In this general election, as in the previous two, The Times will identify a set of MPs from across the spectrum whose continued service in the Commons would be in the public interest, or whose elevation to that institution would be unusually worthwhile. In some cases, this will be based solely on the individual attributes of the person concerned; in others, it will also be related to a cause that he or she personifies. Britain does not, fortunately, suffer from the sort of party list system imposed by some forms of proportional representation. The electorate here has the ability to make individual decisions about the merits of particular politicians. In the past two general elections there has been more of this “personal voting” than at any time since 1945. That trend should continue.

On these hustings, a range of Shadow Cabinet ministers are vulnerable to a Liberal Democrat challenge, in what Charles Kennedy’s allies refer to as their “decapitation strategy”. These include Michael Howard himself (although his defeat is improbable), Oliver Letwin, the Shadow Chancellor, David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, Tim Collins, Shadow Education Secretary and Theresa May, former chairman of the Tory party and now somewhat underemployed speaking on family issues. Much can and will be said for many of these people. Ms May deserves particular support.

With a majority of 3,284 votes, she is not as vulnerable, numerically, as some of her colleagues. Her margin fell back sharply in 2001, nonetheless, largely because of the unpopularity of a local Tory council that managed to close an old people’s home, raise charges for social services and increase the council tax by 9 per cent simultaneously. The resulting grievances were exploited by a Liberal Democrat councillor who served as her party’s champion four years ago. That is why Ms May is under pressure now.

A Conservative defeat here would be a harsh judgment. Ms May has worked her constituency as hard as any “pavement politician”. Although an affluent place, Maidenhead has a large professional class with a social conscience. The wisest use of that conscience is to re-elect their incumbent.

Ms May’s time as the Tory party chairman was brief (16 months) but it was not inconsequential. At the 2002 party conference she offered the bluntest and bravest speech of any Conservative during this Parliament. Although her internal opponents accused her of insulting the team with her reference to the “nasty party”, what she told her audience was how they were seen by those voters whom they most needed to convert. She also devoted much of her time to attempting to reform an antiquated candidate selection process. This was resisted in some quarters.

It is far too early to tell what condition the Conservative parliamentary party will be in after this contest. But whether it is in good heart or in despair, it can only benefit from the views of a woman who has worked at senior levels in the City and who would strike most people as normal and engaging. This newspaper, among others, has occasionally had fun with Ms May’s diverse and fashionable footwear. It is, though, what stands in the shoes that matters. She is an asset to her party and to Parliament. The Liberal Democrats are entitled to pursue a “decapitation” strategy. In this instance, however, the head and the heels of the present MP should stay intact.