News Analysis: Will a lurch to the right save Duncan Smith from his party?

As the Tory leader sacks key party aides and appeals to hardline supporters, his ratings in the polls remain low despite Blair's woes

In theory, the parliamentary recess ought to be a period when the Westminster rumour mill about plots and leadership challenges to Iain Duncan Smith falls silent. But just as Tony Blair faces a barrage of public criticism over Iraq, and opinion polls have recorded falls in his and his party's poll ratings, along comes yet another diversion to focus attention back to Tory in-fighting.

So why, yet again, are we back to another entirely self-inflicted Tory split story? And is the party about to "lurch to the right" as it did during William Hague's leadership?

The party hierarchy was forced on the defensive yesterday over reports that Theresa May's position as party chairman is in jeopardy because Mr Duncan Smith is going to assert his control over the Tory machine. It was a fresh reminder of the Tories' chronic, and continuing, inability to capitalise on the Government's problems.

Mr Duncan Smith's personal ratings have never been impressive, and have been slipping. The good news for him is that, since his election as leader in September 2001, the public know much more about him and are now ready to express an opinion on this hitherto obscure figure.

The bad news is that they don't seem to like what they see. In the latest ICM poll, only 35 per cent of voters approve of the way Mr Blair is doing his job as Prime Minister, while 55 per cent disapprove. A Mori poll in January told a similar story. However, in the same ICM poll only 27 per cent say they are satisfied with the way Mr Duncan Smith is performing, and 50 per cent are dissatisfied. That leaves Mr Duncan Smith with a net approval rating of minus 23 per cent – even worse than Mr Blair's minus 20 per cent.

Those disappointing figures are even more startling when it is realised that some of the Tories' "natural" issues have rocketed up the list of the voters' concerns since the last election, such as immigration and defence. These are areas Mr Duncan Smith has recently been stressing, for example at Prime Ministers Questions. A new team, including the bright young MPs David Cameron and George Osborne encouraged him to return to something of the Hague approach of Blair-bashing. Evidently, however, it has not been enough, and the Tory leader has decided to take action.

On its own, the removal of Mark MacGregor, the party chief executive is hardly big news. Neither is the departure, by mutual consent, of Rick Nye, the Director of the research department. Yet the removals come on top of the departure, last summer, of Jenny Unglass, the former chief of staff, and Dominic Cummings, the policy adviser to the leader. Barry Legg, a former eurosceptic MP will replace Mr MacGregor. And then, of course, there was the bungled decision to remove David Davis from the party chairmanship and replace him with the "moderniser", Mrs May. There is also talk of recalling John Redwood from the backbenches, the man dropped by Mr Hague for bombing with the focus groups.

The parallel is already being drawn with Mr Hague's tenure as leader. Halfway through the previous parliament, after initially dabbling with an "inclusive" approach, Mr Hague lost his nerve when the polls refused to budge and turned to his "core vote" strategy, based on being anti-Europe, anti-asylum seekers and cutting taxes.

But at least that was a coherent, if misguided, strategy. And when Mr Hague tacked to the right in 1999, there were short term political dividends, with gains in the local and European election results.

This round of personnel changes, however, have little to do with strategy and are almost entirely to do with the short-term survival of Iain Duncan Smith as leader.

Although Mr Portillo, Mr Clarke and their principal lieutenants refused to serve after Mr Duncan Smith became leader, nods in their direction were made by the appointment of several of their supporters either in Central Office or the shadow cabinet – the "modernisers" now being eased out.

The early decision to shut up about Europe, taxation and asylum issues and concentrate attention, instead, on public services with a coherent approach under the banner "helping the vulnerable" was a more substantial attempt to reassure the modernisers.

But such is the poisonous atmosphere that has often been the hallmark of the Central Office backroom it was not long before mutual mistrust took over. It also has to be said that the polls have not – so far – shifted very much in the Tories' favour despite the changes.

First it was the Portillistas, through Mr Cummings and Mr MacGregor, who persuaded Mr Duncan Smith to fire Mr Davis. But that then created, in Mr Davis, a focal point around whom a number of original Duncan Smith supporters in the parliamentary party – disillusioned at the attempt to woo Portillistas – have been tempted to rally.

Now Mr Duncan Smith needs to get these MPs back on side in an attempt to stave off any motion of no confidence in his leadership that might arise. Hence the removal of the last modernisers in Central Office. The briefing against Mrs May, and the talk of restoring Mr Redwood is also designed to secure 'traditionalist' support on the backbenches. The aim is to ensure they are not tempted to join forces in voting, if there is a no-confidence vote, with the Clarke and Portillo camps, in order to open up a contest in which Mr Davis would then be their standard bearer.

It would seem that Mr Duncan Smith is now, in effect, repeating the "core vote" strategy of Mr Hague, emphasising low taxes and asylum issues. Private polling for the party showed that, among swing voters, 93 per cent are concerned with asylum issues and 85 per cent are concerned with taxation issues.

Mr Duncan Smith will be hoping that will see him do well in the local elections and elections for the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly in May. It will be a crucial test. That is why the estimates of prospective gains are being aggressively downspun, with the official CCO estimate running at a mere 30 council seats.

The key question is the outcome of any war in Iraq. There is the possibility that Labour party members will refuse to canvass and that their supporters will stay at home. A disastrous war might mean all bets were off for Mr Blair's leadership. Critics of Mr Duncan Smith's approach to the war, such as Ken Clarke and Douglas Hogg would feel vindicated that a political opportunity had been lost.

A good war for the Prime Minister, however, might well boost his prestige and lend a khaki tinge to the May elections. In that case, Mr Duncan Smith would have little to show at the polls and would have to fall back on his core parliamentary support to stave off defeat in a confidence motion. It is a bit like throwing a dice – but Mr Duncan Smith could still throw a six.

This latest row is, therefore, all about circling the wagons to ensure the short-term survival of Mr Duncan Smith. It is hardly the basis, however, on which to find a coherent strategy for a general election that is just over two years away. That leaves room for many more re-shuffles, dismissals and who knows how many further contradictory approaches?