🔗 Share this article Starmer Experiences the Effects of Setting High Standards for Labour in Opposition There exists a political theory in UK politics, often attributed to Tony Blair, that caution is necessary when throwing a boomerang in opposition, since when you reach government, it could come back 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 in particular, he demanded Boris Johnson to step down over his rule-breaking. "You cannot be a lawmaker and a rule-breaker and it's time to pack his bags," he stated. 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 promised he would quit if determined to have committed an offense. Fortunately for him, he was exonerated. Establishing an Ethical Persona At the time, perhaps not entirely helpfully for the Labour leader whom voters already thought was rather rigid, 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 political attacks have returned toward the prime minister forcefully. Maintaining such levels of probity, 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 initially compromise his own position, when his inability to see that accepting free glasses, clothing and Taylor Swift tickets could shatter what little belief existed that his government would be different. Mounting Scandals Since then, the scandals have come thick and fast, although they have differed in seriousness. Louise Haigh was compelled to step down as transport secretary last November after it emerged she had been convicted of fraud over a missing work phone 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 ousted prime minister 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. No Special Treatment 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 gone. 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, second only to 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 seemingly gained insight from the Rayner dispute, responded firmly, declaring that the chancellor had admitted to "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 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, 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 necessitated a permit. She had quickly rectified the error by applying for one. But Kemi Badenoch, whose Tory researchers are believed to have originated the story, was determined to get a scalp. "This whole thing stinks. The prime minister needs to stop trying to cover this up, commission a complete inquiry and, if Reeves has violated legislation, grow a backbone and sack her," she wrote online. Evidence Emerges Luckily for the chancellor, she had receipts. Her husband located emails from the lettings agency they used to rent out 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 neglected to acquire 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 owner – rather than the lettings agent – that is legally accountable for submitting the application. It is additionally uncertain how the couple failed to notice that almost £1000 had not left their bank account. Wider Consequences While the misdemeanour is relatively minor when compared with numerous ones committed during previous Tory administrations, Reeves's encounter with the standards regime underlines the difficulties of Starmer's position on morality. His goal of rebuilding shattered public trust in the political classes, gradually worn down after years of scandals, may be understandable. But the dangers of adopting superior ethical standards – as the political consequences return – are clear: people are fallible.