Tory MPs take back the power to choose their party's leader

Conservative MPs have dealt Michael Howard a devastating blow after they snubbed his plans for electing the party's leader and instead voted to give themselves the final say.

Conservative MPs have dealt Michael Howard a devastating blow after they snubbed his plans for electing the party's leader and instead voted to give themselves the final say.

Only four backbenchers backed Mr Howard at meeting of the 1922 Committee last night while the majority opted to strip grassroots members of a vote.

Mr Howard has said that he wants to remain as party leader until the end of the year and has pledged to oversee changes to the way his successor is elected. But supporters of Iain Duncan Smith, Mr Howard's predecessor, were last night said to be collecting names to force a leadership contest under the present rules. They need more than 30 MPs to force Mr Howard to stand down but they would give the membership a say in the selection of leader.

Supporters of David Davis made it clear the move had nothing to do with them, although he would be the favourite to win an early leadership election.

Mr Howard backed a change in the voting system devised by the governing Conservative Party Board, which would have required the voluntary membership of the party in the country to be consulted with a vote. His preferred option was criticised by senior Tory MPs for threatening to produce "institutionalised conflict" between the MPs and their constituencies over the future choice of leader.

Mr Howard's proposal was heavily defeated in favour of one put forward by the 1922 Committee, which requires the party members around the country to be consulted, but does not specify how.

"It was quite humiliating for Michael," one member of the 1922Committee said. "It was quite extraordinary to see the leader of the party and the chairman [Liam Fox] and Theresa May putting their hands up, and then the rest of the parliamentary party voting the other way.

"It makes you wonder how many times Michael Howard can be humiliated in a meeting by his own party and still carry on."

The vote was a reassertion of the authority of MPs over the party members. It is intended to avoid the election of a right-wing, Eurosceptic leader such as Mr Duncan Smith, who was popular with the gin-and-tonic set in the constituencies, but lacked prime ministerial qualities.

The vote will be resented by party members and a campaign is already being mounted to overturn it. The vote has to be approved in September by the party's electoral college but is unlikely to be overturned.

The proposal means that the party membership's preferred choice of leader has to be relayed to MPs before they vote, but they are not bound by it.

Baroness Thatcher said this week that she wanted the party to "get on with it". Some thought she meant Mr Howard should be replaced quickly, but one Thatcherite MP said: "She was meaning we should get on with attacking Labour."