There are plenty of sensible ways to critique the new imm policy proposals. The biography of the Home Secretary isn't one of them. Politicians set policy for society at large, not based on their personal circumstances. Progressive keen on this arg shld try it in other areas:
Do you think no politician who benefitted from private school can ever propose reforming or abolishing private school?
Do you think no politician whose parents benefitted from private health care can ever make the case for public health care?
Do you think no politician whose parents benefitted from private health care can ever make the case for public health care?
Can those whose parents worked in the City never criticise or propose reforms to the City?
Can those whose parents worked in law enforcement never criticise or propose reforms to the police?
"This policy would have hurt x's own parents' interests" is a specious argument.
Can those whose parents worked in law enforcement never criticise or propose reforms to the police?
"This policy would have hurt x's own parents' interests" is a specious argument.
If anything, IMO, it is something to be said in favour of a policy (*all else being equal* - key caveat) that a politician will argue for it on grounds of the broader societal case even though they or their immediate family would lose out from it or would have lost out from it.
