Steve Richards: Almost in spite of themselves, the Lib Dems have been gaining in political importance

On all fronts, they that find they're the alternative voice, not out of contrivance, but out of outlook

Recently the Liberal Democrats have found important political space. When looking beyond the sex and booze of recent months there are fewer dark laughs and quite a lot of reasons for the party to become deadly serious. Almost in spite of themselves they matter more at the moment than at any point since the general election in 1997.

They acquire importance partly by chance. The pivotal factor is the Government's chosen agenda, which combines a Thatcherite mix of social authoritarianism, an indiscriminate faith in market-based solutions for public services and an Atlanticist foreign policy that outThatchers the Lady's own sense of doting duty in relation to the US. On all fronts the Liberal Democrats find they are the authentic alternative voice, not out of some desperate contrivance, but consistent with their outlook as a political party.

The Conservatives cannot fulfil this role, however hard they try. Until the last election they had unquestionably a distinctive voice, but somehow managed to yell their messages considerably to the right of Tony Blair. Now with barely a nod towards their past they risk becoming a Blairite echo.

To their credit the Conservatives challenged the adolescent politics that fuelled the proposal to outlaw the glorification of terrorism, a piece of legislative game playing that will make no practical impact on the threat posed by terrorism. A less astute Tory leader would have colluded with the weakly defensive Blairite posturing and supported the measure to appear "strong".

But on the whole the Conservatives remain by instinct at least as authoritarian as Blair. It was only last October that the shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, made the building of more prisons a key proposal in his bid to become leader. Davis failed to win, but he retains his old brief.

More widely the default position of the Conservatives remains well to the right of the current Government as we can see from the murmurings of discontent within the ranks. Some of them call already for tax cuts. Others worry about supporting the schools Bill, but only from a fear that the proposals will lead to less selection in secondary schools when they want more. Already they yearn nostalgically for the glory days between 1997 and 2005, the vote-losing era when they launched their attacks even further to the right.

In spite of the murmuring the more influential Conservatives recognise they serve their strategic objectives by backing Blair's schools' Bill. This leaves the Liberal Democrats as the only main party opposed to the proposals, calling instead for a greater focus on what happens in the classroom rather than an energy-draining focus on iniquitous restructuring.

Their voice on this issue is as urgently necessary as it was in relation to the war against Iraq. Without it the House of Commons would seem once more as if it lived on a different planet from the rest of us, with the two main parties dancing together in celebration at a mythical, contradictory vision marked "choice for parents and schools".

On other topical fronts the Liberal Democrats' opposition to the Government's timid positioning in relation to national security is consistent with the party's long-held commitment to civil liberties. In relation to foreign policy they remain pro-European at a time when the Conservatives struggle with an even more confused scepticism and the Government's message is reduced more or less to stating that it is in favour of Europe as long as Europe agrees with us.

So here they are after the sex, drugs and rock'n roll with a pivotal role to play. In the second term it was their opposition to Iraq that mattered. Now the growing consensus between Blair and Cameron, with Gordon Brown feeling compelled to show that he is on board too, means that, quite often, vast swathes of public opinion will be dependent on the Liberal Democrats for representation.

In choosing a leader the party membership is evidently in a reflective mood. I am told that voting normally takes place almost immediately after the ballot papers are delivered to members' homes. This time some are leaving their decision to the last possible moment. I am not surprised. All three candidates have qualities and weaknesses. There is no obvious leader waiting to be gloriously crowned, nor is there a previously unknown making us swoon as he takes a Cameron- like primrose path to the top.

I note only that at two pivotal and highly charged moments in the recent past Sir Menzies Campbell made the right calls. In the mid 1990s he recognised that the only course for his party was to work more closely with a resurgent Labour Party. This is now a taboo now for most Liberal Democrats apparently outraged that any of their MPs would be keen to work in government. I will do his campaign no good by raising it. Still Sir Menzies and Paddy Ashdown can claim to have saved their party as a national force when it might have been swept away by Tony Blair during the phase when the Labour leader walked on water.

Out of that too-easily derided relationship the Lib Dems got a fair voting system for the Scottish Parliament and a fairer one for the European Parliament. It is an extraordinary reflection of the party that Sir Menzies cannot refer to this period, as if moving closer to power is a political sin. More recently he navigated his party towards a coherent opposition to the war against Iraq, emphasising the need to get UN support and when that support was not forthcoming taking a firm stand in defence of international law. Like his stance in the mid 1990s this was a policy that breathed fresh political life into a party that is always in danger through no fault of its own of falling into irrelevance at a national level.

My more long-serving colleagues at The Independent tell me that Chris Huhne displayed an awesome mind when he worked for the newspaper and yet he is untested as a potential leader. Simon Hughes has a boundless and imaginative political energy, but lacks support in the parliamentary party that has worked closely with him and failed to rise to the admittedly unique challenge of dealing with the inevitable questions about his sexuality.

At least they know when their flawed leader is elected that events and their genuine convictions conspire to give them a role on the national stage and one that extends well beyond being a source of unpredictable adult entertainment.

s.richards@independent.co.uk

The Independent is hosting the final hustings in the leadership contest on Thursday at 7.45pm, Friends Meeting House, 173 Euston Rd, London NW1 2BJ.