Keir Starmer Experiences the Effects of Establishing High Standards for His Party in Opposition

There is a political theory 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 could come back to strike you in the face.

The Opposition Years

As leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer mastered scoring points against the Conservatives. Throughout the Partygate scandal in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to resign over his violation of regulations. "You should not be a legislator and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated.

After Durham police began probing whether he had violated lockdown rules himself by having a curry and beer at a political gathering, he made a significant political wager and promised he would resign if determined to have committed an offense. Luckily 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 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 forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, not only for himself but for his entire cabinet, was always going to be 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 failure to recognize that taking free spectacles, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what minimal confidence existed that his government would be distinct.

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 was revealed she had been found guilty of fraudulent activity 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 facing corruption allegations.

The departure 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 coastal apartment 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 dismiss someone on the spot. If a minister – any minister – makes a significant violation of the rules, they will be gone. It makes no difference who it is, they will be terminated," 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 shared apprehension round the top of government. If the chancellor were to go, the whole Starmer initiative could come tumbling down.

Downing Street, having apparently learned from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, announcing that the chancellor had acknowledged "inadvertently" breaking housing rules by renting out her south London home without the required £945 licence mandated by the local council.

Not only that, the prime minister had previously conversed with Reeves, consulted his ethics adviser, Laurie Magnus, and determined that further investigation into the matter was "not necessary," within mere 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 received notification by her lettings agency that her home was in a specified zone which necessitated a permit. She had promptly corrected the error by applying for one.

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 stop trying to cover this up, order a full investigation and, if Reeves has broken the law, show courage and sack her," she posted.

Evidence Emerges

Fortunately for Reeves, she had documentation. Her husband dug out 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 story changed overnight: from her being ignorant that a licence was necessary, to the agency having informed them it would apply on their behalf.

Remaining Issues

Also, the law explicitly specifies it is the owner – instead of the lettings agent – that is legally responsible for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not been deducted from their bank account.

Wider Consequences

While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when measured against numerous ones committed during prior Conservative governments, Reeves's encounter with the ethical framework underlines the challenges of Starmer's position on ethics.

His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the pitfalls of adopting superior ethical standards – as the boomerang comes back round – are evident: people are imperfect.