🔗 Share this article

There exists a political concept in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when launching attacks in opposition, since when you reach government, it could come back to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As opposition leader, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

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

Establishing an Ethical Persona

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

Reversal of Fortune

Since taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be an unachievable challenge, 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 accepting free spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the controversies have come thick and fast, although they have differed in seriousness. 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 accepting the government was being damaged by the uproar over her strong connections to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.

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

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're transforming politics when I dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be gone. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be terminated," 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 authority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by renting out her south London home without the specific £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that additional inquiry into the matter was "not necessary," all within hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were assured 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 quickly rectified the error by applying for one.

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, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has broken the law, grow a backbone and sack her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the rental company they used to rent out 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 seems to be exonerated, though there are remaining queries over why her account evolved overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told 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 responsible for submitting the application. It is also unclear how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small when measured against multiple instances committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

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