And the main news this Thursday p.m.
is the big government re-shuffle.
And I have with me in the studio,
to discuss his new empire,
the Minister for Administrative Affairs,
the Right Honourable James Hacker MP.
It's been said Mr Hacker
that you are now Mr Town Hall as well as Mr Whitehall.
Well, it's very flattering of you to put it that way.
Well, it wasn't me who put it that way, Mr Hacker,
it was the Daily Mirror.
I just wanted to confirm
that you are now this country's chief bureaucrat.
Of course, that's nonsense.
This government believes in reducing bureaucracy.
Well, figures I have here
say that your department's staff has risen by 10%.
Certainly not.
Well, what figure do you have?
I believe the figure is much more like 9.97.
Well, you see, it has been suggested, Mr Hacker,
that your department is
less interested in reducing bureaucracy than in increasing it.
Well, yes,
but that's because we've had to take on more staff
in order to reduce staff.
I beg your pardon?
Well, it's common sense.
We have to take on more doctors to cure more patients,
more firemen to extinguish more fires.
But how do you propose to extinguish
local government bureaucracy?
Well, it's a challenge and I'm looking forward to it.
But would you agree that there's
even more bureaucratic waste there than there is in Whitehall?
Well, yes, that's what makes it a challenge.
How arel you going to meet the challenge?
It's far too early to give detailed proposals.
After all, I've just come here direct from Number 10.
From number 9.97, perhaps!
But the broad strategy is to cut ruthlessly at waste
while leaving essential services intact.
Well, that's what your predecessor said.
Are you saying that he failed?
Please, let me finish. Because
we must be absolutely clear about this
and I want to be quite frank with you.
The plain fact of the matter is that, at the end of the day,
it is the right, nay, the duty,
of the elected government, in the House of Commons,
to ensure that government policy,
the policies on which we were elected
and for which we have a mandate,
the policies after all, for which the people voted,
are the policies which, finally,
when the national cake has been divided up...
...and may I remind you we, as a nation,
don't have unlimited wealth?
We can't pay ourselves more than we've earn...
...are the policies...
I'm sorry, what was the question again?
I was just asking you Mr Hacker,
whether you would agree that your predecessor had failed.
No, certainly not. On the contrary.
It's just that this job is an enormous...
- Challenge? - Exactly!
Incidentally, I heard your chap on the radio yesterday, Humpy.
He sounded as if he wanted to DO things
about your new local government remit.
He kept calling it a challenge.
Congratulations, Humphrey.
How very kind of you.
You may soon be even more important than Arnold here!
Yes, I expect...
No, no, no, no, no.
I do want to be quite clear about this, Humphrey.
I would never have given you local government
if I thought you were going to let Hacker do anything about it.
Well, I'm sure he won't be able to. Nobody else has.
That's not the point, Humpy.
We've found in the past
that all local government reforms rebound on us.
Whenever anybody finds a way of
saving money or cutting staff in local government,
you'll find it works for Whitehall just as well.
Yes, but local government is extravagant,
overstaffed, and incompetent, whereas we...
Exactly so.
I know my duty, Arnold.
And if he does need something to keep him busy,
you know what to do?
Get him to look into Civil Defence.
Civil Defence? You mean fall-out shelters?
Yes.
Governments long ago decided
that Civil Defence was not a serious issue.
No, merely a desperate one!
And it's therefore best left to those
whose incompetence can be relied upon.
Local authorities!
But the highest duty of government is to protect its citizens.
Presumably that's why they leave it to the borough councils!
Thank you, gentlemen.
Minister, may I have a brief word?
It's about a proposal I worked out
before we were transferred to this department?
And you are?
I am...
what?
Yes, you are what?
What?
I am Dr Cartwright.
But if I may put it another way, Minister,
what are you?
I'm C of E.
No, I think the Minister means,
what function do you perform in the department?
Don't you know?
Yes, I know, but the Minister wants to know.
I'm a professional economist.
Director of Local Administration Statistics.
You were running the Local Authority Directorate
before we took over.
Dear me, no.
Sir Gordon Reid was the Permanent Secretary.
I'm just Under-Secretary rank.
I fear I shall rise no higher.
Why not?
Alas, I'm an expert.
On what?
On the whole thing.
It's all in here.
What's this all about?
Controlling council expenditure.
I'm proposing
that all council officials responsible for a new project
would have to list their criteria for failure
before they were given the go-ahead.
What do you mean?
Well, it's a basic scientific approach.
You must first establish a method of
measuring the success or failure of an experiment.
Then when it's completed,
you can tell whether it's succeeded
or failed.
A proposal would have to state
"This scheme would be a failure
if it lasts longer than this or
costs more than that,
if it employs more staff than these
or fail to meet these pre-set performance standards."
That's fantastic!
But you could never make it work.
'Course you can.
It's all in there.
Bernard, this is my top priority reading for the weekend.
Why hasn't it been done before?
I can't understand.
I put it up several times
and it was always welcomed most warmly.
But Sir Gordon always seemed to have
something more urgent on when we were due to discuss it.
Well, you've come to the right place this time.
Thank you very much, indeed.
Thank you, Minister.
This is marvellous,
isn't it, Bernard?
Isn't it, Bernard?
Yes. Well, it's...
That is, it's...
it's very well presented, Minister.
Humphrey will be fascinated, don't you think?
Well, he's on his way here, now.
I'm sure he'll give his views.
What are you saying, Bernard?
Yes, well, as I say, I think
that he'll think that it's beautifully...
typed.
Minister.
Humphrey,
- come in. - Bernard.
- Sit down. - Thank you, Minister.
Now, local authorities.
What are we going to do?
Minister, this new remit gives you more influence,
more Cabinet seniority.
But you do not let it have to give you any more work or worry.
- That would be foolishness. - Look, Humphrey,
we've got to stop this appalling waste
and extravagance that's going on.
Why?
Yes, why?
Well, it's my job.
We're the government.
We were elected to govern.
Really, Minister.
But surely you don't intend to tamper with the democratic rights
of freely-elected local government representatives?
Well...
no,
of course not.
But local government isn't democratic.
Local democracy's a farce!
I mean the vast majority of people
don't even know who their councillor is.
They never vote in a local election.
Those who do simply regard it as a popularity poll
for the government here in Westminster.
Local councillors in practise are accountable to nobody.
They're public-spirited citizens
selflessly sacrificing their spare time.
Have you ever met any?
Occasionally. When there was no alternative.
Half of them are self-centered busybodies on an ego trip
and the other half only in it for what they can get out of it.
Perhaps they ought to be in the House of Commons.
I mean, to see how a proper legislative assembly behaves.
Anyhow, I'm going to get a grip on them.
I have a plan.
You have a plan?
Yes.
I'm going to insist that any local official
who puts up a plan costing more than...
...say... 10,000 pounds
must accompany it with failure standards.
With what?!
With a statement saying that he would have failed
if his project does not achieve certain...
pre-set results...
...or exceeds...
fixed time or staff or budget limits.
Minister, where did you get the idea
for this dangerous nonsense?
From someone...
in the Department.
Minister, I have warned you before
about the danger of speaking to people in the Department!
I implore you to stay out of the minefield of local government.
It is a political graveyard.
But, excuse me, Sir Humphrey,
you cannot have a graveyard in a minefield
because all the corpses would... powww!
But you got me this job, you said.
Yes, but I didn't expect you to do anything.
I mean, you've never done anything before!
Humphrey, I am deaf to your complaints.
I mean, please, I beg you...
No, no, no, no, no, no, Humphrey.
I want specific proposals straight away.
And immediate plans for their
implementation by local government.
Don't know why you're in such a fuss about anyway?
I'm only proposing failure standards for local government,
not here in Whitehall.
Though come to think of it...
Minister, if you insist on interfering in local government,
may I make a suggestion
that could prove a very real vote winner?
Humphrey, I want to hear no more about...
Vote winner?
An area of local government that needs urgent attention.
What?
Civil Defence.
You mean fall-out shelters?
Surely they're just a joke.
Precisely, Minister. At the moment, they are a joke.
Local authorities are dragging their feet, but
the highest duty of any government
is to protect its citizens.
Some people think that the building of shelters
makes nuclear war more likely.
Well, if you have the weapons, you must have the shelters.
Sometimes wonder why we need the weapons.
Minister,
you're not a unilateralist?
I sometimes wonder, you know.
Well, then you must resign from the government!
No, no, no, no, no, no, Humphrey.
I'm not THAT unilateralist.
Anyway, the Americans will always protect us from the Russians,
won't they?
Russians? Who's talking about the Russians?
Well, the independent deterrent.
It's to protect us against the French!
The French?
But that's astounding!
- Why? - Well, they're our allies, our partners.
They are NOW.
But they've been our enemies
for most of the past 900 years.
I mean, if they've got the bomb, we must have the bomb!
Well...
if it's for the French, of course, that's different.
Makes a lot of sense.
Yes. Can't trust the Frogs.
You can say that again!
Of course, there is increasing public concern about the bomb.
If I were to be seen to be doing something about it...
Yes, I see what you mean.
And Ludovic Kennedy
is preparing a BBC documentary on Civil Defence
which is likely to be critical of the current situation.
But, if you were seen to be taking decisive measures...
Right, yes.
I always handle Ludo so frightfully well.
Yes, right, well, where do we start?
Well, Minister, just a suggestion.
The London Borough of Thames Marsh
has spends less on Civil Defence
than any authority in the country.
What, a ministerial visit, do you think?
Isn't that's Ben Stanley's borough, Minister
the one with the wispy moustache, the one that press all hate.
Good point, Bernard. Get onto it straight away.
And get Bill to make sure
that the press knows all about this visit.
Tell them I lie awake at night
worrying about the defenceless citizens of Thames Marsh.
Do you, Minister?
Well, I will now.
Look, mate,
what makes you think
you can come swanning down here from Whitehall
and tell us how to run our borough?
I'm not swanning down from Whitehall.
I'm simply asking you
why you've done less than any other borough in Great Britain
to protect the people who elected you?
Simple. We can't find the money.
Why don't you try looking for it?
That's great!
Stop school meals, buy no textbooks?
Turn the OAPs out into the cold?
I can tell you exactly where you can find it.
- You can? - Yes.
Tell him, Dr Cartwright.
Well, you can scrap the plans for the new exhibition centre
with the artificial ski slope and jacuzzi pool.
You can close the Feminist Drama Centre,
the council's weekly newspaper and monthly magazine
and the Welfare Rights Research Department.
You can halve the members'
management entertainments allowance,
sell the Mayor's second Daimler,
postpone the building of the new Town Hall,
and cancel the 20 councillors' tourism
factfinding mission to Jamaica.
And close the Gay Bereavement Centre.
That'll save 21 millions on capital account over five years
and 750,000 a year on revenue account.
Revenue account.
- That's just stupid! - Why?
Well, it's depriving the disadvantaged of indispensable services!
Jacuzzi pools?
Look, I don't care if we can afford a fall-out shelter.
This is a unilateralist borough.
We do not believe in nuclear war in Thames Marsh.
Mr Stanley, I don't believe in nuclear war either,
but the provision of fall-out shelters is government policy.
It is not Thames Marsh policy.
Thames Marsh has no quarrel with the USSR.
It's not just the USSR we're frightened of.
It could be the Fre...
The who?
The... frigging Chinese!
If the Russians do invade us,
I suppose they'll stop at the borough boundaries, and say,
"Hold on, we're not at war
with London Borough of Thames Marsh.
Right wheel, comrades, let's annex Chelsea instead."
- Excuse me, Minister. - Yes, Bernard.
I think you may be interested in...
Mr Stanley,
it appears that you would not be called upon
to make the supreme sacrifice in any case.
What do you mean?
I understand that there is a fall-out shelter here
under the Town Hall?
Well, is there?
We didn't build it!
But you maintain it.
It's only a very small one.
And there is a place reserved in it for yourself?
I was persuaded, with deep reluctance,
that my preservation was a necessity
in the interests of the ratepayers of Thames Marsh.
And what provision have you made for other essential persons?
Doctors, nurses, ambulance men, firemen.
People who might be almost as important as councillors.
One of them's a chemist!
Great.
Nothing like aspirin for the nuclear holocaust.
Your chap had quite a little publicity triumph
down at Thames Marsh, didn't he?
Yes, tremendous.
You don't sound appropriately happy for him, Humpy.
Well, the trouble is he thinks he's achieved something.
Splendid.
Life is so much easier when Ministers think
they've achieved something.
Stops them fretting.
No little temper tantrums.
Yes, but now he wants to introduce his next idea.
A minister with two ideas.
I can't remember when we last had one of those.
It's not his own.
He wants to introduce pre-set failure standards
on all council contracts over 10,000 pounds
and make a named official responsible.
- Humphrey! - I know. I know.
That idiot scheme of Cartwright's again!
I thought Gordon had squashed it.
Well, he's come over to us now.
Slipped the scheme to the minister privately, under plain cover!
Brown envelope job.
You realise it'll be us next.
I mean, once you specify in advance
what a project's supposed to achieve
and whose responsibility it is to see that it does,
well, the entire system collapses.
You're into the whole squalid world of professional management.
I know.
I've tried to explain to him.
I tried to point out to him that his new responsibilities
were for enjoying, not exercising. But, I don't know.
We already move our officials round every 2 or 3 years
to stop this personal responsibility nonsense.
If this happened, we'd be posting everybody once a fortnight.
I know.
He must be stopped.
What's his next little publicity trip?
Well,
tomorrow he's living his little triumph over again.
He's recording a TV interview with Ludovic Kennedy.
A documentary on Civil Defence.
Supposing he had a dossier
on the curious ways in which local councillors
spend their Civil Defence budgets.
How would that help?
I've got an idea.
Perhaps you ought to become a minister!
Just a joke, Arnold.
Stand by, studio. We're about to record.
Quite a change, Mr Kennedy,
for a minister to be given the chance
to talk about something that's a success.
- Most unusual for the BBC. - Five. Four.
- Is this a change of policy? - Three.
...Two ...One.
Minister, you've been claiming recently
that in your dealings with local authority,
you've been making some progress as regards Civil Defence.
But surely this has been more in the field of publicity
than any achievement?
No, no, no, no,
Ludo.
Civil authorities are being made to face up to these issues
because of the extra interest that we have generated.
Well, you're agreeing.
Your success has been a publicity success.
Well, if you want to put it that way, yes, but
things are changing.
Well, what about Thames Marsh?
Thames Marsh. Good example.
As I said in the press, they have got one fall-out shelter.
And a place in it has been reserved for Mr Ben Stanley,
the leader of the council,
who refuses to build shelters for others.
Don't you think that's rather hypocritical?
Well, surely, Minister,
it's reasonable to expect that
one of our elected representatives
should have a chance of survival.
Who is to govern otherwise?
In the event of a nuclear holocaust,
and, of course,
we all hope and pray that such a thing will never happen,
there are perhaps more important people
than mere politicians, I mean.
Doctors, nurses, ambulance men, and so on.
All people who run essential services.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Minister,
but is it not a fact that the Prime Minister
and the Home Secretary
have places reserved for them in government fall-out shelters?
That is completely different.
How?
Well, there has to be someone to...
run the... you know.
Minister, as I understand it,
you're saying that political leaders
should give up their places for doctors and nurses.
Well, now, have you put this idea
to the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary?
I think we ought to be extremely careful
not to trivialise what is a very serious issue,
Ludovic.
I'll give you another example.
I've just been told of a borough
which sent a group of councillors,
at the ratepayers' expensive, to California
to look at fall-out shelters.
And when they got back, they couldn't do anything about it
because they had spent the entire Civil Defence budget
for three whole years on the trip!
How shocking.
Shocking.
Thank you, Minister.
By the way, how did the recording go?
Well, I got into a bit of bother over Ben Stanley's bunker.
I said politicians weren't as important as doctors and so on.
Did you?
And then he said
"What about the PM's place in the government shelter?"
And what did you say?
Well, I got out of it, of course.
Quite cleverly, actually.
All the same, I'm not too sure how happy the PM will be about it.
But then I recovered with a marvellous story I remember
about a group of councillors
who went all the way to California to look at fall-out shelters
and spent three entire years
of the Civil Defence budget on the jaunt!
May I ask where that came from?
Yes. Where did that come from, Bernard?
From the Civil Defence Directorate, Minister.
They must have known that you were doing the interview.
Well.
Anyway, Minister, I'm sure you know what you're doing.
Humphrey... Humphrey...
you only say that when I've made an appalling cock-up.
Minister, you do know that the borough in question
contains the PM's constituency...
...and that the PM's election agent
was the councillor who led the delegation?
That was just a joke, wasn't it?
Well, Number 10 have been trying
to keep it quiet for weeks. But...
Well,
- truth will out. - No, no, no!
No, no, no, it mustn't out.
It might look like a personal attack.
You know what the PM's like about loyalty, just now.
Well, yes.
Humphrey, this interview must not go out.
Well,
unfortunately, Minister,
I haven't the time, I must be going.
Humphrey, Humphrey, I... I... I... I'm... I'm...
I'm ordering you, Humphrey.
Well, alas, Minister,
it is your orders that are calling me away.
What do you mean?
Well, your scheme for imposing pre-set
failure standards on local councils is very complex.
You asked for proposals straight away.
It's taking every moment of my time.
Much as I would like to help.
However...
if implementing failure standards were not quite so urgent...
You mean, you can stop this broadcast?
Well, now, Minister, we cannot censor the BBC,
but I happen to be lunching with the BBC's Director of Policy.
Perhaps you'd care to join us.
But if we can't censor them...
Well, we can always try to persuade them
to withdraw programmes voluntarily
once they realise that
transmission is not in the public interest.
Well, it's not in MY interest...
and I represent the public,
so it's not in the public interest.
That's a novel argument.
We haven't tried that on them before.
Have we?
I'm sorry, Mr Hacker.
The BBC cannot give in to government pressure.
Well, let's leave that on one side, shall we?
No, no, no, no!
Let's leave that on one side, shall we?
Please, Minister.
Frank, I wonder if I could raise something else?
There is considerable disquiet
about the BBC's attitude and hostility towards the government.
- But that's absurd. - Is it?
Well, they've been documenting instances of bias in
BBC current affairs.
Favourable news stories not reported.
Yes. Excessive publicity
for other countries' cases against Britain.
Especially our Common Market enemies...
partners.
Yes.
Jokes against the Prime Minister.
Unnecessary publicity for anti-government demonstrations.
And ministers' programme suggestions not accepted.
I'm afraid I didn't have room in my case for the others.
But, I'm sure we've got answers to all these.
Of course, the BBC's always got answers.
Silly ones, but it's got them.
Yes, of course.
But I thought it only fair to warn you
that questions are being asked.
What sort of questions?
Well, for example,
were Parliament to be televised,
whether it shouldn't be entrusted to ITV.
You can't be serious?
And whether the BBC administration
is actually making the cuts in jobs and premises
that we've endured in government.
And should a Select Committee be apointed
to scrutinise BBC expenditure?
But that would be an intolerable intrusion.
Well, of course.
And then of course, there's this extraordinary matter of boxes
at Ascot, Wimbledon,
Lords, covent Garden
and the Proms.
Yes, those are a technical requirement
for the production and engineering staff.
Reports from the Inland Revenue
suggest that the production and engineering staff
are all holding champagne glasses.
And are all accompanied by their wives or...
...ladies of...
equal distinction.
And all bear remarkable similarity
to governors, directors and executives of the
corporation, and their friends.
I say, you've come out very well, haven't you?
Mind you, it is just possible
that we might be able to contain all this criticism,
provided the files don't get any larger.
And I've been urging my minister
that there's really no need to take up this case
of the Civil Defence issue formally.
But... But you must see my position.
The BBC cannot give in to government pressure.
No, no, of course not.
We wouldn't want them to, would we, Minister?
- Wouldn't we? - No, of course we won't.
But you see, the minister's interview with Ludovic Kennedy
did contain some factual errors.
Factual errors?
Well, now, that's different.
As you know, the BBC couldn't give in to government pressure.
Absolutely not.
But we set great store by factual accuracy.
Yes, yes, indeed.
But you see, some of the information in the interview,
might well be out of date
- by the time of transmission. - Out of date?
Out of date? Well, now, that's serious.
I mean, obviously, the BBC, I mean,
as you know, couldn't possibly give in to government pressure.
- Indeed not. - No.
But we do not want to transmit out-of-date material.
And since the recording,
I realised that I made one or two inadvertent slips
that might have security implications.
Such as?
He can't tell you what they are.
Why not?
Security.
You can't be too careful about security, I do agree.
If the defence of the realm is at stake,
well, we do have to be very responsible.
I mean, obviously,
the BBC couldn't give in to government pressure,
No, absolutely.
but security, well, you can't be too careful.
- Can't be too careful. - Can't be too careful, you see.
No, if there are inaccuracies and security worries,
well, the BBC wouldn't want to put the interview out.
- Precisely. - That puts a completely different complexion on it.
- Completely different. - Different complexion on it.
Transmission would not be in the public's interest,
- but I must make one thing absolutely clear. - Yes.
There can be absolutely no question
of the BBC ever giving in to government pressure.
- Of course not. - No question.
Good news, Minister.
The BBC have decided
not to send out your interview with Ludovic Kennedy.
- Really? - They felt that was the responsible course.
Well done.
It was nothing, Minister.
And yet, you know,
I can't help feeling that I was trapped
into saying those things that might have embarrassed the PM.
- Surely not? - Yes.
I think I was dropped right in it.
How could you think such a ridiculous thought?
Why is it ridiculous, Humphrey,
to imagine that he would've tried to trap me?
Who?
Ludovic Kennedy.
Ludovic Kennedy tried to trap you.
Yes, well, I'm sure he did.
Deceitful crowd, the media. Underhand.
Can't trust them an inch.
No, deceitful, thoroughly deceitful.
By the way, Humphrey,
I think it might be wise to lay off the local councils.
Yes?
After all,
councillors are responsible,
sensible people on the whole.
And of course, they are democratically elected.
Democratically elected.
I do think central government has to be frightfully careful
before it starts telling them how to do their jobs.
Frightfully careful.
And the failure standards?
I think the same applies...
don't you?
Yes, Minister.