Clarify [verb]: to admit that what you said before was completely untrue

To the rest of the country, the verb “to clarify” has a single, simple meaning: “to make clear”. However, to Government ministers, it seems that “to clarify” has two other meanings.

The first is: “to admit that what you said before was completely untrue.”

An example of this type of “clarifying” was provided this week by Priti Patel. In August, we now know, the International Development Secretary went to Israel, where she held secret meetings with, among others, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. On Friday, Mrs Patel claimed that Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, knew about her meetings. In a statement on Monday, however, she said she wished to “clarify” this claim – by admitting that he hadn’t known about them after all.

Yesterday, Mrs Patel was summoned to the Commons to explain herself.

“Where is she?” shouted MPS, glaring at the Patel-shaped void on the Government bench.

Alistair Burt, a junior minister, rose. Mrs Patel, he announced, was unable to attend, because she was at that very moment setting off on a “longplanned” trip to Africa. It was, according to him, “a Government visit”, so presumably she had permission for this one.

Gamely, Mr Burt echoed his boss’s attempts to “clarify” her initial claim.

“My right honourable friend,” he said, “has made clear that her words left room for misinterpretation.”

Ben Bradshaw (Lab, Exeter) demanded to know why Mrs Patel had even held these secret meetings. Wasn’t her trip to Israel meant to have been “a family holiday”?

“In the middle of her holiday,” explained Mr Burt, “she took two days off.”

Of course. A holiday from her holiday. All that relaxing was getting on top of her, so she unwound by doing some work.

Mr Burt aside, Mrs Patel was defended by not a single Tory MP. Crispin Blunt (Con, Reigate) even told Mr Burt to take his boss “in hand”.

Later in the Commons, we encountered the second alternative definition of “to clarify”. This one is: “to insist that what you’re saying now is what you’ve said all along, even though it’s the opposite.”

This type of clarifying was demonstrated by Mr Johnson. Last week, he told MPS that Nazanin Zaghari-ratcliffe, a British woman imprisoned in Iran, had been “teaching people journalism [there]”. Her husband has since pointed out that not only is this untrue, but that Mr Johnson’s words could be used by the Iranian regime as a pretext to extend Mrs Zaghari-ratcliffe’s prison sentence.

Yesterday Mr Johnson came to the Commons to “clarify”. In actual fact, he explained with a straight face, he had never said that Mrs Zaghariratcliffe had been teaching journalism. All he had said was that teaching journalism should not be considered a crime.

“I accept that my remarks could have been clearer in that respect,” he said, “and I’m glad to provide this clarification.”

So, now we all know what clarifying is. Good to get that cleared up.