Ken Livingstone says he kept quiet about his "three undisclosed 
children" in order to protect the privacy of his former lovers.
I would suggest it was to protect his own political image. Having five children by three women is not so uncommon these days, though it is not a record to be particularly proud of.
According to today’s Evening Standard, the media knew about the London Mayor’s secret son and two daughters, but chose not to publish the story. It has been publicly announced now because the facts were going to be published in a new biography.
The Standard today reveals that Livingstone’s secret love children are a 15-year-old son and two grown up daughters from a relationship which preceded his political career. He is said to have been an attentive father towards them.
However, he deliberately misled Londoners into thinking that his two children with his partner Emma Beal, Tom, five and four-year-old Mia, were his first. He revelled in their warm wishes and congratulations at becoming a father for the first time at the age of 57 knowing it was not true.
Off course politicians should have a private family life. But deliberately misleading the public about how many children you have is not honourable, honest or acceptable for a high profile public figure. The public should expect to be told the truth about these matters and a man should be proud of his children, not conceal them. How did they really feel about this?
Actually, how does any man manage to be a good father to his kids when they live in three or even more different homes? Can he be fair to them all?
I expect a man worthy of power to show pride in his children not skulk around their existence.
Also, I can’t imagine that juggling relationships with so many women was accomplished without duplicity.
I don’t know. It’s hard to judge someone else’s relationships because we don’t know all the facts. Mitterand had a secret “other family” for years and his reputation hasn’t suffered for it.
“Having five children by three women is not so uncommon nowadays, though it is not a record to be particularly proud of.”
It’s a disgrace, Ellee. Selfish, wicked and dishonest behaviour at the root of many of our problems. It’s not fair to the children and in most cases the taxpayer can be found footing the bill somewhere along the line. Chaps I know are paying a paltry £150 per month towards their child – it makes economic sense to dump your kids because I know that they cost a lot more than that to bring up staying married.
At some stage in the early 90s he seems to have had a sexual relationship with three women simultaneously and had unprotected sex with at least two of them at around the same time. Maybe he is a secret moslem convert and regards multiple families as acceptable.
Honeyrose, i can’t imagine who would have fancied him.
Perhaps Ken was also protecting the privacy of his oldest children. A teenager and older children may well not appreciate and indeed feel uncomfortable with the media attention.
Margaret, I think you are very generous with your views on this. What about the privacy of his younger children who he has openly been photographed with?
To paraphrase a Grace Jones song – Ken’s private life, come on Ellee leave me out…