trust we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be out. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be sacked," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

The Reeves Controversy

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in trouble, it sent a collective shudder through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by leasing her south London home without the required £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," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Government Response

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 lettings agency that her home was in a designated area which necessitated a permit. She had promptly corrected the error by submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are thought to be behind the story, was intent on securing a resignation. "This entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to cease attempting to conceal this, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she posted.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the lettings agency they used to lease their home. Just before they were released, the agent released a declaration saying it had expressed regret 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 account evolved overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would submit the application for them.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small when compared with numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's brush with the standards regime highlights the difficulties of Starmer's position on morality.

His ambition of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are imperfect.