Keir Starmer Feels the Consequences of Establishing High Standards for Labour in Political Opposition

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 achieve power, it might return to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer became adept at scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You should not be a lawmaker and a lawbreaker and it's time for him to go," he declared.

After Durham police began probing whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by consuming a curry and beer at a campaign event, he made a significant political wager and vowed 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 somewhat uptight, Lisa Nandy described him as "Mr Rules," emphasizing the difference between Starmer's apparently high ethical standards and Johnson's lack of concern.

Reversal of Fortune

Since assuming office, the boomerang appears to have swung back toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not just for himself but for his whole ministerial team, was inevitably would prove an unachievable challenge, particularly in the imperfect realm of politics.

But rarely did anyone anticipate that it would be Starmer himself who would initially compromise his own position, when his inability to see that accepting free glasses, clothes and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be distinct.

Growing Controversies

Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, though they have varied in degree of severity. Louise Haigh was forced to resign 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 accepting the government was being harmed by the furore over her strong connections to her aunt, the removed leader of Bangladesh now accused of corruption.

The exit of Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, in September after she breached 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 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 out. It doesn't matter who it is, they will be terminated," he told his biographer Tom Baldwin before the election.

Rachel Reeves Situation

When it emerged 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 highest levels of administration. If the chancellor were to depart, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having seemingly gained insight from the Rayner row, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by leasing 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, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and decided 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 confident that Reeves, while having made a mistake, had an excuse: she had not been informed by her rental agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. 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 cease attempting to conceal this, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has violated legislation, show courage and dismiss her," she wrote online.

Proof Surfaces

Luckily for the chancellor, she had documentation. Her husband dug out emails from the rental company they used to lease their home. Just before they were released, 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, although 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 clearly states it is the property holder – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple overlooked that almost £1000 had not left their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the infraction is relatively minor when compared with multiple instances committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on morality.

His ambition of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political establishment, eroded over time after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are evident: people are fallible.