There were two leadership battles yesterday. One took place in an atmosphere of near- violence, with supporters of both camps jostling and booing in an open display of rancour and bitterness. At stake, the future of a nation. At issue, charges of corruption, mob rule, sexism and violence against women. For high drama and fierce division there was nothing to match the race for the ANC leadership in South Africa.

No comparison, then, with the altogether more decorous way in which the Liberal Democrats chose their new leader. Two public school-educated, middle-class white men shook hands in a West End hotel and complimented each other on their separate campaigns. One, Nick Clegg, a former journalist and MEP, was acclaimed, by the narrowest of margins, the winner. The other, Chris Huhne, a former journalist and MEP, conceded defeat gracefully. At stake, the future of a small party long out of power. At issue, policies so similar that the legendary cigarette paper could hardly be slid between them.

And yet Nick Clegg's future, as leader of what was once, and may yet be again, the radical force in British politics, will also be determined at the hands of a mob. When he stands up for his first question time in the House of Commons on January 9 he will face a baying horde of backbenchers willing him to fail. His performance will be judged against the standards set by the unlikely figure of the party's caretaker leader, Vince Cable, whose success was determined by a robust manner, a set of trenchant views and one colourful phrase. By comparing the Prime Minister to Mr Bean he won the ultimate accolade — an invitation to join the audience for the final of Strictly Come Dancing.

It may seem absurd — and essentially frivolous — that the fate of a leader can be determined by five minutes of knockabout debate at Westminster once a week. Prime Minister's Questions were always important but were never a terminal test of political virility. Mrs Thatcher was often lacklustre in the House, Churchill sometimes disastrous, Wilson boring. Their performances were coloured by question time, but never determined by it. In a media-obsessed age, however, it has become the “X Factor” of public life, a popularity contest that transmits almost immediately from the chamber to the commentators, and thence to the wider world. If Mr Clegg stumbles once too often, nothing else will count.

And yet, the Liberal cause needs a champion now, every bit as urgently as South Africa needs a wise leader. The centre ground of British politics has become a muddy morass, fought over between two parties desperate to win what was once known as Middle England, but is now Daily Mail territory, characterised as punitive, illiberal, ethno-suspicious and Europhobic. As a result, on social policy, British politics has slid to the right, and neither Gordon Brown nor David Cameron show signs of moving it back again.

Most commentators have assumed that the problem for the Liberal Democrats will be in finding policies distinctive enough to distance them from new Labour on the centre right and a Tory party that appears to be manoeuvring itself to the left. They conclude that Mr Clegg will have his work cut out to find anything different to say.

On the contrary, the crowded centre ground means that the way is open for a genuinely radical party to make its mark — always providing Mr Clegg has the courage to stake out positions that may not be immediately popular but will be distinctive. He needs to learn the lessons of his own campaign, which lost momentum because he was too cautious, too concerned about alienating different factions within his party, instead of challenging convention. Now that he has won, he should have the courage of his convictions and give Lib Dems the sense of direction that they have lost through the party's internal ructions.

Some of those policies are already there — introduced, ironically, under the leader the party rejected. Sir Menzies Campbell brought in income tax reforms and environmental policies that are by far the most radical on the political scene. But because he was unfairly judged as too old and out of touch, they were never properly sold to the public.

There are other issues where the Liberal Democrats can score. A no-holds-barred revision of the NHS's delivery systems, reform of the absurd policy that is crowding our prisons to no effect, a fight to the death on behalf of civil liberties, a humane approach to immigration, a balanced approach to Europe — most of them unpopular, all of them essential. Mr Clegg himself has set out as his starting point a very traditional Liberal principle: giving power back to the individual. If it is to be more than a convenient soundbite, it needs to be translated into something that people will understand — the means to combat overweening bureaucracy, the ability to roll back the power of central government, demonstrating ways in which people rather than institutions can influence public services, the devolution of government to local levels, the fostering of genuine choice.

All of this and more is on offer, but first Mr Clegg has to surmount the Commons hurdle. He might take a leaf out of the book of that grand old Liberal, John Stuart Mill, who came up with one of the great political insults. Chided for calling the Tories “stupid”, he said: “I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant that stupid persons are generally Conservative.” Pausing for the laughter, he added: “And I do not see why the honourable gentlemen should feel that position at all offensive to them; for it ensures their always being an extremely powerful party.” It beats Mr Bean any time.

Times Recommends

• Care in old age: we won’t pay, the State can’t
• Viewers’ choice: our talentless Everyman
• Memo to the poor: go forth and don’t multiply