Perhaps my post was too harsh and one-dimenstional. In my own country the first chancellor was a conservative who resisted the nazis and created a moderate welfare state after WWII.
In your country the good ol' BBC with series like Civilisation and so on is definitely preferable to the notion of modern liberals that TV is just for entertainment.
So yeah, these kind of dignified and well-read old-school conservatives were great. I'd guess they'd be the first ones to ban private television.
But this kind of conservatism from the post WWII era that cared about education, family and community, that tolerated or even endorsed the mild forms of social security created by the welfare state, is gone.
As one of these conservatives who cares fervently about education, family and community and who endorses social security, the welfare state and public ownership of key utilities and industries, I certainly hope we're not gone!
In Britain you have John Milbank, Phillip Blond, Maurice Glasman and David Lindsay. In Canada you have the Progressive Conservatives - John Tory and David Orchard being prime examples, but also the students of George P Grant. In the US you have left-leaning, socially conservative Democratic legislators like Bob Casey and Marcy Kaptur, as well as palaeoconservative public intellectuals like Rod Dreher. We're not particularly well-organised, but I don't think we're quite gone.
Choosing between a typical contemporary liberal who is mainly socially progressive but not economically and a conservative like yourself would be a no-brainer for me.
As Sonak has pointed out, a key problem nowadays is that globalization undermines politics proper. To me any political agenda that opposes this trend (except of course a fascist or communist one) is welcome.