I understand this argument, but it’s clearly untenable in public. So next I asked about Rhodes’s proposal for saving money on stationery orders. Why hadn’t we accepted it?
‘Minister,’ said Humphrey vehemently, ‘that man was a troublemaker. A crank. He had an unhealthy obsession about efficiency and economy.’
‘But why didn’t we adopt his proposal? It would have saved millions of pounds.’
‘It would have meant a lot of work to implement it.’
‘So?’
‘Taking on a lot more staff.’
This argument was manifest nonsense. I told him so. He seemed unbothered.
‘Disprove it,’ he challenged me.
‘I can’t, obviously.’
‘Exactly,’ he replied smugly.
I stared at him. I had suddenly realised what was going on. ‘You’re making all this up aren’t you?’ I said.
He smiled. ‘Of course.’
‘Why?’
He stood up.
‘As an example,’ he said in his most superior manner, ‘of how to handle a Select Committee.’
[The following week the same Select Committee met Sir Humphrey. Mrs Oldham questioned him closely on the Rhodes disclosures and proposals. The evidence taken that day is printed below – Ed.]
Mrs Betty Oldham: This is all very well, Sir Humphrey, but let’s get down to details. This heated aircraft hangar for example.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Indeed, I fully understand the Committee’s concern. But it can be very cold in Herefordshire in winter, and even civil servants cannot work in subzero temperatures.
Mrs Betty Oldham: We aren’t talking about civil servants. We are talking about coils of wire, with plastic coats to keep them warm.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Yes, but staff are in and out all the time.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Why?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Taking deliveries, making withdrawals, checking records, security patrols, fire inspection, stock-taking and auditing, and so forth.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Well, they can wear gloves can’t they?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: They could. It’s a question of staff welfare policy.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Well, I suggest this policy is costing the taxpayer millions of pounds. (silence) Nothing to say, Sir Humphrey?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: It is not for me to comment on government policy. You must ask the Minister.
Mrs Betty Oldham: But you advise the Minister.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: I think the Chairman is aware that I cannot disclose how I advise my Minister. The Minister is responsible for policy.
Mrs Betty Oldham: All right. So we’ll ask the Minister. Now then, what about those stationery requisition savings?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: That would have involved putting very considerable government patronage in the hands of junior staff.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Considerable government patronage? Buying a packet of paper-clips?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: It is government policy to exercise strict control over the number of people allowed to spend its money. I’m sure you’ll agree that this is right and proper.
Mrs Betty Oldham: But it’s plain common sense to allow people to buy their own paper-clips.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Government policy has nothing to do with common sense.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Well, don’t you think it’s time that the policy was changed? (silence) Well, Sir Humphrey?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: It is not for me to comment on government policy. You must ask the Minister.
Mrs Betty Oldham: But the Minister advises us to ask you.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: And I am advising you to ask the Minister.
Mr Alan Hughes: When does this end?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: As soon as you like.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Well, let’s come to the roof garden.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: With pleasure. It was part of a wide variety of roof insulation schemes which the government undertook to test, in the interest of fuel economy.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Seventy-five thousand pounds?
The actual report of Sir Humphrey Appleby’s evidence to the Select Committee, reproduced by kind permission of HMSO.
[We have reprinted it in more readable form – Ed.]
Sir Humphrey Appleby: It was thought that the sale of flowers and vegetable produce might offset the cost.
Mrs Betty Oldham: And did it?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: No.
Mrs Betty Oldham: Then why not abandon the garden?
