There exists a political theory in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when throwing a boomerang in opposition, because when you reach government, it could come back to hit you in the face.
The Opposition Years
As opposition leader, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. During the Partygate scandal in particular, he called for Boris Johnson to resign over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a legislator and a lawbreaker and it's time for him to go," he declared.
After Durham police launched an investigation whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by having a beer and curry at a campaign event, he took a huge political gamble and vowed he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily 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 rather rigid, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," highlighting the contrast between Starmer's seemingly elevated ethical standards and Johnson's carelessness.
Reversal of Fortune
Since assuming office, the political attacks have returned toward the prime minister with a vengeance. Upholding such high standards of integrity, 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 failure to recognize that taking free spectacles, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could break what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.
Mounting Scandals
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 found guilty of fraudulent activity over a lost official mobile in 2014.
Tulip Siddiq quit as a Treasury minister in January after acknowledging the government was being damaged by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the ousted prime minister of Bangladesh now facing corruption allegations.
The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she violated the ministerial code over her insufficient payment of stamp duty on her £800,000 seaside flat was the most serious blow yet.
Equal Standards
Yet Starmer has consistently maintained there would be no exceptions. "People will only believe we're changing politics when I fire someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a serious breach of the rules, they will be out. 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 emerged on Wednesday that Rachel Reeves, ranking immediately below the prime minister in seniority, could be in hot water, it sent a shared apprehension 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" breaking housing rules by renting out her south London home without the specific £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," within mere hours of the Daily Mail story breaking.
Government Response
Early on Thursday morning, administration sources were assured that Reeves, while having made a mistake, 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 intent on securing a resignation. "This entire situation smells. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has broken the law, grow a backbone and dismiss her," she posted.
Proof Surfaces
Luckily for the chancellor, she had documentation. Her husband located 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 expressed regret to the couple for an "oversight" that meant they neglected to acquire a licence.
The chancellor seems to be exonerated, though there are still questions over why her story changed overnight: from her being ignorant 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 – 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 left their bank account.
Broader Implications
While the infraction is relatively minor when compared with multiple instances committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's brush with the standards regime underlines the difficulties of Starmer's position on morality.
His ambition of rebuilding broken public faith in the political classes, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be comprehensible. But the pitfalls of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are evident: people are fallible.
