Simon Nixon: If only the Tories had opposed the war

They are dominated by a neo-conservative cabal whose views are at odds with their supporters Kennedy should seize the moment. It is only the party of Gladstone that defends our liberty now

At a lunch at one of London's grander clubs the other day, a Tory candidate for a marginal seat in the West Country was bemoaning the challenge that lay ahead. It was all very difficult, he said. Not only was he up against a Liberal Democrat with a majority of several thousand, but he also had to contend with UKIP. People must be out of their minds to vote for fringe parties. Couldn't they see that the only way to get rid of this awful government was to vote Conservative?

There was much nodding around the table. Yes indeed. A terrible shame. An awful government etc. There was an assumption that everybody present was a Tory. It was that kind of lunch. It was that kind of club. So it fell to me to say what I suspected everybody was thinking. "I am a regular Tory voter but if I lived in your constituency, I wouldn't vote for you. Like everybody I know, I'm disgusted by the Iraq war and have no intention of voting for the party that helped get us into his mess."

There was an awkward silence. Then somebody sitting opposite bashfully admitted that he agreed with me. Somebody else said he intended to vote UKIP. Another said he hadn't yet made up his mind but he knew his wife and children planned to vote Lib Dem. It soon became apparent that if an election were held that afternoon, our beleaguered candidate could only be sure of one vote at the table - his own.

This won't have come as any surprise to anybody who has listened to what disgruntled Conservative voters are saying - or looked closely at the opinion polls. Ever since the Iraq crisis blew up in March 2002, opinion polls have consistently shown that Conservative voters are far more opposed to the Iraq war than Labour voters.

An ICM poll in June showed that 52 per cent of Tories thought the Iraq war unjustified compared to 39 per cent of Labour supporters. The same pattern is reflected in attitudes to the US election. A YouGov poll in The Spectator shows that only 19 per cent of Conservative voters would vote for George Bush, compared to 21 per cent of Labour voters, whereas 45 per cent of Tories support Senator Kerry, compared to 43 per cent of Labour voters.

The strength of opposition to the Iraq war among Conservative voters has been one of the most remarkable - and least remarked upon - features of the political landscape. The Tory leadership is dominated by a neo-conservative cabal whose views are fundamentally at odds with the instincts of its traditional supporters. Had the party opposed the war, it would be cruising to election victory.

For the Liberal Democrats, this presents a huge opportunity. Traditional Conservative voters who opposed the war are deeply ambivalent about a party that gives the impression it would do it all again in Iraq. Some will drift to UKIP. Many could be persuaded to vote Lib Dem. But they do need to be persuaded, which means getting the rhetoric right.

The key word here is "liberty". When the Tory leadership talks about liberty, it gives the impression that freedom is essentially a function of the tax rate - which only goes to show how little they understand the instincts of many of those upon whose votes they depend.

Many of those who voted Conservative in the Cold War years in order to defeat communism at home and abroad are not rich or obsessed with money. Typically, those traditional Tory stereotypes are conscientious public servants who care deeply about the institutions that bind society together. They instinctively recognise that the only definition of liberty that matters is freedom from arbitrary political control and that this requires strong, independent institutions able to stand up to political interference.

True lovers of liberty are appalled by the politicisation of the civil service; they are horrified by Tony Blair's contempt for parliament and his disregard for the conventions of cabinet government; they are dismayed by the inability of parliament to hold the executive to account (the toothless reports of the Foreign Affairs and Intelligence Services committees into the Iraq war were an affront to every true democrat); they are alarmed at the Blair government's assault on the freedom of the press, notably in its attempt to intimidate the BBC; and they are outraged by the powerlessness of the judiciary to prevent the detention without trial of British subjects in Belmarsh and Guantanamo Bay.

Above all, they are contemptuous of a party whose support for the Iraq war has left it with nothing to say on these abuses. Iraq has revealed a British state in which the executive wields more power than a Stuart monarch and Tony Blair exercises powers of patronage that would make Walpole blush. How dare the Tories talk of their love of freedom while Tony Blair reassembles the trappings of absolute monarchy?

Charles Kennedy should seize the moment. He should point out it was the party of Gladstone that secured the foundations of our liberty by extending the franchise, reforming parliament and establishing an independent civil service - often in the teeth of Tory opposition. And he should point out that it is only the party of Gladstone that promises to defend our liberty now.

nixon@spjn.freeserve.co.uk

The writer is City editor of 'The Week'