Attempts to free of the British-Egyptian activist frequently diverted the Starmer administration from focusing on core domestic political issues, according to a former member of the prime minister’s closest former advisers.
Paul Ovenden, who stood down last year as the PM's chief of strategy, said the case of the imprisoned activist evolved into a “recurring punchline” among those in government frustrated by the lack of progress of change.
“We'd hold long meetings on the key goals 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 added, “The majority on the political team of government were largely unaware of it – weren’t that tuned into it – because it didn’t impact us daily. It truly turned into a sort of a running joke within government that people would invariably find a way to bring it back to this topic.”
Ovenden said the amount of time spent on the activist's case was indicative of a government that has struggled to remain concentrated on voters’ core priorities 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 sent inappropriate messages about the Labour MP Diane Abbott eight years ago.
But, Ovenden’s political analysis is shared by many in Downing Street, including the prime minister, who complained last month about excessive red tape slowing government action.
Ovenden stated Abd el-Fattah’s case was one of several areas where the government became distracted from its main objectives. He cited controversies over compensation for historical injustices and prohibiting cigarettes in outdoor hospitality areas as further examples.
“When the public is getting more and more frustrated, ever more disillusioned with inaction, increasingly tired with distraction, in my opinion, we simply can’t afford to be using valuable time on what I consider distractions,” he said.
In a separate piece, he calls on the government to roll back environmental regulations, reduce welfare spending and even end the guaranteed pension increase mechanism.
“We don’t have 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 unaffordable benefits framework,” he argues. “We don’t have to strangle small businesses at birth with regulatory burdens.”
As one of a handful of advisers around the prime minister since his days in the opposition benches, his exit was widely regarded as a setback to Starmer, while his analysis of governmental focus resonates in certain quarters.