Keir Starmer "not naming my children"

[Misthios]

Respect his stance not to allow pictures of his kids, fair enough, that is the decision he and his wife have made.

But the whole "i'm not publicly naming them" - you'd think as a former lawyer he'd know birth records are public record and anyone can find out in 30 seconds? So not the big secret he thinks it is?

I like the precedent. Politicians shouldn't bring their partners or families into the public eye; the media shouldn't do it either. We should only care about the job they do - unless a relative or friend is strictly relevant to their decision making.

I think he’s made a great decision not to name them. The press can be brutal. Would you want that for your kids?

We have a reasonably well known person in our school community who has things written about them in the press. It has been an eye opener about how inaccurate the media reports are. It would seem that some of it is just made up because it is so far from the truth.

His dc didn't sign up to be public.

His dc should not be discussed. Being a teenager/child is hard enough.

I do geneology work for a living but I'm only interested in researching names I'm being paid for and their histories. As noone is paying me to find the PMs dc I'm not interested.
They don't affect his position why would anyone need to know about them?

PMs having teenage children is pretty rare. Blair, Major and Starmer have been the only ones I can think of in my lifetime, which stretches back to the 70s. Major’s kids got some attention but Blair’s really took a pasting, and it had an awful effect on them to the extent that it’s considered one of the reasons Blair stood down.

Other PMs have either had older or younger (or no) children, and in the case of the younger ones have shared names and occasional photo ops but no more. Those younger children are not of an age to be doing anything the press might take an interest in.

I think Starmer here is just being very clear that this won’t be a repeat of the Blair experience for his kids.

@Arlanymor I have never heard the phrase "yellow journalist" before. I learned something new, thanks!

But they are keeping it private. And they've publicly said they won't be giving their kids names out. So if anyone does use his kids names, they're doing so against their parents wishes to keep them private.

It doesn't matter that you can find the stuff out. Go find it out if you're interested and do whatever you want with that information. As parents, they've decided not to give out their children's names and that's fine.

What a strange and rather pointless thread.

So the PM wants to keep his children and their names out of the public eye. So what? Good for him.
Of course he knows their names can be worked out but he's drawing a line in the sand here and it's good to see someone who is in the media a lot trying to protect their children from unwanted attention.

I saw an interview where he named his son.

Probably that interview is still online somewhere and people will come across it.

@Misthios you are coming across as really weird…

Your job is looking up people's kids names when they asked you not to?

Is the pay good?

@pizzaHeart you asked about the pets. Now I'm not starting a rumour here but Keir said this morning that the Siberian is white and blue eyed. We've had 4 Siberians - two of which were white/blue eyed -so I've attached a possible photofit using our littlest one

They, the family, are keeping it private. If you or others choose not to also keep it private to the family nobody can stop you, but it would then be fair to query your motives and judge you for your lack of respect for their wishes when publicity around the children cannot possibly be in their best interests or (in its true meaning) the public interest.

Did it occur to you that he thought "we're keeping that private" was a more "Plain English" sentence than "we are choosing not to disclose that information"?

In my company we do a lot of customer facing communications and we're now being told to use "Plain English" and keep it simple and to the point, because that's what the public prefer. As a politician and a senior lawyer, he'll know how to phrase things for the audience.

Why would you even care?!
Makes sense to try and keep his kids out of the public eye, and not naming them then fair enough as most people don't give enough of a shit to go googling random kids birth records.
That's just a bit weird and stalkerish.

Too much cuteness going on 😍[sorry for derailing]

😍😍😍

We need to see siblings and hear their names, thank you very much 🤣

Good for him

It sounds like you need to get a life @Misthios

"I'm not publicly naming them"
It's a weird thing to say. The logical thing is to say "I want to keep my children out of the spotlight and be obliged if you'd respect that".

He should have made a blanket statement, not only make a point about names. It speaks volumes.

What does it say to you @senua?

Quite a few people on here would benefit from going outside and getting some fresh air. Maybe take up a hobby to otherwise occupy your mind?

Very strange what people believe to be important.

He doesn't even know the sex of his children.

He's previously stated two boys and then another time one boy one girl ?

weird behaviour in my opinion.

As we are in possibly in a similar line of work I find the OP's attitude somewhat embarrassing, having deeper access to certain websites, sometimes through licence, is privileged knowledged and therefore not for general use.
Op sounds a bit....stalkerish imo especially as noone else cares.

Was he? Starmer's never mentioned that!