In his somewhat emotional letter to Angela Rayner – handwritten, in an unusual gesture of comradeship – Sir Keir Starmer expressed his “real sadness” at her departure from his administration.
He is not alone in that. It is indeed something like a tragedy that Ms Rayner’s career has come to an end in such a way. In truth, however, and making all allowances for her entirely understandable wish to protect her privacy and her family, she has to take much of the responsibility for what befell her and the government.
The independent adviser on ministerial standards, Sir Laurie Magnus, conducted a balanced and compassionate review of this affair, and recognised Ms Rayner has “acted with integrity and with a dedicated and exemplary commitment to public service”. Crucially, however, he also finds that Ms Rayner, for whatever reason, failed to follow the suggestion and recommendation of two firms of solicitors to obtain suitable expert advice on the taxation liabilities involved in the purchase of the property in Hove.
This lapse still needs to be explained by Ms Rayner. But, in any case, it leaves her with no defence against the allegation that she fell below the necessary standards required for someone in such a role – especially as housing secretary. To her credit, Ms Rayner accepts this, and “deeply regrets” her conduct. She clearly breached the ministerial code and, in short, had to go.
The repercussions from all this do not end there. If Sir Keir was previously aware that she had omitted to take proper legal advice, then he should have asked for her resignation days before, arguably just as soon as she admitted underpaying stamp duty. This is especially the case given the uncompromising attitude he, and Ms Rayner, displayed towards various apparent transgressions of the ministerial code that occurred under the Conservative government.
The prime minister, therefore, also has some questions to answer about what he knew and when. As he and Ms Rayner so often implied, it cannot be a case of one rule for Labour ministers and another for the Tories.
It is curious, to say the least, that having been involved in a previous row over property, Ms Rayner was not more fastidious about her own affairs. Although she was cleared on that occasion by two police enquiries and an investigation by HMRC, such a searing experience should have made her proceed in her latest acquisition with superhuman caution. That she did not brings an additional feeling that this is an entirely avoidable loss of a valuable member of the cabinet, and an equally unnecessary blow to the reputation of the government.
Ms Rayner’s personal background should make no difference to that. It was indeed “an unfortunate failure”, as Sir Laurie puts it, with some understatement.
It all obviously leaves the government in a weakened state. One of the most powerful appeals made by Labour in the last parliament was that it would “end the sleaze” and apply the highest of standards to those in public life. That is why Sir Keir tightened up the ministerial code on taking office.
Ms Rayner was one of the most prominent of those attacking Conservative politicians for their casual attitude to the rules, frequently accusing them in the most brutal of ways of abject hypocrisy. That she should find herself accused of hypocrisy for similar behaviour is poignant, and it means that she and the government have let the public down. Trust is hard-earned but easily lost, and this administration can ill afford further damage to its reputation, this time for a lack of probity.
So now the government has to try and recover. The No 10 team is being strengthened, especially in its economic competence, and that is one cause for hope. The planned ministerial reshuffle has been brought forward, and the party conference, along with a new parliamentary session, does still represent an opportunity for the government to regroup and for Labour to unite. However, there is now the prospect of an internal party election for the post of deputy leader.
Although not strictly required, it was just as well that Ms Rayner also stepped down as deputy leader of the Labour Party. Under the party’s rulebook, if Sir Keir found himself incapacitated as leader, then Ms Rayner would automatically take over, from the back benches, as party leader – but not as prime minister. That is not a sustainable prospect, however remote, so a replacement for Ms Rayner will need to be elected. Sir Keir can only hope that her successor possesses her abilities and can replicate her appeal. Of the prospective candidates, Bridget Phillipson seems most likely to succeed.
On the first day of the Reform UK conference, this debacle comes at a particularly bad moment for Labour, giving Nigel Farage, of all people, an opportunity to perch on the moral high ground. Yet in politics, the battle is rarely over, and there is also the possibility of renewal and recovery.
Despite the turbulence of recent days, and the dismal polls, the next general election is years away, and much can change in that time. This autumn, at Labour conference and elsewhere, the prime minister has to inspire his followers, execute the reforms the nation needs, and regain the trust of the voters. Now he will also need a very active, and punctilious, deputy.
