🔗 Share this article

There is a political concept in UK politics, frequently credited to Tony Blair, that you need to be careful when throwing a boomerang in opposition, because when you achieve power, it might return to hit you in the face.

During Opposition

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to step down over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he declared.

After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had broken lockdown rules himself by consuming a beer and curry at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and promised he would resign if found guilty. Fortunately 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 described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

The Boomerang Returns

Since taking power, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an impossible task, particularly in the flawed world of politics.

But few foresaw that it would be Starmer himself who would be the first to undermine his own position, when his inability to see that taking free glasses, 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, though they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was forced to resign as transport secretary last November after it was revealed she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity over a lost official mobile in 2014.

Tulip Siddiq resigned as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being harmed by the uproar over her strong connections to her aunt, the removed leader 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 coastal apartment was the most serious blow yet.

No Special Treatment

Yet Starmer has consistently maintained 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 out. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be sacked," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it was revealed on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, second only to the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a collective shudder round the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the entire Starmer project could collapse entirely.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, acted decisively, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by renting out her south London home without the specific £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had already spoken with Reeves, sought advice from his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided that further investigation 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 been informed by her lettings 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 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 violated legislation, grow a backbone and sack her," she posted.

Proof Surfaces

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 published, the agent released a declaration 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, though there are remaining queries over why her account evolved overnight: from her being unaware that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would apply on their behalf.

Lingering Questions

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for applying. It is also unclear how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Broader Implications

While the infraction is comparatively small when measured against numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the ethical framework highlights the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His ambition of restoring broken public faith in the political establishment, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are imperfect.