Did he remember what youd said? Humphrey asked.
Course he didnt. Nor did I, come to that. But it was the perfect evasive blocking answer, and as he couldnt remember what I said any more than I could we went straight on to a question about unemployment and whether the Department of Employment fiddle the figures.
Bernard corrected me. You mean periodically re-structure the base from which the statistics are derived without drawing public attention to the fact?
Exactly, I repeated, fiddle the figures.
Humphrey, in spite of himself, was interested. Of course they do, he said.
I know that, I said. But I gave a great answer. I said that Id found no significant evidence of it.
Bernard said, Thats because you havent been looking.
And because we havent shown you, Humphrey added.
I know, Humphrey. Thank you. Well done. So then we went straight on to a googlie about the Department of Energys looming plans for the disposal of nuclear waste. The question was trying to get me to admit that the Cabinets divided.
It is! remarked Humphrey.
I know it is, I said. So I said, My Cabinet took a unanimous decision.
Humphrey smiled. Only because you threatened to dismiss anyone who wouldnt agree.
He was right, of course. But it certainly made them agree unanimously. Anyway, by this time my backbenchers were cheering my every word. Then there was a question about why, despite all that money weve spent on the new anti-missile missile, it was scrapped as obsolete the day before the first one came off the production line.
Humphrey was curious as to how I wiggled out of that one.
This was my master-stroke. I didnt! My reply was sheer genius. I simply said, Our policy has not been as effective as wed hoped, and clearly wed got it wrong.
Humphreys mouth fell open. He was profoundly shocked that Id made such an admission. But it was a brilliant answer. It took the wind right out of their sails. A completely honest answer always gives you the advantage of surprise in the House of Commons.
Bernard was enjoying it in retrospect too. There was actually a supplementary, Sir Humphrey. The Prime Minister was asked when he would request the resignation of the responsible Minister.
That one was too easy. A full toss. I hit it straight to the boundary. I will ask for his resignation when he makes a mistake that could have been seen at the time, not with the benefit of hindsight. My side of the House were on their feet, cheering, stamping, waving their order papers. It was a day to remember!
But unfortunately, it turned out to be a day to remember for other reasons too. Of course I should have detected that something was up from the way in which Sir Humphrey had slunk into the Cabinet Room. I had mistaken his funereal air of impending disaster for simple envy at my brilliance in handling the House so well without any assistance from him. But there was more to it than that.
I understand, he remarked casually, that there was a question about bugging an MP:
Stupid question, I said. Why should we bug Hugh Halifax? A PPS, a member of my own Administration, I cant think where he got such a daft idea. With hindsight I realised that this reply may sound foolish, but I had no reason at all to suspect the truth. Humphrey tried to interrupt me but I didnt listen. After all, how could I have known that I didnt know?
Can you imagine? I said, brushing Humphrey aside, metaphorically that is. Why should we want to listen in on an MP? Boring, ignorant, self-opinionated windbags, I do my best not to listen to them. And Hughs only a PPS, I mean, I have enough trouble finding out whats going on at the Ministry of Defence, what could he know? Its my idea of Hell. Thats how God will punish me if Ive led a wicked life -- he'll make me sit and listen to tapes of MPs talking.
I must admit I was pretty pleased with myself. Humphrey was not amused. So I gather you denied that Mr Halifax has been bugged?
Yes, I said. It was the one question today to which I could give a simple, clear, straightforward, honest answer.
At which point Humphrey ranted for some considerable while. And I simply couldnt understand him, try as I might.
Fortunately, Sir Humphrey made a note of his comments in his private diary that very day Ed.]
I explained to the Prime Minister that unfortunately, although the answer was indeed simple, clear and straightforward, there was some difficulty in justifiably assigning to it the fourth of the epithets he had applied to the statement [honest Ed.] inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information he had communicated and the facts insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated is such as to cause epistemological problems of sufficient magnitude to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be requested to bear.
[Appleby Papers TK/3787/SW]
[Hackers diary continues Ed.]
I realised that he was wrapping up whatever he was trying to say in the hope that it would be less hurtful or embarrassing or something. But I had to ask for a translation.
He nerved himself up for his reply. He looked at the floor, the ceiling, out of the window -- and finally his eyes met mine. You told a lie, he said.
I couldnt believe my ears. A lie?
A lie, he repeated.
What do you mean, a lie? I simply couldnt understand what he could be referring to.
I mean, Prime Minister he hesitated, apparently searching for a way to explain himself, you lied!
I didnt know what he was talking about. I stared at him blankly. He tried again. Uh I know that this is a difficult concept to get across to a politician, but you did not tell the truth.
Could he mean, I asked myself, that we are bugging Hugh Halifax? I didnt know the answer, so I asked him.
He nodded. We were.
We were? I was appalled. When did we stop?
Humphrey glanced at his wristwatch. Seventeen minutes ago.
I was hurt, and upset that my integrity had been impugned in this manner. You cant call that lying, I complained.
I see. Humphrey inclined his head to one side and stared at me hopefully, like a Bearded Collie that is eager to learn. What would you call the opposite of telling the truth?
There was no intent. I didnt mean to deceive them. I would never knowingly mislead the House.
[Hacker, in his state of outraged innocence, had clearly forgotten that he had proudly admitted to misleading the House several times that day. Nonetheless, it is almost certainly true that he would never intentionally have lied to the House, for fear of the consequences. Indeed, for reasons that are quite unclear to the historian, lying appears to be the one offence that the House does not forgive, trivial though it is in comparison to the many great calamities that our politicians inflict upon us Ed.]
Nonetheless, said Humphrey, you did tell them an untruth.
But its not my fault! He couldnt seem to understand. I didnt know he was being bugged.
Bernard coughed quietly to attract my attention. Prime Minister, he explained sympathetically, its not enough to say you didnt know. You are deemed to have known. You are ultimately responsible.
Now I was getting angry. So why the hell wasnt I told?
Bernard looked at Humphrey. They were both pretty embarrassed. The Home Secretary, mumbled Humphrey, might not have felt the need to inform you.
Why?
Perhaps because he was advised that you didnt need to know.
This is ludicrous. But I did need to know, I pointed out.
At this point Bernard took refuge in Civil Service gibberish. Hes spending too much time with Humphrey. I havent the foggiest notion of what he was trying to say.