Two Kent MPs are facing crunch selection meetings that will determine if they will contest the next general election amid a growing row over the Conservative party's selection rules.

Maidstone and Weald MP Helen Grant and the Faversham and Mid Kent MP Helen Whately will be interviewed by local party chiefs as they seek the nomination for constituencies with newly re-drawn boundaries.

There was a shock at the weekend when the Ashford MP Damian Green failed to secure the nomination for a new seat, the Weald of Kent. He was entitled under party incumbency rules to bid for the nomination before other candidates.

That outcome has prompted constituency officials to query why the selection process only involved a small number of members, drawn from the party's executive in the two associations.

Gary Cooke, who is the chairman of the Faversham and Mid Kent Association, said: “There is a sense that [the national party] are ignoring the very people that we actually want to engage with, which is our supporters in these constituencies.

"It does, if people want a choice, it’s almost that they have to say ‘no’ but we are where we are. A wider pool of candidates and a greater level of engagement gives greater legitimacy.”

Minister for social care Helen Whately, who was elected in 2015, will be interviewed this week by constituency association officials.

Helen Grant is similarly entitled to apply before anyone else to become the candidate for the Maidstone and Malling seat, which replaces the existing constituency she has held since 2010.

In both cases, the boundary changes incorporate at least 66% of the electorate in their existing seats - the threshold for triggering the incumbency rule.

Under changes, the new Maidstone seat loses some of its rural villages such as Headcorn, Marden and Yalding - considered more likely to vote Conservative.

In its proposals for Mid Kent and Faversham, the commission said it had received a larger degree of opposition.

Objections centred on three wards in the existing Ashford constituency - Charing, Downs North, and Downs West - and plans to move them.

However, the commission said it was not possible to retain these in the redrawn map and as a result, maintained its proposal to place them in the new Weald of Kent seat.

It is unclear what happens next in the process for a Conservative candidate for the new constituency.

Mr Green says he is considering his options - which include applying for the new Ashford seat.

Analysis - Political editor Paul Francis

It was supposed to be a fairly innocuous re-organisation of parliamentary constituency boundaries.

Instead it has triggered a potentially divisive and disruptive argument within the Tory party - and conspiracies abound.

But is there a simpler explanation than the multitude of conspiracy theories?

The reason why - on paper at least - boundaries are being redrawn is to come up with a fairer allocation of voters to each seat.

In Kent, the shake-up has involved the creation of new seat - bringing the total to 17.

The newly-created Weald of Kent constituency is generally seen as a nominally safe seat for the Conservatives.

As are Faversham and Mid Kent, and Maidstone and Malling, represented by Helen Whately and Helen Grant respectively. All three are subject to party rules permitting the sitting MPs the chance to have their application considered ahead of anyone else.

But in politics, it is generally best to expect the unexpected and in the case of the selection meeting for the Weald of Kent seat, Damian Green got booted out.

Instead of a seamless transfer, we have been treated to something the party is quite good at.

A bit of introspective navel-gazing and the spectacle of a row over party rules that have deprived members any say in the selection process. Initially, the explanation centred on claims this was retribution time for Damian Green, an unabashed Europhile who was plotting to oust Boris Johnson as PM.

But accounts of the selection meeting from insiders say one of the issues raised was anger at the rules imposed by Conservative party chiefs.

Green got caught in the political crosshairs and although he had no responsibility for the rules, was seemingly the fall guy.

The irony is that his fellow MPs who will go through the selection process may not face any interrogation on this front, but who knows? These are dangerous times for would-be election candidates - only the danger is not necessarily the one you might expect.