Prime Minister Keir Starmer is under growing political pressure as his government nears the one-year mark without delivering on a key election pledge: the creation of a new, independent ethics and integrity commission. The commitment, prominently featured in Labour’s manifesto, was meant to symbolize a clean break from what Starmer described as years of sleaze and ethical lapses under Conservative leadership. Restoring public trust in politics was central to Labour’s campaign, and Starmer personally pledged to set higher standards in public office. However, little tangible progress has been made, prompting criticism from opposition MPs, civil society groups, and members of the parliamentary standards community.
The delay has sparked a formal inquiry by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, which is now examining the government’s failure to act swiftly on its ethics reform promises. Critics argue that the current system for ministerial oversight is fragmented and ineffective, relying too heavily on internal mechanisms that lack genuine independence. Starmer’s early moves, including changes to the ministerial code and granting the independent adviser on ministerial standards the authority to launch investigations without prior approval from the prime minister, were seen as positive but ultimately insufficient. Under the current structure, the prime minister still holds the final say on whether a minister is found to have breached the rules, and the adviser’s findings remain non-binding.
Figures like Dave Penman, the general secretary of the FDA union representing senior civil servants, have voiced frustration over the lack of a truly autonomous enforcement body. He and others argue that as long as political leadership maintains control over ethical judgments, public confidence in standards of conduct will remain weak. While the government has introduced a monthly transparency register for gifts and hospitality, the ethics commission itself has barely been mentioned in public discourse since the election. Meanwhile, oversight bodies such as the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) continue to operate without full leadership or statutory backing.
With expectations high and patience wearing thin, the pressure is mounting on Starmer to take decisive action. Critics warn that the longer the government delays establishing a permanent and powerful watchdog, the more it risks undermining its own credibility on issues of integrity and good governance. As the inquiry progresses, the prime minister must demonstrate a genuine commitment to reform or face the political fallout of a broken promise on one of his most high-profile pledges.
