🔗 Share this article

Efforts to free of the British-Egyptian activist frequently diverted the Starmer administration from concentrating on bread-and-butter home affairs, according to one of the prime minister’s closest ex-aides.

Frustration Became a Source of Humour

Paul Ovenden, who stood down last year as the prime minister’s director of strategy, said the case of the imprisoned activist became a “recurring punchline” among those in government exasperated with the lack of progress of change.

“We would be having extended discussions on the key goals of the government, and often they would be derailed via AOB into conversations of this individual,” he stated on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

He added, “Most of us on the political team of government were largely unaware of it – weren’t that tuned into it – because it didn’t impact us on a day-to-day basis. It truly turned into a sort of a standing joke within government that people would always find a way to return to this topic.”

A Sign of Wider Struggles

Ovenden argued the significant focus dedicated to freeing Abd el-Fattah was symptomatic of a government that has struggled to stay focused on the public's main concerns in the face of pressure from “well-connected” campaign organisations and quasi-independent agencies.

These remarks were made during his initial public statement since he stepped down in September, following revelations he had sent offensive texts about the Labour MP Diane Abbott previously.

Echoes of PM's Own Concerns

But, Ovenden’s assessment is echoed by many in Number 10, even the prime minister, who complained last month about bureaucratic hurdles slowing government action.

Ovenden stated Abd el-Fattah’s case was one of several areas where the government was sidetracked from its main objectives. He pointed to rows over reparations to former colonies and prohibiting cigarettes in pub gardens as further examples.

“When the public is getting increasingly impatient, ever more disillusioned with inaction, increasingly tired with distraction, in my opinion, we simply can’t afford to be spending their time on what I consider diversions,” he said.

Advocating for a Radical Shift

In a separate piece, he urges the government to scale back environmental regulations, reduce benefits expenditure and even end the triple-lock on pensions.

“It is not necessary to keep picking the pockets of the productive parts of our economy in order to fund inflation-busting pension increases for the wealthy or an unsustainable welfare system,” he writes. “There is no need to strangle entrepreneurs from the outset with excessive regulation.”

Having been part of a handful of advisers around the prime minister since his days in the opposition benches, his departure was seen by many as a setback to Starmer, while his critique of Whitehall priorities resonates in certain quarters.