🔗 Share this article

Attempts to free of the British-Egyptian activist frequently diverted the Starmer administration from focusing on bread-and-butter home affairs, according to a former member of the PM's inner circle of ex-aides.

Frustration Became a Source of Humour

Paul Ovenden, who stood down last year as the PM's chief of strategy, claimed the case of the imprisoned activist evolved into a “running joke” among those in government exasperated with the slow pace of change.

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

He continued, “Most of us on the political side of government weren’t that aware of it – not closely following it – because it didn't affect us daily. It truly turned into a bit of a kind of a running joke within government that people would always find a way to bring it back to this conversation.”

Symptomatic of a Broader Issue

Ovenden said the significant focus dedicated to the activist's case was indicative of a government that has struggled to remain concentrated on voters’ core priorities in the face of pressure from “well-connected” activist groups and arms-length bodies.

These remarks came in his first public intervention since he stepped down in September, following revelations he had sent inappropriate messages about the Labour MP Diane Abbott eight years ago.

Echoes of PM's Own Concerns

However, Ovenden’s political analysis is shared by many in Downing Street, even the prime minister, who lamented last month about excessive red tape delaying government action.

Ovenden stated Abd el-Fattah’s case was among a number of areas where the government was sidetracked from its primary goals. He pointed to rows over compensation for historical injustices and banning smoking in pub gardens as other instances.

“When the public is getting more and more frustrated, more and more fed up with inaction, more and more fed up 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 welfare spending and even scrap the triple-lock on pensions.

“We don’t have to keep picking the pockets of the wealth-generating sectors of our economy in order to fund above-inflation pension rises for millionaires or an unaffordable benefits framework,” he writes. “There is no need to strangle entrepreneurs from the outset with regulatory burdens.”

As one of a small group of advisers close to the prime minister since his days in opposition, his departure was seen by many as a blow to Starmer, while his analysis of governmental focus finds sympathy in certain quarters.