🔗 Share this article

Efforts to secure the release of Alaa Abd el-Fattah regularly distracted the Starmer administration from concentrating on core domestic political issues, according to a former member of the PM's inner circle of ex-aides.

Frustration Became a Source of Humour

Paul Ovenden, who stepped 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 long meetings on the priorities of the government, and frequently they would be railroaded via any other business into discussions of this gentleman,” 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 bit of a kind of a standing joke within government that people would invariably find a way to bring it back to this conversation.”

A Sign of Wider Struggles

Ovenden argued the amount of time spent on freeing Abd el-Fattah was indicative of a government that has found it difficult to stay focused on the public's main concerns in the face of pressure from “well-connected” activist groups and quasi-independent agencies.

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.

Shared Frustrations in Downing Street

But, Ovenden’s assessment is shared by many in Downing Street, even the prime minister, who complained last month about bureaucratic hurdles slowing 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 banning smoking in pub gardens as further examples.

“At a time when the public is getting increasingly impatient, ever more disillusioned with inaction, more and more fed up 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 end 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 argues. “We don’t have to strangle entrepreneurs at birth with excessive regulation.”

Having been part of a small group of advisers close to the prime minister since his days in the opposition benches, his exit was widely regarded as a blow to Starmer, while his critique of governmental focus finds sympathy in certain quarters.