🔗 Share this article

There exists a political theory 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 might return to hit you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered 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 lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

After Durham police began probing whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by consuming a beer and curry at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would resign 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 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.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, especially in the flawed world of politics.

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

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, although they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit 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 accused of corruption.

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 most serious blow yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained 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 serious breach of the rules, they will be gone. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be sacked," he informed his chronicler Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in authority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the top of government. If the chancellor were to depart, the whole Starmer initiative could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner dispute, acted decisively, announcing that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the required £945 licence demanded by the local council.

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

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were assured that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an justification: she had not been informed by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which required a licence. She had quickly rectified 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 whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband dug out emails from the lettings agency they used to rent out their home. Just before they were released, the agent issued a statement 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 unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would apply on their behalf.

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 also unclear how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is comparatively small when compared with numerous ones committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the ethical framework highlights the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

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