"And then he said..."

Isn't it completely predictable? Having knocked down CK, Mark Oaten and Simon Hughes (not exactly difficult tasks, admittedly) it's now time for for the guns to be turned on Ming. It starts here, with an utterly unsourced story in the Guardian (unsourced unless you count that obscure amoeba Ben Ramm, who makes the pre-Big Brother Chantelle Houghton look high-profile). I daresay it won't stop until he's been forced into making his last oncology test results public. If I were Chris Huhne, I'd be looking in the mirror right now, searching for the little red dot of the laser sight on my forehead.

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Finally have time to write up my thoughts about the Any Questions leadership debate, from the perspective of being in the audience.

The comically long queue outside the hall, which wound along corridors and through doors and almost to the Surrey / Hampshire border, made it look like the event was going to be packed, but in the end there were a few spare seats at the back.

The organisers had given everyone coloured squares of paper to indicate which candidate they were supporting, or that they were undecided, and the stewards were directing people to different areas of the hall depending on the colour of their marker. Since we're a split household they tried to separate us, but I stamped my little feet and said we'd go home if we weren't allowed to sit together and they let us pick our location.

We seemed to end up in the 'undecided' section, very near the back and next to what seemed to be the Huhne supporters' section - it had noticeably more empty space in it than the other blocks. Susan Kramer and David Howarth sat at the back of it, like old-style Soviet commissars waiting to machine-gun the troops if they turned to flee - although both were chatty and friendly afterwards.

Behind us were a very nice but slightly baffled couple who didn't really have any particular thoughts about the leadership or even, so far as we could tell, the Liberal Democrats. They'd turned up for their badminton class as usual and found that the hall had been requisitioned for a radio programme. Offered the opportunity to stay and watch, they settled down in the back row. I'd have loved to ask them what they thought of it afterwards, but they were out of the door too fast for us.

Every seat had a photocopied sheet on it from the BBC with potted biographies of the candidates on it. A typo in Ming's section, where the West Lothian Question was mentioned, quoted him as saying “I have never had a problem with Brutishness”. A useful quality in a leader, I would have thought. Sadly for Sir Menzies, he left his best answer behind in the warm-up, where candidates were asked a light-hearted question so that microphone levels could be checked.

The question was, essentially, “doesn't Sir Menzies have better things to do on Burns Night than come here?” and he came across by far the best in the responses - the other two were a little over-keen to be amusing, hadn't fully settled down, and were just a bit too eager to connect with the audience. Ming was urbane, amusing, and even a little scandalous when he said that, in reality, Burns Night lasted several nights and consisted of equal parts haggis and whisky - with rather more of the latter for some people. There was a sharp intake of breath across the entire hall as everyone similtaneously thought the one word “Kennedy”, but Sir Menzies looked inscrutible, as if he'd just said “fuck” in front of a vicar and was quietly enjoying the confusion.

I won't say that was his high point, but once the actual broadcast began all three candidates acquitted themselves equally well without actually managing to outshine the others.

There's little point in running through the debate point-by-point - Nick Barlow liveblogged it with impressive accuracy, for one thing - but it seems reasonable to give my impressions of the three candidates.

• Ming is still trying too hard - he's at his best when he relaxes and speaks with authority, but he seems at times as if he's striving to make some kind of connection that he fears would otherwise not be made. It doesn't help - it just makes him sound over-anxious.
• Chris has improved as a speaker since Meeting the Challenge and - partly because of the format - also sounded more well-rounded in subject matter. But he still doesn't sound like a leader to me - can't quite put my finger on why. His voice is quite extraordinary, a beautifully modulated baritone.
• Simon was mostly as powerful and as passionate as we all know he can be and I, for one, saw nothing that would scare the horses in Tory heartlands. But the danger is, of course, as much in how he is portrayed as in what he actually says and if he allowed himself to get sidetracked into the long grass occasionally, for example over English devolution, that could easily be because his mind was on what the next day's Sun was going to say.

I marked it afterwards as a score draw, and I think if you'd arrived as a Lib Dem member with no idea of who you were going to vote for you'd have left none the wiser. On the other hand, if you'd arrived as an ordinary member of the public, perhaps a floating voter, you'd have been greatly reassured by what you saw - the event was a good advert for the party and, if we can have a few more like this, the ship might yet be steadied.

Incidentally, if you're reading this via the Lib Dem Blog Aggregator, my posts don't show up on it until eight hours after I make them - the result, I think, of some problem with time zones that I can't troubleshoot.

Last night Ming Campbell was on Question Time, a programme that generally drives me barmy because I find myself wanting to hurl abuse (and chairs) at the screen.

The panel bore distinct evidence of a sudden change in priorities by the programme-makers.

Salma Yaqoob of Respect was joined by a silver-haired ex-diplomat from the dubiously titled “Migration Watch UK” and by the Labour MP Chris Bryant, one of the most outspoken critics of Respect leader George Galloway's appearance on Big Brother. The rent-a-frontbencher Tory Alan Duncan was also there in case there was a need for waspish humour in the midsts of the expected punch-up.

To this mix - interesting, but distinctly Second XI - was added the distinguished, patrician figure of Ming, who sat authoritively next to whichever Dimbleby it is who hosts the programme. If he couldn't hit a few sixes off this bowling, he wouldn't be fit to be leader.

It's my belief that, if he didn't perhaps score a century, he certainly played a captain's innings and on that basis I'm going to vote for him in the leadership election.

Most encouraging was the reaction of the audience when the question of whether he was too old arose. Not just support for him, but the sort of emphatic approval that suggests a backlash is brewing in Middle England against the 'slick young charmer' school of politician represented by both Blair and Cameron.

Sensibly, Dimbleby went to him last to answer the age question. That meant we watched him sit blushing as person after person, in the audience and on the panel, praised him. As each new compliment came in he looked more and more like a child at a birthday party who's been unexpectedly offered another bowl of jelly. It was rather sweet, actually.

So, yes. It's Ming for me.

So Mark Oaten has departed from the Lib Dem leadership race, his campaign having been met with a certain amount of derision and rather a lot of underwhelmed silence. While some people clearly have a lot of faith in him and others were out to get him from the start, most gave him a fair shot and were simply unimpressed.

From my own point of view, I've never been a fan - rather the opposite - but I'd come to realise over the last year or two that he wasn't the scary right-wing nasty man he'd initially seemed. As a result I was open to the possibility I might be convinced by his leadership credentials although I thought it was a very unlikely prospect indeed. Once the campaign started and I saw him in action, though, it seemed to me very obvious that he didn't have what it takes.

Quite apart from any other critera based on philosophy or ambition to take the party forward, he simply didn't look like a leader. No-one takes the slightest bit of notice of the leader of the Liberal Democrats unless that leader makes them take notice, or is such an exotic creature that he or she is rendered newsworthy by their mere existance, as Paddy Ashdown, Boris Johnson, Mo Mowlem and George Galloway all are or were (to ping-pong randomly around the political spectrum in search of examples). Oaten is not a politician in that mould. He is simply another man in a suit.

So who's left?

Chris Huhne is the man with the Big Mo - and I'm not referring to the late former Secretary of State for Northern Ireland this time. The momentum behind Huhne, and the A-list of supporters he's attracting, is very impressive. I'm not quite sure what's doing it, as his performance is sound and professional rather than sparkling and inspiring. Undoubtedly he is the candidate who is most engaged with policy and generating new ideas - but he reminds me a lot of people I used to see in the Green Party: their arguments are irrefutable, but their manner is unelectable. Under Huhne we would swiftly be ghettoised back in the loony fringe, however unfairly, with the inevitable electoral consequences.

Simon seems to have gone a bit quiet recently. I hope he's not ill. Ming seems to be cranking it up, by contrast, recovering with a far sounder PMQs performance this week. I'm almost at the point where I can come out an support him. But not quite - not yet.

Away from the turbulance of the Parliamentary scene, I am currently doing my first bit of campaigning since I retired from active politics in 2003, by helping out an old friend who is up for re-election to the local council in May and faces attacks from all sides. We went touring the ward with him to take photos for a leaflet we're designing for him and his running mates, ending up at a small community sports club. This club has been built up from almost nothing by one dedicated man, who has organised the renovation of a clubhouse, the fitting-out of three soccer pitches and the survival, revival or creation of numerous teams for players of both genders and all ages - he even runs that very rare thing, a disabled soccer team. Amazingly, the clubhouse and dug-outs have no graffiti - a clear sign that he's having an impact on the local youth too.

And you know what? He says none of it would have been possible without my friend the councillor, who championed him against the initial suspicions of residents fearing noise, vandalism and disruption and who helped him wade his way though bureaucracy and paperwork. It was a wonderful reminder of why good people - like my friend - get involved in politics, what they can achieve, and why it all matters.

Here's the second post on Saturday's Meeting the Challenge conference - this one's on the leadership candidates' speeches.

There were all four very different.

• Ming gave a leader's speech, not a candidate's speech. It was thin on detail but heavy on gravitas. He was visibly distracted by the way his microphone kept randomly failing, but he still sounded like a leader ought to. Of course, if you had unanswered questions about his policy proposals you were out of luck.
• Simon spoke with all his usual passion and none of his usual verbal incontinence. He challenged a central plank of party theory - that liberty is more important than equality - and he talked directly to party members. If you agree with him it was stunning - if you don't, there was nothing there for you.
• Chris Huhne was starting with a blank slate, as most people don't know him. An unexciting speaker, he chose to fill it with a strange emphasis on the global environment and, for half the speech, nothing else. By the end he'd said enough about other things to avoid sounding like a single-issue candidate - but only just.
• Mark Oaten strode on stage and for a while ignored the podium. Unfortunately, he doesn't quite have the physical presence to carry that off. He sounded brilliant until after a while you heard the phrase “21st century liberalism” one time too many and realised he was actually talking complete waffle.

I'm still not totally sure how I'm voting. I was able to rule out Oaten, as he was useless; Huhne, as he was too one-dimensional; and Hughes, as I didn't agree with him (although he pretty much totally repaired the damage that he'd done to his reputation in my eyes over the last few years - I'm a fan again, I just have a different view on freedom vs equality). I wasn't sure about Campbell, and I'm still not. I was able to talk to him for a while during one of the coffee breaks and he was very honest in answering some pretty blunt questions that I asked him about his conduct during the removal of Charles Kennedy. He's good - but I may still write in Kennedy's name.

As to the overall prospects, as I wrote earlier in a comment on Guido's blog, I think Oaten's dead in the water but doesn't know it yet, Huhne's going to have a respectable showing but not trouble the winners, and Ming's still the narrowest of favourites ahead of a very confident-looking Hughes.

Anyway, here are abridged versions of all the candidates' speeches (with dodgy photos of them in action). Any errors are down to my shorthand, for which I apologise. Do not treat anything in them as a direct word-for-word quote (although some bits are) as they are all heavily compressed.

The shorter Ming

Let us praise Charles Kennedy and let us have unity during this election - we must remember who the real enemy is. I have always been a liberal, inspired by Jo Grimond. I have learned how to win - winning is tough, you need experience, unity, and to use all the remarkable talents in our party. Win for Britain.

The days of mere Parliamentary survival are over, we have an opportunity and a responsibility. Dedication - passion - professionalism - a strong liberal voice. They say conformity, we say individuality and freedom.

Contrast other parties' policies - Iraq - we stood by our liberal principles. If trusted with the leadership I will never break international law. David Cameron - appalling - Michael Howard's conscience. I know Jack Kennedy liberals - Dave, you are no liberal. We are needed - liberalism at home and liberalism abroad.

To be a liberal is to be a moderniser - never compromise on principle, but make those principles modern and relevant. Ambition. Open minds are more important than open-necked shirts. New thinking, no discrimination, everyone can be like me. A radical democratic revolution.

These are dangerous times - energy competition, terrorism. International cooperation provides security, protects the environment, sustains a strong economy, and makes poverty history.

I believe in leading not following. I want to be trustee of a great party with much to be proud of already but with the best achievements still to come.

The even shorter Ming

I am all Mings to all men - trust me.

The shorter Simon

Thank you all. I'm not going to say my policy aims - the membership makes policy and I will be a consultative leader. We will keep the days of policy and principle alive, even if the other parties don't. So I'm not going to say “ninthly” - the leader's role is to present the party and explain where it stands.

This country is unfair and getting worse. Labour has failed, and it's failed the weakest more than the strong, the poorest more than the richest. We won't do that. What is needed is a fix for the stresses of being poor. People at the bottom of society don't feel engaged with it - can't tackle anti social behaviour or promote freedom without recognising this.

People need freedom and fairness, not one or the other - there is no freedom without equality, it's nothing without fairness. I will spend more where necessary, tax for a purpose. Our subscription to a civilised society. It must be done honestly and fairly.

I'm for workplace democracy, decentralisation of government, the environment, defence of civil liberties - you know my commitment and record. Fairness is global too - trade and aid and climate change. We are the party of fairness historically. Think of the great reforming Liberal governments - equality - what if they had listened to spin doctors? I want us to be that courageous.

I will work with you, my party of more than 30 years, to lead you, to inspire you, to motivate you to go further than we have ever gone before. But together we will inspire Britain, just as it was a century ago. That was “the Liberal hour” - I want the next century to be the Liberal Democrat hour.

The even shorter Simon

It's not about me - it's about you. And fairness, of course.

The shorter Chris Huhne

We face real threats and challenges, global ones, that the Liberal Democrats are uniquely placed to respond to. We face a political challenge too - Labour and the Tories want to copy us and steal our votes - we need to respond. Both are failing to meet the challenge on the big global environmental issues. But we are not focus group environmentalists. Policies for a modern society. We must set out our stall in detail, we must challenge David Cameron and come up with answers.

The only way to deal with emissions and global warming is eco-taxes. These can be problematic - mustn't punish pensioners for heating their homes in winter - but eco-taxes will raise revenue to deal with these problems.

Eco-taxes must be sugared with lower personal taxes aimed at helping people at the lower end. It's nonsense that we set a minimum wage and then tax it. An equality agenda must go hand in hand with an environmental one.

We can spend lots and not get world-class services if we don't give local accountability. Whitehall bureaucracy makes it impossible to reward success and remove failures. 94 per cent of taxation goes through Whitehall but how can central government know what's going on in my local hospital? It's about holding people to account - competition works in politics as well as economics. Again the Tories are pale imitations.

We must shape a modern Liberal Party for a modern Britain. Embarrassing lack of women and ethnic minorities - our next leap forward must be greatest where we are least representative now.

Pioneer a new style of politics - more talking, less shouting. Talk to others without losing our distinctive liberal voice. Unite around a policy program with all our wish lists on it - but made practical. Neither Washington nor Moscow right nor left but policies that work. Unite to win the argument and the electoral war.

The even shorter Chris Huhne

Doomed, we're all doomed! Unless we tax our way to safety.

The shorter Oaten

We've had a bad few weeks - we MPs are crap and we're sorry. But now it's time to look forward and set a liberal agenda for the future. Be positive and uniting. That's the least we can do for Charles.

We already defend liberty, internationally and at home, but that isn't enough. I'm proud we fought the 90 day limit and rejected populism on immigration. Ming was great on Iraq. Only we can do all that and we must continue - defeat the ID card bill. But to get into government we must move into new areas.

We must complete the liberal project and give the electorate something positive. Real equality and opportunity isn't just about removing restrictions, it's about trusting people to exercise their autonomy. Our party must be positive and optimistic.

No sterile debate on left or right - people are not interested in that - not centre either, we stand for passion in politics. People want ideas, inspiration, politicians saying what they believe in. Doing that changes people's minds eg over ID cards. Being a liberal is about being proud to take on these arguments and not being tempted by populism.

The future is liberal and this party must be too - we need 21st century liberalism if we are to realise our potential. We can't dictate behaviour, we must encourage it with positive optimistic (not negative) liberal solutions.

We must learn from Liberal Democrats in power around the country but I fear we're democratic in name only. Let's get our members more involved using new technology. We are the party of ideas but we don't have a monopoly on them. I want to take my message across the country (if Lembit doesn't kill me).

We can't afford to spend the next century on the sidelines while others steal our policies and mangle them. I don't want to be leader of a glorified think tank. Remember the David Steel quote - no, not that David Steel quote - I'm not interested in power without principles but nor am I interested in principles without power.

Let's come together and move our party into the 21st century.

The even shorter Oaten

The future is bright - the future is Oaten.

I'm working from home today - a real delight after a pretty grim journey on the Tube yesterday. But I can't believe how cold and gloomy it is. Midday and I've got the light on, even though I'm next to a window, and a fan heater blowing.

Tomorrow should be interesting - we're going to the Lib Dem “Meeting the Challenge” conference / workshop, which was supposed to be a big get-together to discuss the philosophical underpinnings of party policy and to re-examine whether we were going in the right direction. Of course, it will now become a beauty parade of the leadership contenders.

Four so far, and easily the most interesting is Chris Huhne. An ex-MEP and one of about half a dozen of the 2005 intake of new MPs talked about as a possible future leader, he obviously feared disappearing into obscurity if the party sailed serenely into a future where Ming Campbell became leader with Nick Clegg standing at his shoulder waiting for his turn next.

I won't say Huhne has got a chance, but all bets seem to be off following Ming's stumble at PMQs earlier this week. Right now the candidate I wouldn't want to be is Mark Oaten - the modernisers who make up his natural constituency are either rallying to Ming or standing themselves (will others like Clegg and Ed Davey break ranks and join Huhne as candidates?) Consequently Oaten may find himself making an abrupt transition from 'man of the future' to 'yesterday's man' without getting to experience the fun bit in the middle.

The Birmingham MP John Hemming is showing signs of cold feet in his slightly baffling bid to stand - but not because he's thinking better of it, merely because he's not sure the party still needs him to take on the onerous burden of leadership now that several candidates have come forward to share the responsibility of ensuring a contested election. His blog posts on his campaign prospects have been full of unintentional humour - but when all's said and done he is at least prepared to put his money where his mouth is.

In the middle of all this jockeying for position, Simon Hughes is busy being himself. Good old Simon - even if he does with each passing year increasingly resemble the sort of mad vicar you cross the road to avoid, you always know where you are with him. And where you are is usually either a) waiting for him to turn up an hour late or b) pinned in a corner at a party by him while he talks at length at you and possibly threatens to sing a song. But you've got to love him - the liberal conscience of the front bench and Parliament's most hard-working constituency MP. Also the bookie's favourite following the implosion of the Mingster.

As things stand, I'm still planning a write-in vote / spoiled paper for Kennedy. But I'll keep an open mind tomorrow, and if more new names join the candidate list then who knows?

EDIT: Hemming has decided not to stand. This time. It's a wise decision that means he gets the credit for being prepared to stop a coronation, without the derision that would have followed a crushing defeat. Astonishingly, he even manages to come out of it looking a bit statesmanlike.