Tory MPs naturally think they are the best people to choose their new leader, right? Wrong, actually. While many of them blame grassroots members for lumbering them with unelectables like Iain Duncan Smith, a vocal minority are vehemently opposed to Michael Howard's plans (in pdf) to allow MPs to ignore the preferences of the party's local activists. The 1922 committee is polling the parliamentary party on the proposals today, but some MPs have already made their position public.
Theresa May, Michael Ancram, Andrew Lansley and David Willetts signed a letter to the Telegraph today (registration required) expressing their concerns. "Members deserve a say in the leadership of the party they support," they write. "It may be that the existing mechanism needs some reform ... But we all agree that members deserve more than an ill-defined consultation mechanism."
Of the three Davids likely to bid for the party leadership, few rate Mr Willetts's chances (though he enjoys some backing from the wonkier political commentators). But while most of the momentum has worked in David Davis's favour - with MPs coming under subtle pressure to show unity and rally round his campaign - there are signs that his support is beginning to wobble. And while some members are hopelessly enamoured of Mr Davis, others feel instinctively that he is the wrong man: "Something whispers doubt," said Matthew Parris in the Times on Saturday.
If the votes today and tomorrow do not go Mr Howard's way, it will be a sign of the continuing appetite for debate among Tory MPs, and their reluctance to fall in obediently behind Mr Davis. This contest has a lot of life left in it.
