Is the prime minister’s position that his chancellor did break the ministerial code but that the apology is sufficient resolution?
Or is it that the apology is sufficient for there not to be an investigation into whether she broke the ministerial code?
At their daily press briefing for journalists, Downing Street refused to say whether the code had been broken.
The PM’s official spokesman said SIr Keir had sought confidential advice from his ethics adviser, who ruled that an apology was enough.
“The ministerial code makes clear that in certain circumstances and in consultation with the independent adviser, an apology is sufficient resolution,” the spokesman added.
This may sound niche but it does matter – the chancellor breaking the ministerial code in any way, however minor, is worth noting.
Of course the political implications of this will depend on much less technical questions than that.
The Conservative Party smells vulnerability.
“It’s one rule for the Chancellor and another for everyone else,” a spokesperson said.
“Keir Starmer pledged to restore integrity to politics, but now he’s laughing in the face of the British public. He should grow a backbone and sack the chancellor now.”
However, Kemi Badenoch appeared to slightly muddy the position this morning, suggesting that Reeves should be sacked only if she is found to have broken the law.
A demand that Starmer sack his chancellor is not par for the course.
In fact, for all their criticism of Reeves’s stewardship of the economy over the past 16 months or so, this is the first time the Conservatives have called for her to be sacked.
It’s an important strategic judgment they have made.