The Complete Yes Minister

‘You may, you may,’ I said, affecting not to notice it.

‘Minister, we have been working very hard all night, and I’m happy to be able to inform you that we have come up with some draft proposals that would enable you to achieve your desired objectives by the stated dates.’

In other words, he spent five minutes digging out from the files the proposals agreed last year when Tom was Minister.

‘Well done, Humphrey,’ I said ingenuously. ‘You see, I told the nation how splendid you are and I was right. I had every confidence in you.’

‘Quite so, Minister,’ he said through clenched teeth.

He got out a folder containing his proposals.

‘Are those your proposals?’ I asked.

‘Yes.’

‘Here are mine,’ I said, and produced a folder too.

‘You have proposals too?’ He was surprised.

I told Humphrey to read his proposed safeguards. Then I would read mine. And we would see how they compared.

Humphrey started reading. ‘One – Personal Data –1 A. Safeguards must be applied with reference to . . .’

I could resist it no longer. Reading from my folder, I joined in, and together, in unison, we read: ‘. . . two criteria – the need to know and the right to know. 1.A(i) the need to know. Only those officials for whom the information was submitted may be deemed, prima facie, to have a need to know.’

We looked at each other.

‘We seem to be of the same mind,’ I remarked.

‘Where did those proposals come from?’ he demanded. I said nothing. After a few moments he repeated, ‘Where did those proposals come from?’

‘Humphrey,’ I replied in a tone of slight reproof, ‘my lips are sealed.’

¹ In conversation with the Editors.

5

The Writing on the Wall

January 18th

The help that I received from Tom Sargent in the matter of the National Data Base might seem unusual to those who are outside the extraordinary world of politics. Strange though it may seem to those members of the public who read numerous abusive speeches in which members of the two main political parties revile each other as incompetent, dishonest, criminally stupid and negligent, cross-party friendships are extremely common. In fact, it is much easier to be friends with a member of the opposite party than a member of one’s own party – for one is not in direct personal competition for office with members of the Opposition in the way that one is with one’s colleagues.

All my Cabinet colleagues and I were naturally in bitter competition with each other during our years in Opposition. In the last three months we’ve all been so busy trying to deal with the real opposition – the Civil Service – that we’ve not had any real time to do-down each other. But I have a hunch, from the recent atmosphere in Cabinet, that some political manoeuvring is in the air again.

There are still numerous other matters concerning me, about which I have also had a little time to reflect this weekend. I realised early on (in my first week as a Minister, in fact) that Open Government presents real problems. It was made clear to me that if people stop having secrets they stop having power.

In fact, paradoxically, government is more open when it is less open. Open Government is rather like the live theatre: the audience gets a performance. And it gives a response. But, like the theatre, in order to have something to show openly there must first be much hidden activity. And all sorts of things have to be cut or altered in rehearsals, and not shown to the public until you have got them right.

The drawback with all this is that it begs the question – which is that the Civil Service keeps secrets from Ministers. They say they don’t, but I’m sure they do. I’m now all in favour of keeping secrets from the public of course, for the reasons I’ve just given, but it should be my privilege, as the people’s elected representative, to decide when to keep the people in ignorance. It should not be up to the Civil Service to keep me in ignorance.

Unfortunately, it is pretty hard to get this across to them.

I have also learned a few general lessons. I must never show my hopes or fears to Humphrey, if I can avoid it – especially party fears. If you give away your political weaknesses, they’ll destroy you. You have to keep them guessing.

I now realise that I should always get civil servants to commit themselves first. Never say, ‘I think . . .’, but always say, ‘What do you think . . .?’

I’ve also learned about ‘yes’ and ‘no’. You can always turn a ‘no’ into a ‘yes’ – but not vice versa. Furthermore, when you say ‘no’, let the Private Office say it for you – but when you say ‘yes’, pre-empt the Private Office and phone up yourself. That way, they get the blame and I get the credit.