Yes, Prime Minister (1986) s02e07 Episode Script

- The Chief Whip and Party Chairman to see you.
- Take a seat.
I'll be right with you.
Bernard, take a seat.
I want you here for this meeting.
- Isn't this a party matter? - It's also a government matter.
- It's about our education policy.
- The government's or party's? - It's the same thing.
- With respect, they're not the same thing.
- That's why we want the meeting.
- It seems Bernard sit! Stay.
What's the problem? - Education.
- What can I do about it? - You're the Prime Minister.
- Yes, I know.
I have no direct control over education.
I don't control the curriculum or exams.
I don't control the choice of head teachers.
Nothing.
The voters hold you responsible for everything.
You do have influence.
I'm fed up with it.
When I became PM, I thought I'd have power.
And what have I got? Influence.
I've got no power over the police, the rates, EEC directives, European courts, our courts, the judges, NATO.
- What have I got the power to do? - Lose us the next election.
Which you will if you don't tackle education.
The voters want something done about low academic attainment.
- Sex education! - I'm not against sex education.
I'm not against children being taught the facts of life in class, but not homosexual technique! - Or heterosexual technique, come to that.
- Where should they learn it? Behind the bike sheds like we did! Did you? Never mind sexual technique.
Some of our schools are teaching more Hindi than English.
I know English is more important, but I daren't say so or I'd be accused of racism.
When I met the Ethnic Awareness Council, I happened to glance at my watch when a black woman delegate was speaking and I was accused of racist body language.
And sexist.
- I get the message.
What do you want me to do? - Get a grip on education.
Get Henry to do something about the Department of Education.
- They've got him house-trained.
- Sack him.
I can't have another Cabinet convulsion.
- Then invite the opposition leader's wife here.
- What can she do? Start measuring up for carpets and curtains.
Yes, right, fine.
This afternoon? - Bernard, I believe the PM wants to see me.
- Yes, Sir Humphrey.
- No, no, the education system.
- I see.
- Bit late to do anything about that either.
- He thinks he'll lose the next election.
- Worse things could befall the nation.
- He can't ignore facts.
If he can't ignore facts, he's got no business being a politician.
Anyway, Bernard, he's got nothing to worry about.
The education system does all most parents require of it.
Keeps children out of mischief while they're at work.
That paper the Party Chairman had suggests the comprehensive system is breaking down.
Bernard, I never thought to hear such language from a loyal member of the Civil Service! - Have you been got at by the enemy? - You mean the Russians? No, Bernard, I mean the Prime Minister's political advisor - that Wainwright female.
- Comprehensive education ought to be validated.
- Of course, but not invalidated.
But if it was introduced to improve standards Whatever gave you that idea? - You mean it was to get rid of class distinction? - Precisely! - So that all children - Children? - Who mentioned children? - I just The Department of Education never mentions children! No, no, no, no, Bernard.
It was to get rid of class distinction in the teaching profession.
Improve the living standard of teachers, not the educational standards of children.
Bring the NUT teachers up to the salary level of their rivals in the National Association of Schoolmasters in the grammar schools.
- But the - When there is a Labour government, the Education Department says comprehensives abolish the class system.
When there's a Tory government, they say it's the cheapest way to provide mass education.
To Labour, we explain that selective education is divisive and to the Tories we explain that it is expensive.
That way, we have a happy relationship with the NUT and we educate our own children privately.
- But if the government wants change - The teaching unions don't.
Isn't it our job to persuade unions to accept government policy? No, it is our job to get the government to accept union policy.
Since government change policy all the time and unions never change their policy at all, common sense requires that the government be brought in line with the unions.
Yes, Prime Minister? Oh, fine.
He can see you now.
Sir Humphrey, he's very worried that he seems responsible for something he can't change.
Yes, I'm sure.
Responsibility without power - the prerogative of the eunuch throughout the ages.
- Prime Minister.
- Good morning.
What were you saying? Nothing.
I understand you're worried about the local education authority.
- No, the Department of Education and Science.
- Indeed? I think the DES does a splendid job.
Look what's happened to education.
This is a question from a Religious Studies paper.
"Which do you prefer - atom bombs or charity?" Even maths is politicised.
"If it costs £5 billion a year to maintain Britain's nuclear defences "and £75 a year to feed a starving African child, "how many children could be saved from starvation "if the Ministry of Defence abandoned nuclear weapons?" That's easy.
None.
They'd spend it all on conventional weapons.
In any case, it's just a sum.
Five billion divided by 75.
But children aren't learning to do the sums.
The local education authorities might argue that they don't need to.
They have calculators.
They all need to know HOW it's done.
We were all taught basis arithmetic, weren't we? Were we? What's 3,947 divided by 73? Er Oh, I'd need a pencil and paper to do that.
No, never mind that.
- I could do it when I left school.
- Now you'd use a calculator.
That's not the point.
Look at Latin.
Hardly anybody knows that now.
Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.
What? - Times change and we change with the times.
- Precisely.
- Si tacuisses, philosophus manisses.
- What does that mean? If you'd kept your mouth shut, we might have thought you were clever.
- I beg your pardon? - Not you, Prime Minister.
That's the translation.
No one would have thought Sir Humphrey was saying that about you.
Go away, Bernard, please.
I can't believe it.
You had a strict academic upbringing.
Are you denying the value of it? What's the use of it? I can't even call upon it in conversation with the PM of Great Britain! Education in this country is a disaster.
We're supposed to prepare children for work.
Most of the time they're bored stiff.
I should've thought that being bored stiff was an excellent preparation for work.
The school leaving age was raised to 16, but they're learning less.
We didn't raise it so they'd learn more but to keep teenagers off the job market and hold down unemployment figures.
Are you saying there's nothing wrong with education? Of course not.
It's a joke.
It's always been a joke.
By leaving it in the hands of local councillors, it will remain a joke.
Half of them are your enemies and the other half are the sort of friends that make you prefer your enemies.
- What are you saying? - That education will never get any better as long as it's subject to all that tomfoolery in the town halls.
Imagine what would happen if you put defence in their hands.
- Defence? - Give councils £100 million each and ask them to defend themselves, we'd have a civil war in three weeks! - You're being silly.
- Am I? That's what's happened to education.
And why? Because nobody thinks education is serious the way defence is serious.
So that's why civil defence is in local authority hands? Of course.
Because everybody knows it's a joke.
You just don't leave important matters in the hands of those clowns! And as you've left education to them, one must assume that, until now, you have attached little importance to it.
It is important.
It could lose me the next election.
Ah! In my naivety, I thought you were concerned about the future of our children.
Yes, that too.
After all, they get the vote at 18.
Then, Prime Minister, then centralise.
Take it away from the local councils.
Put it under the Department of Education, then you could do something about it.
Do you think I could? Grasp the nettle, take the bull by the horns? You can't take the bull by the horns if you're grasping the nettle.
Oh, really, Bernard? By grasping the nettle with one hand, you could take the bull by one horn with the other hand, but not both horns because your hand isn't big enough.
If you did take the bull by one horn, it would be rather dangerous because Well, it was just a mixed metaphor and since we were discussing education, I - (BUZZER) - Thank God! Yes? Your political advisor's outside.
- Send her in, Bernard.
Humphrey, thank you.
- Thank you.
- You've given me much food for thought.
- In that case, Prime Minister, bon appétit.
Dear lady.
- Yes, Dorothy? - My notes for your tour of the north-west.
Visits to hospitals and factories.
- Drumming up votes in marginal constituencies.
- No! - Why not? - I'm coming with you if it's a government tour.
If it's canvassing marginals, I can't come and the Treasury can't pay.
It's a government visit.
It's coincidence that all the stop-offs are in marginals.
- Well, that's all right, then.
- That's OK.
What can I do about education? Quickly.
- You mean do or appear to do? - Appear to do.
I can't do, obviously.
Well, in the short term, we could get you on TV associated with something good and successful.
- Is there something? - I had thought of this for your schedule.
- You could fit it in.
- St Margaret's School Young Enterprise Scheme.
It's set up its own manufacturing company.
They make cheeseboards, paperweights, toast racks, sell them and track the operation in their business-study classes.
- They involve local businessmen.
Parents help.
- Does it cost a lot? - No, it makes a profit.
- Isn't it teaching them to be rather grasping? - No, they give the money to local charity.
- Fine, I'll do it.
Make sure the TV crews have plenty of time to cover me er cover the event properly.
Write me a speech with a snappy, 20-second piece for the news bulletins.
- That should win back a few seats.
- Prime Minister.
Er, give a lead to those responsible for the nation's education, Bernard.
Of course, Prime Minister.
(NEWSREADER) Finally, the PM visited St Margaret's School on his north-western tour.
The school has set up a manufacturing business where the children make a variety of goods for sale in the local community.
The children do their own sales and marketing and use the experience they gain as a basis for their maths and business studies.
The Prime Minister was presented with an example of the school's output.
In conclusion, I must congratulate you on all the hard work, the discipline and the success of your enterprise.
You've set an example in British education which other schools would do well to follow.
We need more schools like St Margaret's and I shall always treasure your present.
No Prime Minister ever lost a seat if he could help itl (NEWSREADER) And that was the six o'clock news from the BBC.
- I thought that was OK, didn't you? - Fine.
- My joke went down well.
- MY joke! Better than Channel 4 coverage.
They didn't describe it as the PM's tour of the north-west.
They said, "Jim Hacker touring the marginal constituencies.
" - That's true, isn't it? - But they shouldn't say it.
It's biased reporting! - Reporting the facts? - Nothing wrong with visiting the marginals.
- What they said was still true.
- It was still biased to say it! I'm not interested in your paranoia.
I was interested in that school.
- Parents queue up to get their children into it.
- Pity they can't all get in.
Coffee? - Lovely.
- Why can't more parents send children there? - No room.
- There is.
School numbers are falling.
- That'd mean poaching the other schools.
- So what? The other schools would have to close.
Great! St Margaret's could take over their buildings.
- Darling, that wouldn't be fair.
- Who to? - The teachers in the schools that had to close.
- Good ones could teach at the popular schools.
What about the bad teachers? It wouldn't be fair on them.
What about the children, or are the bad teachers' jobs more important? Darling, it's it's no good.
Who's to say who are the bad teachers? It just wouldn't work.
- Why not? - Well it wouldn't work.
- Why not? - What do you mean? Suppose schools were like doctors.
In the NHS, you choose which doctor to go to, don't you? - Yes.
- And he gets paid per patient.
Why don't we do the same with schools? Have a National Education Service.
Parents could choose the schools and the schools get paid per pupil.
- Exactly! - There'd be an outcry.
- From the parents? - No, from the Department of Education.
- I see.
And who has the most votes? - The DES would block it.
- Fine, get rid of them.
- What? - Get rid of the Department of Education.
- I don't understand you.
Get rid of it, abolish it, remove it, expunge it, eliminate it, eradicate it, exterminate it! - Get rid of it! - Get rid of it? - Yes.
- I couldn't do that.
- Why not? What does it do? - I could do that.
Local government could administer the lot.
We could have a Board of School Inspectors.
The rest could go to Environment.
I could send that house-trained idiot Henry to the House of Lords.
Golly.
I wonder what Humphrey will say.
Whatever he says, I want to be there when you tell him.
To witness the clash between the political will and the administrative will? I think it'll be a clash between the political will and the administrative won't.
- You sent for me, Prime Minister? - Humphrey, come in.
Sit down.
I want to bounce an idea off you.
I've realised how to reform the educational system.
Excellent, Prime Minister.
(CLAPS HIS HANDS) I'm going to let parents move their children to any school they want.
You mean after application, scrutiny, tribunal hearing and appeals procedures? - No, just move them whenever they want to.
- I'm sorry.
I don't quite follow.
This government will let parents decide which schools to send their children to.
Prime Minister, you can't be serious! - I am.
- But it's preposterous! - Why? - You can't expect parents to make these choices.
How on earth would parents know which schools are best? - Which school did you go to, Humphrey? - Winchester.
- Was it good? - Oh, excellent, of course.
- Who chose it? - My parents, naturally.
Now, that's different, Prime Minister.
My parents were discerning people.
You can't expect ordinary people to know where to send their children.
- Why not? - Well, how could they tell? They could tell if their kids could read, write and do sums and if the exam results were good.
- Exam results aren't everything.
- True.
Parents who don't want an academic education for their children can pick progressive schools.
But parents have no qualifications to make these choices.
Teachers are the professionals.
Parents are the worst people to bring up children.
They've no qualifications, no training.
You don't expect untrained teachers to teach.
The same should apply to parents.
- Before having children, they should be trained? - No, that's no problem.
They've all been trained to HAVE kids.
Sex-education classes have been standard for some years.
Perhaps we could do better.
Before people can have children, we should make them sit exams - written and practical.
Perhaps both.
Then they could be issued with breeding licences.
Oh, very droll, Prime Minister.
No, but I'm being serious.
It's looking after children that parents are not qualified for.
That's why they have no idea which schools to choose.
It couldn't work.
What about the Health Service? People choose their doctor without medical qualifications.
- Ah, yes, well, that's different.
- How? Well, doctors are The patients aren't parents, dear lady.
Oh, really? What makes you think that, Humpy? Not as such.
In any case, as a matter of fact, I think letting people choose doctors is a very bad idea, very messy.
Much tidier to allocate people to GPs, much fairer.
Then everyone has an equal chance of getting the bad doctors.
- I see.
- In any case, we're talking about education.
With respect, Prime Minister, I think that the DES will react with some caution to your rather novel proposals.
- You mean they'll block it.
- They will give it urgent consideration and insist on a thorough and rigorous examination of all the proposals allied to a detailed feasibility study and budget analysis before producing a consultative document for consideration by all interested bodies and seeking comments and recommendations to be included in a brief for a series of working parties who will produce individual studies which will provide the background for a more wide-ranging document considering whether or not the proposal should be taken forward to the next stage.
- You mean they'll block it.
- Yeah.
- No problem.
- We thought you'd say that.
- We have a solution.
- Oh, yes? We'll abolish the DES.
- I'm sorry? - We'll abolish it.
- Abolish it? - Why not? Abolish Education and Science?! - That'd be the end of civilisation as we know it! - Only the department.
Education will flourish.
- With no government department? Impossible! - Departments are tombstones.
The Department of Industry marks the grave of industry, the Department of Employment, that of employment, the Department of Environment, that of the environment.
And the Department of Education marks where the corpse of British education is buried.
What does the DES do? What's its role? I hardly know where to begin! It lays down guidelines, it centralises and channels money into education authorities, University Grants Committee, it sets standards! - Does it set the curriculum? - It would like to! - Select and change head teachers? - Maintain school buildings? - No - Set exams? - No - Does it choose the children? - How does it affect what a child does at school? - It supplies 60% of the cash.
Why can't the cash go from the Treasury to the schools? Do we need 2,000 civil servants to funnel money from A to B? The DES also creates a legislative framework for education.
Not much legislation.
Environment could do that.
They deal with other local authority matters.
You can't be serious! Who'd assess forward planning and staffing variations, variations in pupil populations, density of schooling required in urban and rural areas? - Who'd make sure everything ran properly? - 2,500 private schools seem to solve these problems every day without any help from the DES.
They respond to changing circumstances.
- Supply and demand.
It's easy.
- Who would plan for the future? Education today is what the department planned? Well, of No, of course not! - Is there anything else that the DES does? - Well, it it Well, we don't need it, then, do we? QED.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
I really Quite unthinkable.
Once they start abolishing whole departments, the very foundations of civilisation crumble.
- Barbarians at the gates.
- The return of the Dark Ages.
Did anything like this crop up when you were Cabinet Secretary? No.
We let them amalgamate departments, but that worked very well.
Yes, quite.
You keep the existing staff and you put in an extra layer of coordinating management at the top.
Exactly.
But you have to stop the liquidation of the Department of Education, Humphrey.
Have you tried discrediting the person who proposed it? No point.
It was the Wainwright female, so he's passing it off as his own idea.
- Discrediting the facts behind it? - It's a political idea, so facts don't come into it.
- Massaging the figures? - No figures are involved.
But it's hard to get the Prime Minister to see that it's a bad idea.
Of course.
It's actually a very good idea.
It just mustn't happen.
I wonder if we oughtn't to play along with it - in the interests of the nation's children.
Never mind the nation's children.
What about our colleagues at the DES? - Of course.
Sorry.
- Let's be clear about this.
The only people who'll like this idea are the parents and the children.
Everyone who counts will be against it.
- Teachers' unions.
- Local authorities.
- Educational press.
- And, of course, the DES.
- So what's the strategy? - Unions can be counted on to disrupt the schools.
And go on TV saying the government are causing the disruption.
Good.
Local councils will threaten to turn the constituency parties against the government.
The Department of Education will delay every stage of the process and leak anything that embarrasses the government.
We can help with that at the Campaign for Freedom of Information.
Thank you, Arnold.
Ah, thanks.
But what are we actually Thank you, Billy.
What's our argument? Well, obviously, that this new proposal will destroy our educational system.
- Everybody knows it's destroyed already.
- Well, we will say Sorry, the press will say that it's government interference in the DES that destroyed it and that this new plan will make things worse.
- Will that do the trick? - It always has in the past.
- But this time the political pressure is stronger.
- You must find a political weapon to fight it with.
What political weapon did you have in mind, Arnold? I? That is your concern, Humphrey.
Your chance to prove yourself worthy of the high office to which you've been called.
- The PM's ready to see you.
- What's it about? - The abolition of the DES, I'm afraid.
- This is going to be bloody.
- There's a minor matter I need your advice - Is it important? - Not important but urgent.
- What is it? You know that enterprise school the PM visited, when they gave him that stool? It's just come to light that the wood they were using was stolen.
Bernard, this is hardly Stolen? Yes, it was government property stolen from a YTS workshop last year.
How shocking.
It was referred to the DES, as the theft came to light at a school.
They don't know whether to prosecute.
Sorry to bother Don't mention it, Bernard.
Show me in.
Come in, Humphrey.
Come in, come in! Sit down.
Only one item on the agenda today - the abolition of the DES.
Actually, if there's only one item, it's an agenDUM.
I don't think the Prime Minister's got as far as the second declension.
I don't mind your scoring cheap debating points since you've already lost the battle of the DES.
- The DES will be very upset.
- Does it matter since they'll cease to exist? The process will take a few years.
They'll fight tooth and nail.
- What can they do to me? - They're a formidable department.
- I am a formidable Prime Minister.
- Indeed you are.
But you might still need their cooperation.
Cooperation? From the Department of Education? Don't make me laugh! Fine, fine.
I'll tell them to go ahead with the prosecution, then.
- What prosecution? - Oh, it's hardly worth bothering you with.
That enterprise school where you were televised last week.
- Yes? - The profits A model for other schools Yes, yes, go on.
- The profits were the proceeds of theft.
- Theft? What do you mean, theft? I mean removing goods without the knowledge or consent of the owner with the intent of I know what theft means.
What do YOU mean? Well, the stool that they gave you was made from wood appropriated from the local YTS workshops.
- What do you mean? - It was nicked.
By two of last year's pupils.
- A pair of nickers.
- Thank you, Bernard.
The YTS want to prosecute.
Now, the Department of Education could stop them.
You know, return the wood and hush it up.
Millions saw me on TV saying that school was an example! Well, it is a sort of example.
They mustn't prosecute! I hope the Department of Education won't leak the fact that you're covering up for crooks.
- You must tell them not to prosecute.
- That would need their cooperation.
I can just see the newspapers - "Jim's enterprising crooks.
"The Prime Minister has sat on the fence for so long that now he's become one.
" Persuade them not to prosecute.
It's very difficult to persuade people to cooperate if they are actually under a death sentence.
- Death sentence? - If you're abolishing the department.
Oh! Oh, that! No, that was just a vague idea of Dorothy's.
An idle thought.
Nothing serious.
- You're sure? - Positive.
Splendid, Prime Minister.
Shall we now continue with the agendum? Agendum? Oh, yes! We have no agendum.
(RHYTHMICALLY) We have no agendum today! Business concluded.
All right, Humphrey? Yes, Prime Minister.