🔗 Share this article

There exists 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 reach government, it might return to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at landing blows against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal specifically, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

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

The "Mr Rules" Image

At the time, possibly not completely advantageous for the Labour leader whom the public already perceived was rather rigid, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.

The Boomerang Returns

Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Upholding such high standards of integrity, not just for himself but for his entire cabinet, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, especially in the imperfect realm of politics.

But rarely did anyone anticipate that it would be Starmer himself who would be the first to undermine his own position, when his inability to see that accepting free glasses, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what minimal confidence existed that his government would be different.

Mounting Scandals

Since then, the controversies have emerged rapidly, though 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 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 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 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 only believe 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.

The Reeves Controversy

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

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, acted decisively, announcing that the chancellor had admitted to "inadvertently" violating housing rules by leasing her south London home without the specific £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Furthermore, the prime minister had already spoken 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 emerging.

Government Response

Early on Thursday morning, government insiders were confident that Reeves, while having committed an error, had an excuse: she had not received notification by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which required a licence. She had promptly corrected 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 entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she posted.

Evidence Emerges

Luckily for the chancellor, she had documentation. Her husband located emails from the lettings agency they used to lease their home. Just before they were published, the agent issued a statement saying it had apologised to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they failed to obtain a licence.

The chancellor seems to be exonerated, although there are still questions over why her account evolved overnight: from her being ignorant 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 applying. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice 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 goal of rebuilding broken public faith in the political establishment, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the pitfalls of taking the moral high ground – as the boomerang comes back round – are clear: people are imperfect.