Which embassy? Luke whispered, fearing the worst.
Tel Aviv, I said with delight.
My God, croaked Luke, a broken man. No! Please! You cant send me to Israel. What about my career?
Nonsense, I replied briskly, knowing only too well that this would be the end of him. Its an honour. Promotion.
Luke was trying anything to save himself. But what about the Israelis? Youll upset them. They wont want me, they know Im on the Arabs side!
I didnt speak. I allowed the silence to speak for itself. Convicted out of his own mouth. We all stared at Luke, and I heard the grandfather clock ticking. Not that I meant he said feebly, then stopped.
Bernard and Humphrey averted their eyes. They didnt like being present at the end of a colleagues career.
I answered him. I thought you were supposed to be on our side, I remarked quietly.
Luke was silent.
Anyway, I said with a brisk smile, we need someone like you in Tel Aviv to explain to them why we always vote against them in the UN. Dont we, Humphrey?
Humphrey looked up at me. He knew when the game was lost. Yes Prime Minister, he said humbly.
THE SMOKESCREEN
[Some three and a half months after Hacker became Prime Minister he had to face his first Cabinet crisis, and the way in which he overcame it was a tribute to his increasing political skills. The crisis involved many issues simultaneously -- his fight to save his Grand Design, threatened leaks, the threatened resignation of at least one and possibly two junior ministers, and his use of the powerful tobacco lobby in a fight to outwit the Treasury and obtain tax cuts to give him some short-term electoral advantage.
The origins of the crisis may be seen in the notes of a meeting that took place early in May between Sir Humphrey Appleby, the Cabinet Secretary, and Sir Frank Gordon, the Permanent Secretary of the Treasury. There is no reference to this meeting in Sir Humphreys diary but Sir Franks notes were recently found in the Civil Service archives in Walthamstow Ed.]
1 Monday
Lunched with Appleby at the Reform Club. Appleby was concerned because our new Prime Minister wishes to cut either taxes of public expenditure.
This should be resisted. Politicians are like children -- you cant just give them what they want, it only encourages them.
Nonetheless, Appleby should not even have allowed it to get as far as being a Formal Proposal. It should not have been allowed to get past Informal Discussions.
[Sir Frank Gordon could not have been seriously worried. There are nine further preliminary stages after Informal Discussions and Formal Proposals. All eleven stages are as follows:
1. Informal discussions
2. Formal proposals
3. Preliminary study
4. Discussion document
5. In-depth study
6. Revised proposal
7. Policy
8. Strategy
9. Implementation plan circulated
10. Revised implementation plan
11. Cabinet authorisation
Any competent Civil Servant should be able to ensure that if a policy is unwelcome, stage 11 will not be reached until the run-up to the next General Election Ed.]
Humphrey is unduly relaxed about the matter, in my humble opinion. The possible tax cut is contingent upon Hackers fantasy about cancelling Trident and switching to conscription to create large conventional forces. The Services will never wear it because, however much they dislike Trident, they hate conscription.
But my staff are horrified. There are waves of panic running through the Treasury. Giving away one and a half billion pounds of our money is unthinkable. [Hacker was arguing that the money was the taxpayers, and that -- in the event of a tax cut -- the Treasury would merely not be taking it away from them. This has never been the Treasury view Ed.]
I indicated to Humphrey Appleby that Arnold [Sir Arnold Robinson, the previous Cabinet Secretary] would never have allowed such a notion to become a Proposal. Appleby observed, with some justice, that Arnold was not at Number Ten with the present inmate.
As Humphrey Appleby is relatively new to the job I made the following matters clear to him:
1) The entire system depends on the supposition that he can control the PM and that I can control the Chancellor.
2) For this control to be maintained there must be an agreeable mistrust between them.
3) Hostility between them would be preferable.
4) Tax cuts unite them. Politicians win votes with them.
5) Even proposed tax cuts unite them, because they give the promise of votes to be won.
Appleby was confident. One might almost say complacent. He is confident that the Prime Minister and the Chancellor will manage their hostility without our help. Eric [Eric Jeffries, the Chancellor of the Exchequer], he believes, will never forgive Jim for winning Number Ten, and Jim can never trust Eric again -- after all, one never trusts anyone that one has deceived.
I have ensured, however, that Eric opposes any tax cuts. I used the usual bait -- told him we needed the money for hospitals, schools and the old people. [This argument was known in the Treasury as the Kidney Machine Gambit. It hardly ever failed. It was followed up with the suggestion that the incumbent would be known to history as The Caring Chancellor. This never failed Ed.]
Appleby still felt that I was overly concerned about a tax cut of a mere one and a half billion pounds. It is true that the amount is not much in itself. But I indicated that some of our senior colleagues are worried that he (Appleby) is not in control. This cut has been proposed far too soon. Is Appleby able to keep up Arnolds tradition -- the iron fist in the iron glove? It would, after all, be a black day for Britain if the politicians started running the country.
[Sir Humphrey Appleby did not seem unduly worried by Sir Franks hints, anxieties and veiled threats. He records his own dry comments into his diary.]
Frank was worried about Hackers proposed tax cuts. They are serious, I know, but if I were in his shoes I should be much more worried about the state of the economy and low productivity. Of course, theres not much frank can do about that. The British worker is fundamentally lazy and wants something for nothing. Nobody wants to do an honest days work any more.
This same afternoon I went to Lords. When I got there England were seventy for four. Another collapse by England. What with the state of the pound and the state of our batting one sometimes wonders whether England has any future at all.
Still, it was a delightful afternoon. Warm sunshine, cold champagne, and the characteristic smack of willow on leather -- occasionally, anyway.
I was there on government business, of course, as the guest of Gerald Baron, Chairman of the British Tobacco Group. The BTG are national benefactors in my opinion. I took the opportunity to ask Gerald for more sponsorship for the Garden. [The Royal Opera House, in Covent Garden, which was more or less run from the Cabinet Office Ed.] Gerald was fairly open to the idea, though he mentioned that the Minister for Sport might also drop in at Lords this afternoon, twisting his arm on behalf of Wimbledon, Brands Hatch or some snooker tournament. I dont know where wed all be without the BTG.
I did notice, however, that Dr Peter Thorn, the Minister of State for Health, was again conspicuous by his absence. Apparently hes been got at by the anti-smoking lobby. Gerald asked me if Dr Thorn has much clout in Whitehall. I was able to reassure him on that score. Dr Thorn is only a Minister, and has no clout at all.