Following our most recent PopConversation with Sir John Redwood, our resident raconteur Swift reviews the discussion 

Sir John Redwood has been around the block a few times. Adviser to Margaret Thatcher, MP, twice a candidate to lead the party, author, and upholder of orthodox monetarism to an extent that is hard to match. Swift believes the phrase might be 'unswerving consistency'. Now people can be passionately wrong can they not, J. Corbyn and E. Miliband? Sir John's advantage is that he has been consistently proven to be on the right side of history (a modish phrase that Swift hates, but seems appropriate here).

Interviewed by PopCon's head honcho, Mark Littlewood, Sir John exuded that slightly world-weary dispassionate yet patient tone that is his trademark. Were he to strike out on a new career, children's entertainer should be crossed off his list. Yet there is something in his cool demeanour that is appealing, and he expresses his views with a clarity that is rare in the world of politics dominated by spin and deceit. He might not have held one of the great offices of state, but he has the intellectual stature to match the height of his homonymous tree.

JR was one of the triumvirate that delivered the Thatcherite privatisation revolution from No 10 when that great lady was ready to go for it. The others being Bernard Ingham (communications) and the top civil servant of the time (government machine). PopCon salutes them. Seldom have so few achieved so much.

Nowadays, the collective wisdom is that one should have lots and lots of people in No10 doing things, pretending they know what the PM is thinking, and having a lot of meetings to discuss it. Sir John's face displayed an evident distaste when describing the present set up. Not only too many of them in HQ, but not much good either.

Sir John is not, though, one of those hang 'em and flog 'em brigade when it comes to the civil service. There are good ones, maybe a few excellent ones, but there are far too many mediocre ones that we don't need. He would argue in favour of a hiring freeze to reduce the bloated system by some six per cent a year. Ministers should hand-pick people of real talent from within (not outside) the machine, and use them to deliver change..

As Swift was formerly an official himself, he can speak from personal experience. Sir John is absolutely right, and any future government should not only implement this plan, but hire him to supervise it.

He described the present political situation as 'gripping', which Swift supposes is one way of putting it, although 'terrifying' also comes to mind. On the negative side we have a government which has put all the bad policies of the last administration 'on steroids', while dumping the (few) good ideas the Conservatives did have. On the positive, the new government is bumbling and inefficient, and already catastrophically unpopular. That, Swift, reflects, is the fastest fall from grace since Lucifer had a crack at the Almighty. Sir John noted wonderingly that the one area where one might expect to see some skill from Labour - the art of spin - is just as bad as everything else. 'Maladroit' he said - a perfectly chosen word.

In his measured way, Sir John unpicked the economic situation of the nation. The independence of the Bank of England, other than in setting the bank rate, is a myth. He did not, indeed, want to see the Monetary Policy Committee abolished, or to lose its power on interest rates, but to have a range of different voices therein. Too many members were schooled in the same orthodoxy, and their principal skill seemed to be testing how far off-beam their interest rate predictions could be.

Otherwise the Bank is not independent, as it works in lockstep with the Treasury. The result was the colossal bond buying (too much, for too long) and ensuing inflation which was at least, if not the only, certainly one of the one of the primary causes of the Conservative election disaster. The Bank's shilly-shallying on bonds was also culpable in dethroning Kwasi Kwarteng and then Liz Truss (a fact, which Mr. Littlewood noted, it has owned up to). Bit late now, thinks Swift.

On matters international Sir John was warm on Trump's demands for more military spending, quizzical on the impact of tariffs (if imposed on the lines suggested so far), and absolutely derisive about Sir Keir Starmer's weedy crawling towards Brussels for a better relationship. There was a vanishingly small chance of a better deal without making concessions that would subvert Brexit. Trade with the EU was still increasing, and if the UK had failed to take full advantage of Brexit, whose fault was that? Starmer would be able to offer nothing of substance and would return with a matching offer from the EU. 'Nothing will come of nothing', as the Bard observed.

When the conversation turned to the future of our dear old Conservative Party, Sir John mounted his charger and sounded the trumpet. He admired Kemi Badenoch - 'a brave lady' - and thought that talk of another leadership challenge was absolutely misguided. The Conservative Party could be reformed (geddit?) from within (like the Republicans in the US).There was no premium on attacking Farage and Reform directly, but there was a need to go after Labour on immigration, for the socialists were the masters now. They own the power: they consequently own the problems too. Trying to palm everything off on the last government was a rapidly depreciating currency, not to mention creating alarm and despondency in the City, industry, and the voters. There was no Labour vision, and as we know, where there is no vision...

When Sir John first stood for the Conservative leadership before the 1997 election, he campaigned on the slogan: 'No change, no chance'. That, Swift believes, is a pretty good summary of where the Conservatives now stand. He thinks Sir John is an optimist who has always played the long game and played it well. We are lucky to have him.