A Question of Loyalty
(Sir Humphrey is leading a meeting.)
HUMPHREY So you'll let me have your redraft on establishment levels by Thursday?
PETER
You need it that early?
HUMPHREY No, I don't need it that early. But the Minister has to read it before he faces the
Select Committee. And what makes it harder, he has to remember it. And what
makes it harder still, he has to understand it. Incidentally, Peter, was it you that
wrote the Minister's Washington speech?
PETER
Yes, Sir Humphrey.
HUMPHREY Splendid, well done, couldn't have been better.
(Enter Bernard)
BERNARD The Minister's in his office now, Sir Humphrey.
HUMPHREY Good, right. Well, thank you all. (to Bernard) Well, Bernard, how have you enjoyed
having your Minister out of the office for a week?
BERNARD Not very much.
HUMPHREY Haven't you?
BERNARD No, it makes things very difficult.
HUMPHREY Oh, Bernard! A minister's absence is a godsend! You can do the job properly for
once. No silly questions, no bright ideas, no fussing about what the papers are
saying. You know, Bernard, I sometimes think our Minister doesn't believe he
exists unless he's reading about himself in the papers. I'll bet you the first thing
thing he says when he gets back into the office is 'Any press reports on my
Washington speech?'
BERNARD How much do you bet?
HUMPHREY A pound.
BERNARD Done. (They shake hands) He won't, because he's already asked. In the car, on the
way back from Heathrow.
HUMPHREY (torn between irritation and pride) You're learning, Bernard. (Humphrey draws a
pound note from his wallet and hands it over.)
BERNARD Thank you.
HUMPHREY So you see why the minister's absence is a good thing?
BERNARD Yes, but so much work piles up.
HUMPHREY Splendid. What with a couple of days of briefing before he goes, and then
debriefing and backlog when he gets back, we can keep him out of the department's
hair for a fortnight. Then for the next six months, whenever he complains about not
being informed about something, we can tell him it came up while he was away.
BERNARD Is this why we're having so many summit conferences?
HUMPHREY Well, of course, that's the only way the country works. Concentrate all the power at
Number Ten, then send the PM away. EC summits, NATO summits,
Commonwealth summits. Then the Cabinet Secretary can get on with running the
country properly.
BERNARD Well, we ought to be seeing him now.
HUMPHREY Oh, Bernard. What did you think of the Minister's Washington speech that Peter
wrote? (quotes) British government administration is a model of loyalty and
BERNARD
HUMPHREY
BERNARD
HUMPHREY
BERNARD
HUMPHREY
BERNARD
HUMPHREY
BERNARD
HUMPHREY
BERNARD
HUMPHREY
integrity and efficiency. It's a ruthless war on waste, we're cutting bureacracy to the
bone a lesson Britain can teach the world.
Is it true? Can we prove it?
Oh, Bernard. A good speech isn't one in which we can prove the Minister is telling
the truth. It's one in which no one else can prove that he's lying.
Yes, but even so, I . . well, I'm sure Peter did a frightfully good job on it and
everything. but I just wondered whether perhaps it might have been a bit boring for
the audience.
Of course it was boring. Bored the pants off them. Ghastly to have to sit through, I
should think. Minister's speeches aren't written for the audience they're speaking to.
Aren't they?
Delivering a speech is just a formality you have to go through in order to get the
press release into the papers. We can't worry about entertaining people - we aren't
scriptwriters for a comedian. Well, not a professional one, anyway. No, the point is
that the speech said the right things.
But why does it have to be said in public?
Well, it's vital. Once the speech is printed, the Minister is committed to defending
us in front of Select Committees and things.
But he defends us anyway.
Only to a point, Bernard. Once something goes wrong, the Minister's first instinct is
to rat on his department. So we write him a speech to get him to nail his trousers to
the mast.
You mean, nail his colours to the mast?
No, nail his trousers to the mast. Then he can't climb down. Come on.
(They go into the Minister's office)
HUMPHREY Ah, welcome home, Minister.
MINISTER Hello, Humphrey. Bernard, didn't you say there were some press cuttings of my
Washington speech somewhere?
(Humphrey grins like a basking shark.)
BERNARD Yes, I put them in the box, Minister.
MINISTER Oh.
(Bernard passes the pound note back to Humphrey.)
HUMPHREY Minister, you do realise the importance of tomorrow's Select Committee hearing,
don't you?
MINISTER Indeed I do. The press will be there.
HUMPHREY Well, it's not just a question of the press, Minister. It is a scrutiny of this
department's future operation. Now, if it were to emerge from the hearing that we
were extravagant, or incompetent . . .
MINISTER Are we extravagant or incompetent?
HUMPHREY Well, of course not. But there are hostile members on the committee, especially the
one for Derbyshire East.
MINISTER Oh, no, Betty Oldham won't be there, will she?
HUMPHREY Yes, alas. So I do urge you to master this brief, Minister and do please ask me if
you have any problems.
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
HUMPHREY
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
BERNARD
MINISTER
Another brief on the Select Committee? I've only just mastered one on the plane,
coming back.
Oh really, what was in it?
Er . . . It's so difficult to concentrate on a plane. They keep trying to serve you
drinks and show you movies. Wake you up.
It must be frightfully difficult to concentrate if you keep being woken up. No,
seriously. This is the first and only brief containing possible questions from the
committee with the appropriate answers, all carefully presented to give the
department's position.
Is it absolutely accurate?
They're all carefully presented to give the department's position.
You said yourself how important these Select Committees are. I cannot be seen to
mislead.
You will not be seen to mislead.
Is it the truth?
The truth and nothing but the truth.
The whole truth?
Of course not.
So, we're going to tell them that we're keeping secrets, are we?
Indeed not.
Why not?
He that would keep a secret, must keep it secret that he has a secret to keep.
(Exit Humphrey)
Who said that?
It was Sir Humphrey.
who said it originally?
Oh, er, Francis Bacon, wasn't it?
Oh yes. Why is it that Ministers can't ever go anywhere without their briefs?
It's in case they get caught with their trousers down.
(laughs) Oh, very droll, Bernard. Now, are we going to be interrupted?
No, I kept your diary empty for the rest of the day, Minister.
Good. Now then, remind me what was in that submission that I read on the plane.
Well, it's more or less a rehash of the report the department produced last year.
And the year before?
Yes, Minister.
And the year before that?
Yes, ever since 1867. A few appropriate alterations, of course. Shall we go through
it point by point?
Do we have to? I'm still half-asleep from jetlag.
Well, it's up to you, Minister, but all the press will be there tomorrow.
Right, let's get at it.
(The Select Committee)
The fact is, Mr Chairman, that the Department of Administrative Affairs is run to a
high standard of efficiency, and does indeed support and service the administrative
CHAIR
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
MINISTER
PETER
LINDA
MINISTER
PETER
MINISTER
PETER
LINDA
BERNARD
PETER
MINISTER
PETER
MINISTER
BERNARD
PETER
BERNARD
MINISTER
CHAIR
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
can't it?
work of all the other government departments, as we've said in our submission to
this committee.
Thank you, Minister. (to committee) Questions? Mrs Oldham?
Thank you, Mr Chairman. Minister, have you ever heard of Malcolm Rhodes?
No.
I see. Well, Malcolm Rhodes was an Assistant Secretary in the DAA, until he
resigned last year.
There are 23,000 people in the DAA.
Quite, but he resigned. Or was eased out. Became a management consultant in
America, and has just written a book, of which this is an advance proof, in which he
makes a number of astounding allegations of wasted public money in the British
Civil Service, particularly in your department.
Could I have a quick word with my officials, Mr Chairman?
(Cue civil service huddle)
Why don't we know anything about this?
I didn't know Rhodes had written a book.
Oh my God.
Do you know Rhodes?
Yes.
Who is he?
He's a troublemaker, Minister.
He's not sound.
What does he say in the book?
I don't know.
What do I do?
Stall.
Stall? What do you mean, stall?
Stall, meaning 'avoiding answering'.
Yes, I know what stall means. I'd like to know what you mean by sending me out
into a typhoon without so much as an umbrella.
An umbrella is no use in a typhoon, because the wind will get underneath it.
Oh, shush.
Have you had sufficient consultation with your officials now, Minister?
Well, let me read you some of the scandalous facts that Mr Rhodes reveals. For
instance, and I quote at number 4 Regional Supply Depot in Herfordshire, there are
two former aircraft hangars used only for stores, but which are centrally heated to 70
degrees Fahrenheit, day and night. What have you got to say about that?
I can't possibly answer a question of that detail without prior notice, Mr Chairman.
It might not even be true.
It is, I had it checked last week. What I'm asking is what conceivable reason there
can be for such appalling extravagance.
Well, some material deteriorate at low temperatures. It would depend what was
stored there.
Copper wire.
Yes, well . . . er, copper wire, er . . .it can corrode, of course, in damp conditions,
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
BETTY
MINISTER
MEMBER
CHAIR
It's plastic coated.
Plastic-coated. Yes, er, well, er, plastic-coated? Well, I'll certainly have it looked
into.
He also says that your department insists on ordering all pens, pencils, paperclips
and so on centrally, and then distributing them against departmental requisitions.
Well, that seems to be quite sensible. You can make great savings through bulk
purchase.
And he demonstrated that this procedure is four times more expensive than if local
officers went out and bought what they wanted in the high street.
That's very interesting. If this is true, of course, we shall change the system. We're
not just a rigid bureaucracy, you know.
He said he gave these figures, and proposed this change, when he was in your
department, and it was turned down on grounds that people were used to the existing
system. How's that for rigid bureaucracy?
Well, I'll have it looked into.
Looked into?
Looked into, yes.
You did say in your Washington speech last week, that your department conducted a
ruthless war on waste, and could teach the world a lesson. How would you
reconcile that with spending 75,000 pounds on a roof garden on top of the
Supplementary Benefits Office in Kettering?
Well, I'll . . .
Have it looked into?
Yes, well, I will.
I think, Chairman, that the Permanent Secretary of the DAA is due to appear before
us next week. Would he not be the appropriate person to answer these questions?
(The Minister nods furiously)
Thank you. (to the secretary) Could you see that Sir Humphrey is notified? And
perhaps you might let him see the allegations?
(The Minister's office)
HUMPHREY New allegations of government waste? Some big questions to answer? Minister,
you have put me in a very difficult position indeed.
MINISTER Well, what about the position you've put me in? There's the PM, demanding
economies left, right and centre, and I'm made to look as though I've been wasting
all the money that everyone else has been saving.
HUMPHREY Minister, nobody else has been saving anything - you ought to know that by now.
MINISTER They all look as though they have.
HUMPHREY Well, couldn't you have stalled a bit more effectively?
MINISTER Stalled? What do you mean, stalled?
HUMPHREY Well, blurred things a bit. You're always so good at blurring the issue. You have a
considerable talent for making things unintelligible, Minister.
MINISTER I beg your pardon?
HUMPHREY No, I mean that as a compliment, I assure you. Blurring the issue is one of the basic
ministerial skills.
MINISTER What are the others?
HUMPHREY Delaying decisions, dodging questions, juggling figures, bending facts and
concealing errors.
MINISTER Well, what was I expected to do?
HUMPHREY Couldn't you have made it look as though you were going to do something, and then
done nothing? Like you usually do?
MINISTER But Humphrey, if these revelations are true...
HUMPHREY Ah exactly, Minister, if... You could for instance have discussed the nature of truth.
MINISTER The Committee isn't the least bit interested in the nature of truth. They're all MPs!"
HUMPHREY Well, you could have said it was a security matter.
MINISTER How could HB pencils be a security matter?
HUMPHREY Depends what you write with them.
MINISTER What on earth are we doing building roof gardens on top of offices?
HUMPHREY Well, you see, we took over the office design from an American company that was
going to occupy it, and it just so happens that nobody noticed the roof garden on the
plan. Tiny mistake, the sort that anyone could make!
MINISTER Tiny mistake? 75,000 pounds! Give me an example of a big mistake.
HUMPHREY Letting people find out about it.
MINISTER Why are we heating sheds full of wire?
HUMPHREY You want the truth?
MINISTER Well, if you're sure it wouldn't be too much trouble.
HUMPHREY The staff are using the sheds for growing mushrooms.
MINISTER Well, stop them!
HUMPHREY They've been doing it since 1945. It's almost the only perk in an extremely boring
job.
MINISTER What about Rhodes's proposals for buying stationery. Why didn't we accept them?
HUMPHREY The man was a troublemaker and a crank. He had an unhealthy obsession with
efficiency and economy.
MINISTER But why didn't we adopt his proposals? It would have saved millions of pounds.
HUMPHREY Yes, but it would have meant a lot of work to implement it.
MINISTER So?
HUMPHREY Taking on a lot more staff.
MINISTER Oh, Humphrey.
HUMPHREY Well, disprove it.
MINISTER I can't, obviously. You're making it up, aren't you?
HUMPHREY Of course.
MINISTER Why?
HUMPHREY As an example of how to handle a Select Committee.
(Sir Humphrey and the Select Committee)
BETTY
This is all very well, Sir Humphrey, but let's get down to details. This heated
aircraft hangar, for example.
HUMPHREY Oh, yes indeed, and I do understand the committee’s concern. It does get frightfully
cold in Herefordshire in winter, and I’m afraid even civil servants can’t . .
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
MEMBER
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
HUMPHREY
BETTY
We aren't talking about civil servants, we are talking about coils of wire with plastic
coats to keep them warm.
You see, there were a lot of staff going in and out all the time.
Why?
Taking deliveries, making withdrawals, checking records, fire inspections,
stocktaking, and all these . . .
They could wear gloves, couldn’t they?
Well, they could, but it is a staff welfare policy.
Well, I suggest this policy is costing the taxpayer millions of pounds. Nothing to
say, Sir Humphrey?
It's not for me to comment on government policy, you must ask the Minister.
But you advise the Minister.
Well, I'm sure the chairman will agree I cannot disclose how I advise the Minister.
The Minister's responsible for policy.
All right, so we’ll ask the Minister. What about stationery requisition savings?
Well, that would require placing very considerable government patronage in the
hands of junior staff.
Considerable government patronage? Buying a packet of paperclips?
Well, it’s government policy to exercise strict control over the number of people
allowed to spend its money, and I'm sure you'll agree that’s right and proper.
But it's plain common sense to allow people to buy their own paperclips.
Government policy has nothing to do with common sense.
Then don’t you think it’s time the policy was changed? Well, Sir Humphrey?
It's not for me to comment on government policy, you must ask the Minister.
The Minister advises us to ask you.
And I'm advising you to ask the Minister.
When does this end?
As soon as you like.
Well, let's come to the roof garden.
Yes, with pleasure. This was part of a wide variety of roof insulation schemes,
which the government was testing in the interest of fuel economy.
But 75,000 pounds!
Well, it was thought that the sale of flowers and vegetable produce might offset the
cost.
And did it?
No.
Then why not abandon the garden?
Well, it's there now, and it does insulate the roof, and we’re not building any more . .
But you wasted 75,000 pounds!
Well, it was government policy to test all proposals for fuel saving.
At this fantastic waste of the taxpayers’ money? You agree the money was wasted?
It's not for me to comment on government policy, you must ask the Minister.
Look, Sir Humphrey, whatever we ask the Minister, he says is an administrative
question for you, and whatever we ask you, you say is a policy question for the
Minister. How do you suggest we find out what is going on?
HUMPHREY Yes, yes, yes, I do see that there is a real dilemma here. In that, while it has been
government policy to regard policy as a responsibility of Ministers and
administration as a responsibility of Officials, the questions of administrative policy
can cause confusion between the policy of administration and the administration of
policy, especially when responsibility for the administration of the policy of
administration conflicts, or overlaps with, responsibility for the policy of the
administration of policy.
BETTY
Well, that is a load of meaningless drivel. Isn't it?
HUMPHREY It's not for me to comment on government policy, you must ask the Minister.
(In the Minister’s office)
MINISTER That was a great help, Humphrey.
HUMPHREY Thank you, Minister, I did my best.
MINISTER You did the best for yourself, perhaps. But your answer solved nothing – the day
after tomorrow, we’ll both be there side by side, getting the third degree from that
committee. And we’ve got to have the right answers, the same answers.
HUMPHREY Well, we must establish what our position is.
MINISTER Good. What are the facts?
HUMPHREY In establishing our position, the facts are neither here nor there.
MINISTER I see. Well, what’s our position?
HUMPHREY We must just choose one of the five standard excuses to deal with each one of their
allegations. A different one for each, if possible.
MINISTER Five standard excuses?
HUMPHREY First, there’s the excuse we used in the Anthony Blunt case. That there's a perfectly
satisfactory explanation for everything, but security forbids its disclosure. Second,
there's the excuse we used for comprehensive schools. That it only went wrong
because of heavy cuts in staff and budgets, which stretched supervisory resources
beyond their limit.
MINISTER But that's not true, is it?
HUMPHREY No, but it’s a good excuse. Then there's the excuse we used for Concorde. A
worthwhile experiment, now abandoned, but not before it had provided much
valuable data and considerable employment.
MINISTER But that is true, isn't it? Oh no, of course it isn't.
HUMPHREY There is the excuse we used for the Munich Agreement
It occurred before
certain important facts were known, and couldn't happen again.
MINISTER What important facts?
HUMPHREY Well, that Hitler wanted to conquer Europe.
MINISTER I thought that everybody knew that.
HUMPHREY Not the Foreign Office.
MINISTER Five?
HUMPHREY Five, there’s the Charge of the Light Brigade excuse. It was an unfortunate lapse by
an individual, which has now been dealt with under internal disciplinary procedures.
MINISTER And that covers everything?
HUMPHREY Well, just about everything, so far.
MINISTER Even wars?
HUMPHREY Small wars.
MINISTER So it’s real teamwork from now on.
HUMPHREY United we stand, divided we fall.
(Enter Bernard)
BERNARD Sorry to interrupt, Minister. You’re due at the House in ten minutes, and the Prime
Minister’s Special Advisor wants to know if you can pop by for a drink at some
point today. Sir Mark Spencer.
MINISTER Mark Spencer?
BERNARD Yes. I suggested 5.30.
MINISTER Fine, fine, yes. I knew there'd be trouble. Now the PM’s getting interested in why
our replies to the committee have been so feeble. This is all I needed.
HUMPHREY Well, perhaps it is just for a drink, Minister.
MINISTER Don't be silly, Humphrey. They don’t ask you to Number Ten for a drink just
because they think you’re thirsty. Look, I’ll meet you back here at 6.30, and we’ll
cook up a story.
HUMPHREY Agree our position, Minister!
MINISTER That's what I said.
(Inside Number Ten)
SIR PETER Come in. Hello, Jim! Scotch?
MINISTER Thank you.
SIR PETER How are things going?
MINISTER Fine, fine. That Select Committee - was a bit of a shock having that book thrown at
us out of the blue, but everything's under control. I’m seeing Humphrey Appleby
this evening, and we’ll come up with some sort of explanation. Nothing for the PM
to worry about. I’d like to know where Malcolm Rhodes got all his information –
most of it seems to have come from right outside his division. And I’d like to know
who fed those proofs to Betty Oldham. The PM must be livid. It’s no fault of mine!
SIR PETER What makes you think the PM is livid?
MINISTER Well, surely?
SIR PETER Let's try and look at this situation logically, shall we, Jim? Sit down.
MINISTER Yes, of course.
SIR PETER Now, let me ask you some questions. What is the PM trying to achieve in public
expenditure?
MINISTER Well, cuts, obviously.
SIR PETER Why has there been so little success?
MINISTER Obstruction from the civil service?
SIR PETER Are all the Cabinet committed to this policy of cutting public expenditure?
MINISTER I think so. I certainly am.
SIR PETER If that is so, why have virtually no ministers achieved any real cuts?
MINISTER Rome wasn't built in a day, you know.
SIR PETER No. It's because all the ministers have gone native. The Civil Service has housetrained them to a man.
MINISTER No . . . Well, it may be true of one or two, but it certainly isn’t true of me.
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
MINISTER
SIR PETER
If a minister were really trying to cut public expenditure, how would he react to a
book exposing massive government waste?
Well . . . it would depend. What are you trying to say?
Do you know what the civil service is saying about you?
No.
That you're a pleasure to work with.
(pleased) Oh!
That’s what Barbara Wodehouse says about her prize-winning spaniels. I've even
heard Sir Humphrey Appleby say of you that you’re worth your weight in gold.
Now what does that suggest to you?
(deflated) That I’ve failed. Utterly.
You look as if you need another Scotch.
Now the PM isn’t pleased, I suppose, because of my performance at the Select
Committee – because I failed even to cover up the failure.
No, the PM is not pleased because you're covering up too well.
What?
Well, don’t you see? You’re protecting the civil service, you’re protecting
Humphrey Appleby. The PM and I are doing our level best to expose why cuts in
government expenditure are not taking place, and you are helping the civil service to
defy the government. Now, you were wondering how Betty Oldham got the
advance copy of that book, and where Malcolm Rhodes got his inside information.
Can't you guess?
(points upstairs)
(sharply) Of course not. Not directly.
(in a small voice) You?
(does a Special Advisor’s imitation of cunning)
Well, what am I supposed to do at the Select Committee?
There's only one course open to you. Absolute loyalty.
Who to?
That's your decision.
(At the Select Committee)
HUMPHREY Actually, it was an error which occurred before certain important facts were known,
and I can assure you it was an oversight that couldn’t possibly happen again,
wouldn’t you agree, Minister?
MINISTER Sir Humphrey's reply is perfectly correct. The correct official reply. But I’ve been
thinking very deeply over the last few days, since we last met, and there’s no doubt
in my mind that this committee is onto something. Of course there's error, and of
course excuses can always be found in individual cases. But you have convinced
me that our whole approach is wrong. Ministers and their civil servants so often
cover up and defend (Churchill impression) where they should seek out and destroy.
I have spoken to Mr Malcolm Rhodes, the author of this invaluable book, and he has
agreed to head an independent outside inquiry into the whole field of government
administration, starting with my department.
CHAIR
And how does Sir Humphrey react to this?
Oh, Sir Humphrey’s in complete agreement with me. We work as a team, don’t we,
Humphrey? If I may say so, he is a pleasure to work with.
BETTY
But, Minister, this account of what’s been going on doesn’t square with what you
were saying in your Washington speech about a ruthless war on waste.
MINISTER Well, I'm an old-fashioned sort of chap, Betty, and I believe in a thing called loyalty.
Whatever you say about your chaps in private, you defend them in public, isn’t that
so, Humphrey?
BETTY
In that case, aren't you being rather disloyal to them now?
MINISTER No, I believe that a Minister has a higher loyalty. A loyalty to Parliament, a loyalty
to the nation. And that loyalty must be paramount. However hard, however painful
that may be. Of course, one is loyal to one’s department and one’s officials, until
the evidence is overwhelming. But I must now say in public what I have long said
in private - that reforms can and will take place. And I know that in this I will find
in Sir Humphrey my staunchest ally. Isn't that so, Humphrey?
HUMPHREY Yes, Minister.
MINISTER
(Back in the Minister’s office)
HUMPHREY (sarcastically) That was a big help, Minister.
MINISTER Well, I did my best.
HUMPHREY You did your best for yourself. So this is your idea of teamwork, is it? Oh, most
amusing.
MINISTER I had to do it!
HUMPHREY You had to do what? Cravenly admit everything to that committee? Don’t you
realise how calamitous this has been for us?
MINISTER Well, not for both of us, I hope.
HUMPHREY You hope in vain, Minister. The department is up in arms. They’ll have very little
confidence in you in the future. And as for Number Ten, I shudder to think how the
PM will react to your public admission of failure.
(Enter Bernard)
BERNARD A personal letter from the Prime Minister.
HUMPHREY I did warn you, Minister. Bernard, perhaps you could give some thought to drafting
a face-saving letter of resignation for the Minister.
MINISTER (reads) Dear Jim. Dear Jim! We haven’t seen enough of each other lately. Would
you be free to come to lunch at Chequers on Sunday? We shall just be the family.
Do please bring Annie and Lucy - I look forward so much to seeing you.
HUMPHREY I don’t think I . . .
MINISTER It’s paid off! It has paid off!
HUMPHREY A conspiracy! That drink with Mark Spencer!
MINISTER Haven’t seen enough of each other, lunch at Chequers, just the family! And look,
it’s handwritten! Do you realise how much this is worth?
HUMPHREY I believe the going rate is thirty pieces of silver, Minister.
MINISTER No, Humphrey. Loyalty and integrity have received their just reward.
HUMPHREY Loyalty?
MINISTER I have backed you up, Humphrey, in just the same way that you have always backed
me up. Isn’t that so? I'm sorry? Did you say something?
BERNARD
Er, I think he said yes, Minister.