The Complete Yes Minister

without fear or favour. It is the right thing to do. Also, it’ll be very popular.

[Bernard Woolley reported this conversation with Hacker to Sir Humphrey Appleby sometime later that day. He knew that Appleby was due to meet Sir Desmond Glazebrook for tea, to discuss the new high-rise building for the bank, and he felt obliged to let Sir Humphrey know the extent of the Minister’s opposition to it.

We found a report of this and of Appleby’s meeting with Glazebrook among Sir Humphrey’s private papers – Ed.]

B. reported to me that the Minister wanted to make a courageous stand on high buildings, for the press. I hope he has a head for heights. It seems that Hacker will do anything to get his picture in the papers.

Had tea with Sir Desmond, and reported that the matter did not look too hopeful. He was surprised. I remarked that, clearly, he had not read the Financial Times this morning.

‘Never do,’ he told me. I was surprised. He is a banker after all.

‘Can’t understand it,’ he explained. ‘It’s too full of economic theory.’

I asked him why he bought it and carried it about under his arm. He explained that it was part of the uniform. He said it took him thirty years to understand Keynes’s economics and just when he’d finally got the hang of it everyone started getting hooked on those new-fangled monetarist ideas. Books like I want to be free by Milton Shulman.

Presumably he means Free To Choose by Milton Friedman, but I share his feelings and doubts.

He asked me why they are all called Milton, and said he was still stuck on Milton Keynes. I corrected him: ‘Maynard Keynes.’ He said he was sure there was a Milton Keynes, I felt the conversation should be abandoned then and there, and I opened up his copy of the FT and showed him our Minister’s speech to the Architectural Association last night in which he attacked skyscraper blocks. This speech has attracted much favourable publicity and must be reckoned a problem for us now.

Sir Desmond insisted that the bank’s new block is not a skyscraper. Nonetheless, it has thirty-eight storeys on current plans, and he is asking for an extra six storeys.

The Minister, on the other hand, is talking about a maximum tolerable height of eight storeys.

The Minister is further encouraged by his party’s manifesto, which contained a promise to prevent many more high-rise buildings. But this problem is more easily dealt with. I explained to Sir Desmond that there is an implicit pact offered to every Minister by his senior officials: if the Minister will help us implement the opposite policy to the one to which he is pledged (which once he is in office he can see is obviously undesirable and/or unworkable) we will help him to pretend that he is in fact doing what he said he was going to do in his Manifesto.

[We are indeed fortunate that Sir Humphrey’s training as a civil servant – training to put everything down in writing – resulted in his recording for posterity these attitudes and skills which were undoubtedly Civil Service practice in the 1980s but which were kept secret because they were unacceptable constitutionally – Ed.]

Desmond said that this was a reasonable compromise, in his opinion. So it is. Regrettably, reasonableness is not the first quality that springs to mind when one contemplates the average Minister. [Hacker was a very average Minister – Ed.]

Desmond tried to apply pressure to me. He dropped hints about our future plans together. I reassured Desmond that, although he would not get permission from Hacker this week and although it would be tricky, I was sure a way could be found to alter any adverse decision.

Desmond was puzzled. He thought a decision was a decision. I explained that a decision is a decision only if it is the decision you wanted. Otherwise, of course, it is merely a temporary setback.

Ministers are like small children. They act on impulse. One day they want something desperately, the next day they’ve forgotten they ever asked for it. Like a tantrum over a rice pudding – won’t touch it today and asks for two helpings tomorrow. He understood this.

Desmond asked me if I intended to tell him that I refused to accept his decision. The man really is dense! I explained that, on the contrary, I shall start off by accepting Hacker’s decision enthusiastically. Then I shall tell him to leave the details to me. [Appleby Papers 97/JZD/31f]

[Hacker’s diary continues – Ed.]

September 15th

We had the urgent meeting with Sir Desmond Glazebrook today. It went off most satisfactorily and presented no problems, largely because it was preceded by a meeting between me and Sir Humphrey in which I ensured his full co-operation and support.

When Humphrey popped in for a quick word before the meeting he outlined Glazebrook’s case for a tower block:

1) There are already several tower blocks in the area

2) Their International Division is expanding rapidly and needs space. And international work brings in valuable invisible exports

3) Banks need central locations. They can’t move some of it elsewhere

4) It will bring in extra rate revenue for the city

This is a not unreasonable case. But, as I pointed out to Humphrey, it’s a typical bank argument, money, money, money! What about the environment? What about the beauty?

Humphrey was impressed. ‘Indeed Minister,’ he agreed. ‘Beauty. Quite.’ He told Bernard to make a note of it.

I could see I was winning. ‘And what about our children? And our children’s children?’