🔗 Share this article

There is a political theory in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when throwing a boomerang 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 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 having a beer and curry at a political gathering, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would quit if found guilty. Luckily for him, he was exonerated.

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy characterized him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the contrast between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Upholding such high standards of integrity, not only for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, 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 spectacles, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what minimal confidence existed that his government would be different.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, although they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud over a missing work phone in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after accepting the government was being harmed by the furore over her close ties to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

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 most serious blow yet.

Equal Standards

Yet Starmer has always been clear there would be no special treatment. "People will only believe we're changing politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – whichever minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be gone. It makes no difference 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 authority, could be in trouble, it sent a shared apprehension through the highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could collapse entirely.

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

Not only that, 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," all within hours of the Daily Mail story emerging.

Political Defense

Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an justification: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. She had quickly rectified the error by submitting an application.

But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are believed to have originated the story, was intent on securing a resignation. "This whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has broken the law, show courage and sack her," she posted.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the rental company 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 still questions over why her story changed overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having told them it would submit the application for them.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law clearly states it is the property holder – rather than 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 misdemeanour is comparatively small when measured against multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime highlights the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of restoring shattered public trust 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 boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are fallible.