Rachel Reeves was never going to resign over her failure to apply for a permit to rent out her house in south London.
She is unlikely even to face a fine from Southwark council – the mea culpa from the estate agent will have absolved her of much of the political guilt.
The episode is a distraction from the far bigger challenge she faces ahead of next month’s budget – and the £30-40 billion black hole.
But that doesn’t mean this squall should be ignored entirely – for it tells us two important things.
The first is it reminds us of of one of Ms Reeves‘ traits that is at odds with the vibe she likes to present to the country: that she is not always as across the detail or on top of things as she would like to make out.
The chancellor first said she was not advised to get a permit by a letting agent, so did not do so. Then, 24 hours later, she said that she was told by the letting agency it would take care of a permit, and did not realise it had not.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
But is that quite good enough, particularly for someone who campaigned to strengthen exactly this law and who ended up deriving financial benefit for not doing so, to quite evidently not be across the detail?
In the aftermath of Angela Rayner’s resignation for a failure to comply with property law, might it not have been worthwhile for one to double-check the paperwork of one’s second home?
Then there have been other incidents in Ms Reeves’ life outside of being chancellor that jar with the image of a super-efficient stateswoman.
Ahead of the election, Ms Reeves was forced to hold her hands up and acknowledge making mistakes in her new book about female economists after she faced allegations of plagiarism.
She admitted that some sentences in her book, The Women Who Made Modern Economics, were “not properly referenced in the bibliography”.
She also had to update her LinkedIn after it emerged she was not an “economist” when she worked in financial services at a bank.
For a chancellor who faces making momentous decisions that will affect everybody in this country, lack of attention to detail is not a characteristic she would want extensively dwelt on. The bigger story this tells about her will sting.
The second thing it tells us is just how central she is to the Starmer project.
Number 10 moved to protect her within hours – publishing an exchange of letters late into Wednesday night that relied just on the account of Ms Reeves and apparently without corroborating evidence.
The government machine went out of its way in the fastest possible timeframe to try and shut the matter down – a courtesy not extended to Angela Rayner or Louise Haigh.
This is because Sir Keir knows a Reeves departure risks exposing himself – weeks before a budget that could determine this prime minister’s fate.
Read more from Sky News:
Investigation into Reeves not needed, Starmer says
Sky News gets rare access inside Reform UK meeting
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
It also risks an adverse reaction in the bond markets, which fear higher-borrowing alternative candidates in the Treasury.
Neither outcome is one this government feels like it could cope with at the moment.
Rachel Reeves is quite simply the most important figure in Sir Keir Starmer’s administration, and this is why she is protected at almost any reasonable cost.
While this is true now, it may not always be this way, however. Will Sir Keir feel the same after 26 November when he has to defend the tax-raising budget?
