He told me that, in his opinion, I shouldn’t get involved with the art gallery/football club affair. I told him he was being rather bold.
‘Better for me to be bold than for you to be stumped, Minister.’ I like Bernard. He’s wasted in Whitehall.
He then informed me that it is axiomatic in Whitehall (though news to me, I must say) that an MP should never get involved in a planning inquiry in his own constituency.
Apparently this is because the local issues are usually finely balanced. Therefore you’re bound to offend as many constituents as you please. Either way, you can’t win. The same problem as the integrated national transport policy, in fact. And Bernard emphasised that it becomes especially dangerous to become involved if there’s a powerful quango lurking in the wings.
This sounded all very sensible in theory, and I was grateful for Bernard’s support and care. But in this case I’m not sure that the local arguments
Bernard took this on board, and made no direct reply. He simply suggested that we now went through my diary for the morning. I thought he’d conceded my point until we examined the diary closely.
10.15 a.m.
The Secretary-General of the Arts Council
(The biggest quango of them all)
10.45 a.m.
The Historic Monuments Association
11.00 a.m.
The National Trust
11.15 a.m.
The Country Landowners’ Association
11.30 a.m.
The Council for the Protection of Rural England
11.45 a.m.
The Country Crafts and Folklore Council
I gazed at Bernard, nonplussed.
‘Rural England?’ I asked, picking one of the appointments out at random.
‘Yes,’ said Bernard and made a vague gesture towards the window. ‘There’s quite a lot of it out there.’
‘But why are all these people coming to see me?’
‘The Corn Exchange,’ he explained patiently. ‘It’s the Arts and Architecture mafia.’
‘So who are the Country Crafts and Folklore Council?’
‘The raffia mafia.’ He wasn’t joking it seems. ‘All very influential people. They’ve all come out of the woodwork. There’ll be letters in
I had a nasty feeling now that he could be right. But I am determined to fight on. This is one I can win.
I admonished Bernard. ‘I didn’t ask you to put any of these people in my diary, Bernard. What were you thinking of?’
‘I was thinking of Sir Humphrey, Minister. He asked me to.’
I told Bernard that I intended to support my excellent scheme, come what may.
The rest of the day was spent in interminable meetings of excruciating boredom listening to all the pressure groups. Tonight I’m feeling absolutely exhausted.
Bernard displayed even more ingenuity and tenacity today.
Having taken on board that my art gallery demolition plan is irrevocable, he produced a document for my inspection when I arrived at the office this morning.
He was actually asking me to approve it. He described it as the Local Government Allowances Amendment No. 2 to this year’s regulations. ‘What is it?’ I asked.
He had written me a briefing, summarising the purpose of the document. It’s a Statutory Instrument to be laid before the House. ‘As Minister responsible for local government we need you to authorise that the revised Paragraph 5 of No. 2 Regulations 1971 shall come into operation on the 18th of March next, revoking Regulation 7 of the Local Government Allowances Amendment Regulations 1954 (b).’
I asked him what he meant, as I took the briefing and gazed at it.
So he showed me the explanatory note, which adds that ‘These regulations are to make provision for prescribing the amounts of attendance and financial loss allowances payable to members of local authorities.’
I didn’t pay much attention to Bernard’s summary, because I was mesmerised by the document itself. I’ve kept a copy.
[
Isn’t it remarkable that this immortal prose should be described as an ‘explanatory note’?
I finished reading it and looked at Bernard.
‘I think that’s quite clear, isn’t it?’ he said.
‘Do I have to bother with all this piddling gobbledegook?’ I replied.
He was slightly put out. ‘Oh, I’m sorry, Minister. I thought that this would be an opportune moment for you to ensure that, as a result of your Ministerial efforts, local councillors would be getting more money for attending council meetings.’
I suddenly realised what he was driving at. I glanced back at Bernard’s summary. There it was, in black and white
He had done excellently. This is indeed an opportune moment to display some open-handed generosity towards members of local authorities.