🔗 Share this article

Efforts to free of Alaa Abd el-Fattah frequently diverted Keir Starmer’s government from focusing on core home affairs, as stated by 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 became a “running joke” among those in Whitehall exasperated with the lack of progress of change.

“We'd hold extended discussions on the key goals of the government, and frequently they would be railroaded via any other business into conversations of this gentleman,” he stated on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

He added, “The majority on the political side 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 running joke within government that people would always find a way to bring it back to this conversation.”

Symptomatic of a Broader Issue

Ovenden argued the amount of time dedicated to the activist's case was symptomatic of a government that has found it difficult to remain concentrated on voters’ core priorities in the face of pressure from “influential” activist groups and arms-length bodies.

These remarks were made during his first public intervention since he stepped down in September, after it was revealed he sent inappropriate messages about the Labour MP Diane Abbott previously.

Echoes of PM's Own Concerns

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

Ovenden said Abd el-Fattah’s case was one of several areas where the government became distracted from its main objectives. He pointed to controversies over reparations to former colonies and prohibiting cigarettes in pub gardens as further examples.

“At a time when the public is getting increasingly impatient, more and more fed up with a lack of progress, increasingly tired with distraction, in my opinion, we simply can’t afford to be spending their time on what I consider distractions,” he said.

Advocating for a Radical Shift

In a separate piece, he calls on the government to scale back environmental regulations, reduce welfare spending and even scrap the triple-lock on pensions.

“It is not necessary to keep taking money of the wealth-generating sectors of our economy in order to fund inflation-busting pension increases for the wealthy or an unsustainable welfare system,” he writes. “We don’t have to stifle small businesses from the outset with excessive regulation.”

Having been part of a handful 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 critique of governmental focus finds sympathy in certain quarters.