🔗 Share this article

Efforts to free of the British-Egyptian activist regularly distracted the Starmer administration from focusing 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 stepped down last year as the prime minister’s director of strategy, claimed the case of the British political prisoner evolved into a “recurring punchline” among those in Whitehall exasperated with the lack of progress of change.

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

He continued, “Most of us on the political team of government weren’t that aware of it – not closely following it – because it didn't affect us daily. It actually became a bit of a kind 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 the activist's case was symptomatic of a government that has struggled to remain concentrated on the public's main concerns in the face of pressure from “well-connected” activist groups and arms-length bodies.

Ovenden’s comments were made during his initial public statement since he stepped down in September, after it was revealed he had sent inappropriate messages about the Labour MP Diane Abbott previously.

Echoes of PM's Own Concerns

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

Ovenden stated Abd el-Fattah’s case was among a number of areas where the government became distracted from its primary goals. He pointed to rows over reparations to former colonies and prohibiting cigarettes in pub gardens as further examples.

“When the public is getting more and more frustrated, ever more disillusioned with inaction, increasingly tired with side issues, in my opinion, we cannot justify to be spending their time on what I consider diversions,” he said.

Advocating for a Radical Shift

In a further article, he calls on the government to roll back environmental regulations, cut benefits expenditure and even end the guaranteed pension increase mechanism.

“It is not necessary to keep taking money of the wealth-generating sectors of our economy in order to pay for above-inflation pension rises for millionaires or an unsustainable welfare system,” he argues. “There is no need to stifle entrepreneurs from the outset with regulatory burdens.”

Having been part of a handful of advisers close to the prime minister since his days in the opposition benches, his exit was seen by many as a setback to Starmer, while his critique of governmental focus finds sympathy in certain quarters.