Attempts to free of the British-Egyptian activist frequently diverted the Starmer administration from focusing on core domestic political issues, according to one of the prime minister’s closest former advisers.
Paul Ovenden, who stood down last year as the prime minister’s director of strategy, said the case of the British political prisoner evolved into a “recurring punchline” among those in government exasperated with the slow pace of change.
“We would be having extended discussions 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 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 affect us on a day-to-day basis. It actually became a sort of a running joke within government that people would always find a way to return to this topic.”
Ovenden argued the amount of time spent on the activist's case was symptomatic of a government that has struggled to remain concentrated on voters’ core priorities in the face of pressure from “well-connected” activist groups and quasi-independent agencies.
Ovenden’s comments came in his first public intervention since he resigned in September, after it was revealed he sent inappropriate messages about the Labour MP Diane Abbott previously.
However, Ovenden’s assessment is echoed by many in Downing Street, even the prime minister, who lamented last month about excessive red tape slowing government action.
Ovenden stated Abd el-Fattah’s case was among a number of areas where the government became distracted from its main objectives. He pointed to rows over reparations to former colonies and prohibiting cigarettes in outdoor hospitality areas as further examples.
“When the public is getting increasingly impatient, ever more disillusioned with inaction, more and more fed up with side issues, in my opinion, we simply can’t afford to be spending their time on what I consider distractions,” he said.
In a further article, he calls on the government to roll back environmental regulations, reduce benefits expenditure and even scrap 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 inflation-busting pension increases for millionaires or an unaffordable benefits framework,” he argues. “We don’t have to strangle small businesses at birth with excessive regulation.”
Having been part of a handful of advisers around the prime minister since his days in opposition, his exit was seen by many as a setback to Starmer, even as his analysis of Whitehall priorities finds sympathy in certain quarters.