THE increasingly bitter argument about who elects the next Conservative leader — just the MPs, or the whole membership — is fundamental to the future of the party.

It is about power, just as it was in the Labour Party in 1980-81 when the Left succeeded in shifting the decision from the MPs to an electoral college of MPs, unions and members. It comes back to Lenin’s core question about politics: “who? whom?”

The conventional wisdom has been that the wider the franchise, the better the chances for the more ideological candidate who is closer to the views of party activists. The reality has seldom been as straightforward. After all, it was Labour MPs who elected the left-wing Michael Foot in the autumn of 1980 and the electoral college gave big victories to the more “right-wing” John Smith in 1992 and to Tony Blair in 1994. And it was Tory MPs who backed William Hague over Kenneth Clarke in 1997, even though it was party members who gave Iain Duncan Smith a big win in 2004, when Mr Clarke was ahead among MPs.

At present, there is a striking contrast between the views of Tory MPs and the public as a whole. Mr Clarke is well ahead in the public’s rating about who would be the best Tory leader, at 41 per cent, against 10 per cent for David Davis, and the rest nowhere, according to the latest Populus poll for The Times, undertaken over the weekend. Even among Tory voters, Mr Clarke is ahead at 55 per cent (up 26 points since mid-July), against 16 per cent for Mr Davis (down 10 points). David Cameron is 2 per cent among all voters, and 3 per cent among Tories.

These figures have to be treated with caution because they partly measure public recognition. Mr Clarke is the best-known candidate and has received a lot of publicity recently after entering the race. While this also explains Mr Cameron’s low ratings, it also underlines his problem in making an impact.

Populus has put two possible match-ups to voters, assuming that Gordon Brown leads Labour at the next election and Charles Kennedy the Liberal Democrats. If Mr Clarke is the Tory leader, Labour would be only slightly ahead, at 39 to 37 per cent. But if Mr Davis is the leader, Labour would win by 43 to 33 per cent, representing no change for the Tories on their result in 2005.

The Tories would do better under Mr Clarke than Mr Davis in all groups except 18 to 24-year-olds. Labour would increase its share on May’s election faced by either Mr Clarke or Mr Davis, and the Lib Dems would fall by four or five points to 18 to 19 per cents. So the Lib Dems would be squeezed, and lose seats, if Mr Brown is the Labour leader, regardless of who leads the Tories.

Until now, there has been scant sign that Mr Clarke’s popularity with the public and Tory voters would make any difference to MPs. Mr Clarke has little support among the new Tory MPs, now a fifth of party. But a survey by the Times political team has, unexpectedly, put Mr Clarke well ahead of Mr Davis among constituency chairmen. Admittedly, ordinary party members may be more anti-Clarke because of his pro-European past, and they will again have the final say if the rule changes are rejected. So who has the vote is not just an arcane matter. It is of crucial importance to the result.

www.timesonline.co.uk/peterriddell

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Should Knox’s trial even have reached the courtroom?
• All that glitters is not sold in Wright’s world
• Believe it or not, Big Brother is your friend