- 2 days ago
Tv, Yes Minister - S02E04 The Greasy Pole
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:00Thank you very much.
00:30Thank you very much.
01:00Thank you very much.
01:02Thank you very much.
01:04Surely it's just too bloody obvious.
01:05He has to give us the go ahead.
01:07But if the minister thinks...
01:08Ministers don't think.
01:09Oh, for...
01:10Don't talk to me about ministers.
01:14I have been chairman of a British chemical corporation for ten years, and in that time I've had to deal with 19 different ministers.
01:21Oh, dear, oh, dear.
01:22When they've had time to see me, which they usually haven't, because they're too busy talking to the leaders of all the trade unions and bribing them not to strike.
01:29Oh, come now, Wally.
01:30They've never bribed anybody, too.
01:32Oh, no?
01:33Have a coingo, Tom?
01:34Have a night-toothed dick?
01:34Have a peerage, Harry?
01:36Yes.
01:36But the minister's worried.
01:38Of course the minister is worried.
01:40If I had never done anything to worry one of those lily-livered, vote-grubbing, baby-kissing jellies, we'd have all gone down the tube ten years ago.
01:48But you say propanol contains metadioxin.
01:51So what?
01:53Dioxin was the chemical released at Cervezo. It can damage the fetus.
01:56That's dioxin, for Christ's sake. Metadioxin is an inert compound.
02:01It has been given a clean bill of health by the FDA in Washington.
02:04The Henderson Committee, which you set up, is going to give it the okay, too.
02:07Yes, I know, Wally, I know, but the name could be, well, politically sensitive.
02:11Well, anyway, I've taken the name metadioxin out of the proposal. I just call it propanol.
02:16Oh, very wise of you.
02:17You told me to.
02:18Very wise of me.
02:20But as I say, the minister may well raise no objections. It's just a question of tact.
02:27Fine. In that case, there's no problem.
02:29Good. I'll just come along and have a tactful word with Hacker and persuade that egotistical blancmange myself.
02:37Well, I think, and I hope you won't take this amiss, Wally, that with any luck, I might just be able to manage without your unique and refreshing brand of tact.
02:45But this is wonderful news, isn't it, Humphrey?
02:49Yes, minister.
02:50Overnight, we turn a run-down chemical plant from a loss maker into one of the most profitable units in the PCC, making them the largest manufacturers of propanol in Europe.
02:59Yes, minister.
03:00Capital equipment to be made in British factories, additional rateable income for the local authorities, foreign exchange from the exports. It's all too good to be true.
03:08But it is true, minister.
03:09Good old propanol.
03:12What is propanol, actually?
03:14Well, it's rather interesting. It used to be made with dioxin until the cervezo explosion in North Italy. Then they had stopped making it.
03:21So now they developed a safe compound called metadioxin. But, of course, the Italian factory is still sealed off. So they've asked the British Chemical Corporation to make it for them.
03:28It's an ill win.
03:29Quite so, yeah.
03:30But this new stuff is perfectly safe.
03:33Perfectly.
03:33Good.
03:34Well, I suppose some weak ministers might have some doubts in view of the similarity of the names, but no one with any backbone could be deflected from such a beneficial project on such a useless pretext.
03:46Absolutely not. I know just the sort of minister you mean. Political jellyfish. Terrified of taking any decision that might upset someone. After all, every decision upsets someone, doesn't it?
03:55Good government is doing what's right, not just doing what's popular. Isn't that so, Humphrey?
04:00Absolutely, Minister.
04:01But this will be popular, won't it, Humphrey?
04:03Very popular.
04:04Humphrey, I just want to make absolutely sure you're not asking me to make a courageous decision, are you?
04:12Well, of course not, Minister. What a suggestion.
04:14Good, good. You don't think I ought to take it to Cabinet?
04:17Well, in my opinion, the less said the better.
04:19Oh, why?
04:20Because although metadioxin is totally harmless, the name may cause anxiety in ignorant and prejudiced minds.
04:26Humphrey, you're talking about my Cabinet colleagues.
04:29I was referring to the Friends of the Earth and other pressure groups.
04:32Oh, I see.
04:34Yes.
04:35Oh, Joan Little is a ride minister, MP for Liverpool Southwest.
04:38Oh, good. You don't know what she wants to you to go there?
04:40Oh, well, of course she is the Prime Minister's PPS and the new plant is in her constituency.
04:44Fine, show her in.
04:45Oh, yes.
04:45If you'll excuse us, Humphrey.
04:47The PM's PPS. Well, I think I'd prefer to stay in Cabinet, my honestly.
04:50Joan Little, Minister, member for Liverpool Southwest.
04:53Joan, I don't think you know Humphrey Appleby.
04:55No.
04:56I'm delighted to meet you.
04:57Do take a seat, please.
04:59Thank you, Bernard.
05:00No.
05:00Bernard.
05:01Oh, yes.
05:03Now, what can I do for you?
05:05Jim, what's the British Chemical Corporation up to in my constituency?
05:10Well...
05:11They will shortly be announcing a very exciting project involving new jobs and new investment.
05:15Yes, but there's some very worrying rumours about this new project.
05:19Such as?
05:20Rumours about dangerous chemicals.
05:22Well, all chemicals are dangerous.
05:24It just depends how...
05:24The Minister means that the rumours are completely unfounded.
05:27There's no cause for alarm.
05:28All the same, can I have your assurance, Jim, that first of all, they'll be a full public inquiry?
05:34Actually, public inquiry might not be a bad idea.
05:36The Minister was about to say there's absolutely no need for a public inquiry.
05:40The matter is being fully investigated already and a report will be issued shortly.
05:43Listen, I came here to talk to Jim.
05:46And indeed you are talking to him.
05:48But he's not answering, you are.
05:50The Minister and I are of one mind.
05:52Whose mind?
05:53Your mind?
05:54Oh.
05:56Listen, I've heard on the grapevine that this factory would be making the chemical that poisoned Cervaso in North Italy.
06:02No, that's not true, ma'am.
06:03Isn't it?
06:04The chemical in Cervaso was dioxin.
06:06This is metadioxin.
06:08But that must be virtually the same thing.
06:10No, no, it's just a similar name.
06:11It's the same name with meta stuck on the front.
06:14And that makes all the difference.
06:17Why?
06:17What does meta mean?
06:21What does meta mean, Humphrey?
06:23Oh, it's quite simple.
06:23It means with or after or sometimes beyond.
06:26It's from the Greek, of course.
06:27Of course.
06:27In other words, with or after dioxin, sometimes beyond dioxin.
06:31It depends whether it's the accusative or the genitive.
06:33With the accusative, it's beyond or after.
06:35With the genitive, it's with.
06:37As in Latin, of course, as you no doubt obviously recall.
06:39Where the ablative is used for words needing a sense of with to precede them.
06:43Oh, but of course, there isn't an ablative in Greek, is there?
06:47Well done, Bernard.
06:48Well done.
06:52You see?
06:54Not exactly, no.
06:56Nobody I should have thought that was perfectly plain.
06:58What I insist on knowing is what is the actual difference between dioxin and metadioxin.
07:04Well, it's quite simple.
07:05Metadioxin is an inert compound of dioxin.
07:07Oh, what?
07:08Yes, I think I follow that, Humphrey.
07:11But could you explain it a little more clearly?
07:15In what sense, Minister?
07:16What does inert mean?
07:19It means it's not...
07:22Ert.
07:23Wouldn't err to fly.
07:30What did you say, Bernard?
07:32Oh, oh, oh, nothing, Minister.
07:34But what does that mean in practical terms?
07:37What do you mean, chemically?
07:38Yes, chemically.
07:40Yes, what does it mean, chemically, Humphrey?
07:41Well, I'm not sure I can explain it in layman's language, Minister.
07:45It's, um...
07:45Do you know any chemistry, Humphrey?
07:47No, of course not, Minister.
07:48I was in the scholarship form.
07:52Classics.
07:53And what's a compound while we're at it?
07:56Don't you know any chemistry, either?
07:57No, do you?
08:00We ought to, haven't we?
08:01Well, a compound is...
08:03It's...
08:04Well, you know what compound interest is.
08:07Yes.
08:08Yes.
08:08Well, a jolly good thing to enjoy compound interest.
08:11Well, that's the sort of thing a compound is.
08:15Yes, well, that's it, then.
08:16To sum up, I think we're all of the same mind, broadly speaking, about this.
08:21And we're ready to go ahead with the proposals.
08:23Go out.
08:24I've said no such thing.
08:26No.
08:28We've agreed that the only difference is in the name.
08:31Dioxin and metadioxin.
08:33It's like...
08:34...Littler and Hitler.
08:36I mean, nobody's suggesting you're like Adolf Hitler just because their names are under the same.
08:39That's not the point.
08:41Well, what is the point?
08:42The point is that this factory is in my constituency.
08:44But it'll be good for the constituency.
08:46More jobs, more money.
08:49The only people we can possibly offend would be a few cranky environmentalists.
08:52At most, I should say, it couldn't cost us more than about 100 votes.
08:56My majority is 91.
09:00Not to mention the three constituencies bordering onto mine.
09:03All marginals.
09:04I wonder if I could intervene just once more.
09:06The case for the British Chemical Corporation manufacturing parpanol is overwhelming.
09:10Am I right, Mr.
09:11Overwhelming?
09:11To create jobs, increase income for the local authority and secure profitable export orders.
09:15Export orders?
09:16Furthermore, the drug has been declared safe by the Food and Drug Administration in Washington.
09:21Washington.
09:21We are preparing a report here as well.
09:23And the minister is confident that this scheme is totally to the advantage of your constituency and the country.
09:29Moreover, if it proves not to be safe, I shall not allow it to be manufactured here.
09:33But of course, if the report says that it is safe, that'd be absurd, wouldn't it?
09:36I'm not satisfied with that, Jim.
09:42Just remember that the party made you an MP.
09:45And you certainly can't be a minister if your party loses the next election.
09:54You still don't look very happy, Minister.
09:56No, it's all very well, Humphrey.
09:57But suppose this report isn't as conclusive as you say it is?
10:00Who is this fellow Henderson, anyway?
10:02Ought and I to meet him?
10:03Oh, no need.
10:04Professor Henderson is a brilliant Cambridge biochemist, and he's been chosen with some care.
10:08Suppose he produces one of those cautious, wait-and-see reports.
10:12Well, in that case, we don't publish it.
10:13We use the American report instead.
10:15Oh, fine.
10:17You mean we suppress it?
10:19Certainly not.
10:20We just don't publish it.
10:21What's the difference?
10:23Oh, it's all the difference in the world.
10:26Suppression is the instrument of totalitarian dictatorships.
10:29We don't offer that sort of thing in a free country.
10:31Well, we simply take a democratic decision not to publish it.
10:36Fine.
10:37And what am I supposed to say to the press and Parliament?
10:40We were hoping the Henderson report would say we'd made a wise decision.
10:43Instead, they say we've cocked it up, so we're going to pretend that this report doesn't exist.
10:47Oh, very droll, Minister.
10:48Well, what would I say?
10:49Well, there is a well-established government procedure for suppressing...
10:52for deciding not to publish reports.
10:54Is there?
10:55Really?
10:55Of course.
10:56You simply discredit them.
10:58God.
10:59Yeah.
11:01How?
11:03Well, stage one.
11:05You give your reasons in terms of the public interest.
11:08You hint at security considerations.
11:10Do you mind if I make a note?
11:12This could come in useful.
11:14I wouldn't mind discrediting some of the party's idiotic research documents.
11:18Well, you point out that the report could be used to put unwelcome pressure on government
11:21because it might be misinterpreted.
11:23Well, anything could be misinterpreted.
11:25The Sermon on the Mount could be misinterpreted.
11:27Indeed.
11:28It could well be argued that the Sermon on the Mount, had it been a government report,
11:31should certainly not have been published.
11:34A most irresponsible document.
11:36All that stuff about the meek inheriting the earth
11:38could do irreparable damage to the defence budget.
11:43Is it right?
11:45What else?
11:45Well, you say it'd be better to wait for a wider and more detailed study
11:49over a longer time scale.
11:51Suppose there isn't one?
11:52Better still, you commission one.
11:54Gives you even more time to play with.
11:56And all this is what you call stage one?
11:58Yes.
11:58Now, in stage two, you go on to discredit the evidence that you're not publishing.
12:03Well, how if you're not publishing it?
12:04Oh, really, Minister?
12:05It's much easier if it's not published, obviously.
12:07You do it by press leaks, of course, not directly.
12:10You say it leaves some important questions unanswered.
12:14That much of the evidence is inconclusive.
12:16That the figures are open to other interpretations.
12:19That certain findings are contradictory.
12:23And that some of the main conclusions have been questioned.
12:27Suppose they haven't?
12:27Then question them.
12:30Then they have.
12:31But to make accusations of this sort, I mean, you'd have to go through it with a fine-toothed
12:36curtain.
12:36No, no, no.
12:37You say all these things without reading it.
12:41There's always some questions unanswered.
12:43Such as?
12:44Well, the ones that weren't asked.
12:47And that's stage two?
12:48Yes.
12:48Now, in stage three, you undermine recommendations.
12:53Not really a basis for long-term decisions.
12:56Not sufficient information on which to base a valid assessment.
13:01Not really any need for a fundamental rethink of existing policies.
13:05Broadly speaking, endorses current practice.
13:08All that sort of thing.
13:09It's easy.
13:09And that always has the trick?
13:10Nearly always.
13:11Suppose it doesn't.
13:12Then you move on to stage four.
13:14Oh, stage four.
13:15Now, in stage four, you discredit the man who produced the report.
13:19Off the record, of course.
13:21You say that he's harbouring a grudge against the government.
13:24Or that he's a publicity seeker.
13:25Or, better still, that he used to be a consultant to a multinational company.
13:31Supposing he wasn't?
13:32Then he's hoping to be.
13:34Everybody's hoping to be a consultant to a multinational.
13:37Or he's trying for a knighthood, or a chair, or a vice-chancellorship.
13:41Really, Minister?
13:42There are endless possibilities.
13:45Oh, excuse me, Minister.
13:46Yes?
13:47The press officer just rung to say there's an item about the propanol factory just coming up on the news.
13:51Yes, yes, yes, yes.
13:52Why on earth wasn't I told about this?
13:54Well, it was arranged with a BCC.
13:55They're not obliged to clear with us.
13:56There's now a return to Washington.
13:58Home again, and a row has blown up on Merseyside
14:01about a plan for the British Chemical Corporation
14:04to manufacture propanol
14:06under licence for the Italian government.
14:08Apparently, propanol contains metadioxide,
14:11which the BCC claims to be completely harmless.
14:14It is, however, a compound of dioxin,
14:18which was the chemical released after a factory explosion at Serveso
14:21in northern Italy in July 1976,
14:24spreading a cloud of poisonous dust over a four-mile radius.
14:29Today, a Merseyside group of protesters
14:31voiced their opposition to the BCC scheme
14:34outside the factory gates.
14:35I'll tell you what we're going to do.
14:44As far as I'm concerned,
14:45Sir Wally can take his poison chemicals somewhere else.
14:49I've got a daughter expecting a baby in three months,
14:51and I'm not having a grandchild of mine
14:53to form for the sake of the bloody high ties.
14:55I can tell you that.
14:56And if we're a government that cared about ordinary people,
15:00they'd never allow it.
15:03BCC said tonight
15:04that a government report on the safety of propanol
15:06was due to be published shortly
15:08by the Department of Administrative Affairs.
15:11And now abroad again.
15:12Today in Prague.
15:16This metadioxin is dynamite.
15:18I assure you, Minister, it's totally harmless.
15:21Only chemically, not politically.
15:22It can't hurt anyone.
15:25It could finish me off.
15:27Yes?
15:28Excuse me, Minister.
15:29Number 10 on the phone.
15:30Who?
15:31The political office.
15:33The PM's just seen the news.
15:35Right.
15:42Hello, Jim here.
15:45Yes, I just saw that too.
15:48Yeah, well, I don't think we need to be too worried
15:49about a little local difficulty.
15:52Well, not in view of the jobs and the exports.
15:56Well, no, not many jobs.
15:59About 90, I think.
16:01Yes, but the export...
16:02Oh, you do, do you?
16:06Yes.
16:07Yes, well, I was coming round to that viewpoint myself.
16:10Yes.
16:11Yes.
16:12Right.
16:13Right.
16:18Humphrey.
16:18Something has just struck me.
16:25So I noticed.
16:28You know, there could be arguments against this scheme.
16:31Minister, you have already agreed.
16:33Yes, but it could lead to a loss of...
16:36public confidence.
16:37You mean votes.
16:38No, no, no, no, no.
16:40Votes.
16:40No, no.
16:41No, it's not that votes are a consideration.
16:44Good heavens, no, no, not at all.
16:45No, but you see, it's the public will.
16:48This is a democracy.
16:50And the people don't like it.
16:52The people are ignorant and misguided.
16:54Humphrey, it was the people who elected me.
16:56Minister, in a week, the whole thing will have blown over.
17:02And in a year's time, we will have a safe and successful new factory on Merseyside.
17:07A week is a long time in politics, Humphrey.
17:09A year is a short time in government.
17:11All right.
17:11You're in government, I'm in politics.
17:12And the PM is not pleased.
17:14Minister, with the greatest possible respect...
17:16Oh, are you going to insult me again?
17:18It could be said that you're putting party before country.
17:21Those hoary old clichés.
17:22Can't you think of a new one?
17:23Well, I think, Minister, that a new cliché could perhaps be said to be a contradiction in terms.
17:28Humphrey, you know nothing because you lead a sheltered life.
17:31I intend to survive, and I'm not crossing the PM.
17:34Oh, Minister, why must you always be so concerned with climbing the greasy pole?
17:39The greasy pole is important.
17:40I have to climb it.
17:41Why?
17:44Because it's there.
17:48Don't get me the editor of the Times, please.
17:51Thank you, Bernard.
17:53How come the Times knows the wording of the Henderson report before I do?
17:59Well, there's been a leak, Minister.
18:01I know that.
18:02It was marked confidential.
18:04I mean, I only got a draft report last night.
18:06Well, at least it wasn't labelled restricted.
18:08Why do you say that?
18:08Well, restricted means it was in the papers yesterday.
18:12Confidential means it won't be in the papers until today.
18:16Who leaked this?
18:17Humphrey?
18:18Oh, I'm sure he didn't, Minister.
18:20Are you?
18:21Well, he probably didn't.
18:23No?
18:24Well, it might have been someone else.
18:27Yes.
18:27These leaks are a disgrace.
18:30And people think it's the politicians who leak.
18:31Well, it has been known, though, hasn't it?
18:33In my opinion, we're far more leaked against than leaking.
18:40Political cowardice to reject the BCC proposal.
18:43Craven expediency.
18:45Hacker has no choice.
18:47I suppose Humphrey thinks he's got me committed to this scheme now, does he?
18:49Well, it's only an unofficial leak of a draft report, Minister.
18:52You're committed to nothing.
18:54Does the report give you a way out?
18:58May I remind you, Minister, Sir Wally McFarlane is waiting outside to see you.
19:01All right.
19:02But he's wasting his time.
19:05Will you come in, please, Sir Wally?
19:08Ah, Wally.
19:09May I join you, Minister?
19:12If you like.
19:14Do sit down, will you?
19:15Thank you, Jim.
19:17Now...
19:17Thank you, Bernard.
19:18Oh, Bernard.
19:18Oh, sorry.
19:21Sorry, Mark.
19:22Sorry about that.
19:24I see from the press that the...
19:26that the Henderson report comes down clearly on our side.
19:29Yes, I've seen that, too.
19:30Yes, that committee's leaking like a sip.
19:34Sir, Minister, there's no real case for refusing permission for the new club, now, is there?
19:39I'm not sure yet.
19:41Oh, look, Jim.
19:42We've been working away at this contract for two years.
19:45It's very important to us.
19:47I'm the chairman.
19:48And I'm responsible.
19:50And I tell you, as a chemist myself, that metodoxin is utterly safe.
19:54Why do you experts always think you're right?
19:56And why do you think that the more inexpert you are, the more likely you are to be right?
20:00Ministers are not experts.
20:02They're chosen expressly because they know nothing.
20:05You admit that.
20:06Nothing about technical details.
20:10Ministers have to take a broader view of the country.
20:13That's why I cannot commit myself yet.
20:15Oh, carker.
20:16This is the wrong decision, and you know it.
20:19It's weak, cowardly, and craven.
20:20I am not coward.
20:22Sit down!
20:24You think you'll lose a miserable few hundred votes from a few foolish, ill-informed people
20:28in those constituencies?
20:29It's pathetic.
20:31It's politics.
20:32Exactly.
20:33I should be writing to the Secretary of State for Industry.
20:35I am prepared to resign if you block this one.
20:46How do you feel that went, Minister?
20:50Well, we'll just have to get another chairman.
20:52Get another?
20:54Nobody on earth would accept a job like that.
20:57Nobody wants to be chairman of a nationalised industry.
20:59It's instant ruin.
21:01They may as well accept the golden handshake on the day they start.
21:05It's only a matter of time.
21:06We'll find someone.
21:07Yeah, some useless non-entity or some American geriatric.
21:10Not much, sir.
21:11How do you expect the Department of Industry to find a decent replacement
21:15when we forced his predecessor to resign
21:17for taking a sound commercial decision which we blocked for political reasons?
21:20Let's not bring that up again.
21:21I have no choice.
21:23Minister, a minister can do what he likes.
21:25It's the people's will.
21:26I am their leader.
21:28I must follow them.
21:33I have a clear conscience.
21:34My hands are clean.
21:35Well, I should have thought it was very difficult to keep one's hands clean
21:38while climbing the greasy pole.
21:43Bernard, we must stop Wally making a public fuss.
21:46Press conferences accusing me of lack of faith.
21:49Interviews on Panorama.
21:50What am I to do?
21:52If I stop this scheme,
21:54the Times and the Telegraph accuse me of craven political cowardice.
21:57If I let it go ahead,
21:58the Mirror and the Sun say that I'm murdering unborn babies.
22:01If only the Henderson report cast any doubt at all
22:05on the safety of metadioxin.
22:06Are you sure it doesn't, minister?
22:07Not as it stands.
22:11Bernard,
22:11Henderson's a Cambridge man, isn't he?
22:13Yes.
22:14Which particular college is he at?
22:16Oh, King's.
22:17Why?
22:18Nothing.
22:18I just wondered if it was my old college.
22:21Weren't you at the LSE?
22:26Oh, yes, so I was.
22:28Have you got his file, Bernard?
22:29Yes, it's with a report.
22:31Have you got a Cambridge telephone?
22:32Oh, minister, you do realise, don't you?
22:34Not that you have any such intention, of course,
22:35but it would be most improper
22:37to try to influence an independent report of this nature.
22:40Most improper?
22:41Out of the question.
22:42No, I just thought it might be rather nice
22:43to run down to Cambridge
22:44and drop in to have tea with my old friend R.A. Crichton,
22:48Provost of King's.
22:49Get him on the telephone.
22:51Oh, yes, minister.
22:52Jane, get me King's College Cambridge, please.
22:53Who knows?
22:55Professor Henderson might drop in
22:57to have a cup of tea with his provis.
22:59That'd be a happy coincidence, wouldn't it, Bernard?
23:01Perfectly natural, if they're both at the same college.
23:03Nothing improper about that, is there, Bernard?
23:05How can a coincidence be improper, minister?
23:07My feeling entirely about it.
23:10Yes?
23:13May I speak to Lord Crichton, please?
23:24How does it feel, Richard,
23:27to move from the Commons to the Lords?
23:29Like moving from animals to the vegetables.
23:33Oh, thank you, my dear.
23:35Good to see you, Pete.
23:36Now, come and meet an old friend of mine, Jim Hacker.
23:38Jim, this is Professor Henderson.
23:41Professor Henderson!
23:43I must say, I didn't expect to see the minister.
23:45Oh, what a coincidence!
23:47Yes!
23:48What a coincidence!
23:49You two know each other, then?
23:51Well, we haven't actually met.
23:52No, but I'm writing a report for the minister's department.
23:54Well, what a coincidence!
23:56Yes, what a coincidence!
23:58Extraordinary coincidence!
23:59Now, I expect you're very happy with my report?
24:02Oh, absolutely.
24:03Delighted.
24:04You must have worked very hard.
24:05Well, most of the work was done by the FDA in Washington.
24:08Ah, well, if you'll excuse me,
24:09I'll go and help my wife with a tea.
24:11Tell me, have you ever written a government report before?
24:15Er, no.
24:16Because, you know, your name will be on it
24:18forevermore.
24:19The Henderson Report.
24:20It's a kind of immortality.
24:23Yes, I hadn't thought of it like that.
24:25And you, if anything were to go wrong...
24:27Go wrong?
24:29If this metadioxin were to turn out
24:31to be not quite as safe as you say it is.
24:34Your career?
24:35Very courageous.
24:38None of the standard tests on metadioxin
24:40show any evidence of teratogenic toxicity.
24:44Standard tests?
24:44That's right.
24:45What do you mean?
24:48Well, you know, I was making a few notes in the train
24:51as I was coming down.
24:52Oh.
24:52And, of course, I'm not a biochemist.
24:54But it would appear that the American report
24:56leaves some important questions unanswered.
25:00Well.
25:01And some of the evidence is inconclusive,
25:03some of the findings have been questioned,
25:05and the figures are open to other interpretations.
25:07Yes, but all figures are open...
25:08And different results might come from a wider
25:10and more detailed study over a longer timescale.
25:13Well, obviously...
25:14Yes, but, you see, if anything were to go wrong,
25:16I mean, even in ten years' time,
25:18a delayed effect,
25:19the press would go straight to your report.
25:22And if it were to turn out that you'd ever,
25:25well, for instance, done laboratory trials
25:28for a multinational drug company...
25:31That was 15 years ago.
25:3314.
25:35You know what the press is like,
25:36even if there's no basis.
25:38No smoke without a fire could be a millstone.
25:40And the press would be absolutely merciless,
25:44especially the popular press,
25:45I mean, if anything went wrong.
25:47Death agony of Henderson Report victims.
25:50Yes.
25:52Yes.
25:55I don't know what to do.
25:57I mean, I can't alter the evidence.
25:59Metadioxin is a safe drug.
26:00The report has to say so.
26:01Oh, quiet.
26:02I can see you have no choice.
26:03Come along, you two.
26:04Stop talking, shop.
26:05Our professor of economics is dying to talk to you.
26:08Oh, dear.
26:08You're not worried about this report, are you, though, Peter?
26:16You know, I've done lots of these things.
26:18It's only the phrasing of the conclusion
26:20that you have to worry about.
26:21That's all the press I would read.
26:23Now, how does it end up now?
26:25Well, I just say,
26:26on the existing evidence,
26:28the committee can see no reason not to proceed.
26:30Yes.
26:31Well, it's just a question of a tidy little bit of redrafting.
26:35Well, while the committee feel
26:37there's no reason for them not to proceed
26:40on the existing evidence,
26:42it must be emphasised that metadioxin
26:45is a comparatively recent compound.
26:47And it would be irresponsible to deny
26:49that after further research,
26:52its manufacture might be proved
26:53to be associated with health risks.
26:57Yes, yes.
26:57Well, that seems perfectly fair.
26:59Um, could you just say that again?
27:04Better than that.
27:05I'll jot it down for you.
27:07The Minister for Administrative Affairs,
27:09James Hacker,
27:10has announced that he'll not be giving his approval
27:12for the British Chemical Corporation
27:14to manufacture propanol.
27:16The report of the Henderson Committee,
27:17while generally approving the drug,
27:19said it would be irresponsible to deny
27:21that future research might disclose health risks.
27:24Mr. Hacker made his announcement today
27:29while on a visit to the BCC's Merseyside factory,
27:32where he was greeted by an enthusiastic cry.
27:36And now, Sport,
27:37following last night's overwhelming defeat...
27:40Well, Minister?
27:42Well, Humphrey?
27:44Do you feel like a hero?
27:45Indeed I do.
27:47And number ten will be delighted.
27:48One of the worst governmental decisions
27:50I've ever witnessed.
27:51And one of the best political decisions
27:52I've ever made.
27:55What do you think, Bernard?
27:57Ah, er, well, er...
27:59I think that, er,
28:00bearing everything in mind
28:01and after due consideration
28:03and, er, considering all the implications
28:05and points of view,
28:06that, er, er, well, in other words,
28:09in fact, I am, er, bound to say,
28:12you look awfully good on television, Minister.
28:17Humphrey, do you think we can manage a CBE for Henderson
28:19or a vice-chancellorship or something?
28:21Certainly not.
28:22He's totally unreliable
28:23and completely lacking in judgment.
28:25I still can't think
28:26why he suddenly cast doubt
28:27on his whole report
28:28in that final paragraph.
28:29I think he has excellent judgment.
28:32Enormous stature
28:32and great personal charm.
28:40I thought you said
28:41you'd never met him.
28:43I meant intellectual stature, Humphrey.
28:46And charm?
28:47He writes with charm.
28:53Doesn't he, Bernard?
28:55Oh, oh, yes, Minister, yes.
28:57They won't let him choose.
29:03Yes, that is.
Recommended
31:20
|
Up next
29:41
29:41
29:29
29:59
28:18
28:30
30:22
25:22
29:56
31:49
28:41
32:04
27:41
58:00
59:00
46:21
46:04
25:36
22:30
46:03
42:56
Be the first to comment