Can Starmer buck the trend and keep his family out of the spotlight?

Remember that doorstep photograph of Cherie Blair the morning after the night Labour won in 1997? She does. Speaking about it almost a decade later, she was finally able to laugh about it.

Mrs Blair had gone to bed at 6.30am only to be woken at 8am by voices at the front door of the family home in Islington. So she opened it.

“It was such a terrible mistake,” she told The Guardian. “There was a great flash of bulbs.”

Cherie Blair the morning after the night Labour won in 1997 (Image: free)

The moment was said to have inspired the paparazzi scene in the movie Notting Hill two years later (though no-one, mercifully, followed Rhys Ifans’ example and came out to pose in his pants for the world’s media).

Cherie Blair’s dismay went beyond the photo. “I was very upset when the press said I was wearing some sort of nylon thing. It was a high-quality, cotton nightie from Next.”

So no photos of Mrs Sunak, or as is far more likely Mrs Starmer, wearing a nightie, Next or otherwise.

Here is something else you should not expect to see - a picture of the Starmers recreating that shot of the Blairs and their young family on the doorstep of Number 10. Sir Keir and his wife Victoria have two children, a boy and a girl, born 2008 and 2010 respectively. The Starmers have never revealed the youngsters’ names to the media and you won’t find any pictures in the press.

Read more

• Scotland 'still suffering Thatcher effects'
• Baillie says candidate comments untrue

Nor will you be reading about life in the Starmer household any time soon. Victoria Starmer, an occupational therapist for the NHS, has never given an interview and has no plans to change that.

In trying to keep their family life private to this extent, the Starmers are going against convention. With the exception of Theresa May, and before that Ted Heath, both of whom had no children, details of a Prime Minister’s family have emerged in the media. The level of detail varies, and the amount of coverage, but there has been no withholding such basic facts as names.

Will the Starmers succeed in keeping their family life private? And what does it tell us about modern politics that their desire for privacy should be seen as remarkable?

The public has become used to being told about politicians, their backgrounds, and their families. This general election has been no exception. There can scarcely be a person in the UK who doesn’t know Sir Keir’s father was a toolmaker, or Rishi Sunak’s dad was a GP and his mother a pharmacist. Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, was seen in a party political broadcast caring for his disabled son.

In Scotland, too, there is an expectation that partners and children will be part of the picture. John Swinney, for example, spoke about the need to consult his disabled wife and wider family before deciding to run for SNP leader and First Minister. Kate Forbes brought her family, including baby daughter, to hear the winner of the SNP leadership contest, as did Humza Yousaf, the victor on the day.

Why do politicians allow the public into their lives in ways most professions - and certainly most journalists - never would?

There are lots of reasons why a person votes as they do. Feeling a connection to a politician or party is only part of it, but it is an important one. Where does this person come from? What do they stand for? What is important to them? From these factors and more we make a judgment.

Being open about family life generally works in a politician’s favour. They would not do it otherwise. But it is not always the case. How often in this general election, for example, have you heard a Labour politician saying Rishi Sunak is richer than King Charles?

Children are a tough one. Do you talk about them or not? If you don’t have them, do you talk about that? When running for the Tory leadership against Theresa May, Andrea Leadsom rightly apologised for saying being a mother gave her “a very real stake” in the future. Remember, too, that awful New Statesman cover featuring an illustration of Angela Merkel , Nicola Sturgeon, and other women leaders staring into an empty cot. There is personal and there is too personal.

As for the partners and children of politicians, there must be some who have enjoyed being along for the ride. None immediately comes to mind, however. Denis Thatcher thought the best thing he could do was stay firmly in the background. Norma Major felt the same. It is hard to imagine any of the Blair children recommending a life in the media spotlight.

Still, not many people will be able to say they have lived above the shop in Downing Street, spent weekends at Chequers or, in the case of Boris Johnson’s youngest, went paddling with their mum Carrie and US First Lady Jill Biden while the G7 summit was taking place in Cornwall. Some experiences money truly cannot buy.

Michelle Obama (Image: free)

There are examples of parents making a life in politics work for the children. In her memoir, Becoming, Michelle Obama made it clear she could not have done without the help of her mother in bringing up daughters Malia and Sasha. Marian Shields Robinson, who died recently at age 86, moved into the White House with the Obamas, where she was a constant source of love and support for all the family.

Whether the Starmers succeed in keeping their family life as private as they would wish remains to be seen. There are protections in law, as mum and dad, both trained lawyers, know better than most. Editors could come to an agreement with the family, but there is always the risk of it being broken.

So far, the media has respected the boundaries set down by the Starmers. But even those seem to be shifting, as when a Sunday paper ran a photo of Sir Keir and Lady Victoria at a Taylor Swift concert. What happened to party conference photos only?

Only the few who have been through the experience can know what it is like to live with the media on your doorstep day after day. Ready or not, the Starmers are about to join that exclusive club.