The Complete Yes Minister

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.

[Hacker’s diary continues — Ed.]

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 and plain English: ‘Amounts of attendance and financial loss allowances payable to members of local authorities.’ So that’s what it all means!

He had done excellently. This is indeed an opportune moment to display some open-handed generosity towards members of local authorities.

He asked if he could make one further suggestion. ‘Minister, I happen to know that Sir Humphrey and Sir Ian Whitworth have been having discussions on this matter.’

‘Ian Whitworth?’

Bernard nodded. ‘The Corn Exchange is a listed building. So it’s one of his planning inspectors who will be conducting the inquiry. Sir Humphrey and Sir Ian will be laying down some “informal” guidelines for him.’

I was suspicious. Informal guidelines? What did this mean?

Bernard explained carefully. ‘Guidelines are perfectly proper. Everyone has guidelines for their work.’

It didn’t sound perfectly proper to me. ‘I thought planning inspectors were impartial,’ I said.

Bernard chuckled. ‘Oh really Minister! So they are! Railway trains are impartial too. But if you lay down the lines for them, that’s the way they go.’

‘But that’s not fair!’ I cried, regressing forty years.

‘It’s politics, Minister.’

‘But Humphrey’s not supposed to be in politics, he’s supposed to be a civil servant. I’m supposed to be the one in politics.’

Then the whole import of what I’d blurted out came home to me. Bernard was nodding wisely. Clearly he was ready and willing to explain what political moves I had to make. I asked him how Humphrey and Ian would be applying pressure to the planning inspector.

‘Planning inspectors have their own independent hierarchy. The only way they are vulnerable is to find one who is anxious for promotion.’

‘Can a Minister interfere?’

‘Ministers are our Lords and Masters.’

So that was the answer. Giles Freeman, the Parly Sec. at the Department of the Environment, is an old friend of mine. I resolved to explain the situation to Giles and get him to intervene. He could, for instance, arrange to give us a planning inspector who doesn’t care about promotion because he’s nearing retirement. Such a man might even give his verdict in the interests of the community.

All I said to Bernard was: ‘Get me Giles Freeman on the phone.’

And to my astonishment he replied: ‘His Private Secretary says he could meet you in the lobby after the vote this evening.’

I must say I was really impressed. I asked Bernard if he ever thought of going into politics. He shook his head.

‘Why not?’

‘Well, Minister, I once looked up politics in the Thesaurus.’

‘What does it say?’

‘“Manipulation, intrigue, wire-pulling, evasion, rabble-rousing, graft…” I don’t think I have the necessary qualities.’

I told him not to underestimate himself.

[Three days later Sir Humphrey Appleby received another letter from Sir Ian Whitworth — Ed.]