🔗 Share this article

Attempts to free of the British-Egyptian activist frequently diverted the Starmer administration from focusing on core home affairs, according to a former member of the prime minister’s closest former advisers.

A 'Running Joke' Within Government

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

“We'd hold long meetings on the key goals of the government, and often they would be railroaded via AOB into conversations of this individual,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

He continued, “The majority on the political side of government weren’t that aware of it – weren’t that tuned into it – because it didn’t impact us on a day-to-day basis. It actually became a sort of a standing joke within government that people would invariably find a way to return to this conversation.”

A Sign of Wider Struggles

Ovenden argued the significant focus spent on freeing Abd el-Fattah was indicative of a government that has struggled to remain concentrated on voters’ core priorities in the face of pressure from “influential” activist groups and arms-length bodies.

Ovenden’s comments were made during his first public intervention since he resigned in September, after it was revealed he had sent offensive texts about the Labour MP Diane Abbott previously.

Echoes of PM's Own Concerns

However, Ovenden’s assessment is shared by many in Number 10, including the prime minister, who complained last month about excessive red tape delaying government action.

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

“At a time when the public is getting increasingly impatient, more and more fed up with inaction, increasingly tired with side issues, in my opinion, we cannot justify to be using valuable time on what I consider diversions,” he said.

Advocating for a Radical Shift

In a separate piece, he urges the government to roll back green rules, cut welfare spending and even scrap the guaranteed pension increase mechanism.

“It is not necessary to keep taking money of the productive parts of our economy in order to pay for inflation-busting pension increases for the wealthy or an unsustainable welfare system,” he writes. “There is no need to stifle small businesses at birth with regulatory burdens.”

As one of a small group of advisers close to the prime minister since his days in the opposition benches, his exit was seen by many as a blow to Starmer, while his critique of governmental focus resonates in certain quarters.