Until now, I haven't publicly declared support for a particular candidate. Partly this is because of the fact that I'm not too interested in the leadership election itself. This may seem odd, but I find the jockeying for position dull and the focus on personality to be a distraction. I'm not a liberal because of admiration for specific individuals, I'm a liberal because of my admiration for specific principles. Finally, I'd rather be training my fire on our enemies than pointing out the weaknesses of those on our own side.

So I've held off making this post for a while. Since most people have now cast their votes, I might as well explain who I voted for and why. To cut a long story short, I voted for Menzies Campbell as first preference, and Chris Huhne as second.

Like many, I followed the initial twists and turns with avid interest. I feel that Charles Kennedy's downfall was mishandled, but we were bound to be in for some negative publicity whatever happened. Having run the "Tory crisis" story for the last ten years, and holding off on the "Labour crisis" story until Blair's departure becomes imminent, "Lib Dem crisis" was the only story that the papers were interested in writing. For us, it has been something of an education. We are no longer the obscure third party and we should expect tough scrutiny, even occasionally unfair coverage, from the press.

The Mark Oaten story was depressing mostly because it moved the debate even further away from issues of policy and principle, focussing on lurid personal details. Likewise the "outing" of Simon Hughes. But when the dust finally settled, it was clear to me that I had a choice between two candidates: Campbell and Huhne. Why not Hughes? It certainly had nothing to do with his bisexuality, or even his handling of that issue. My view of him has partly been based on the comments of others, relating to his notorious disorganisation. This view seems to be backed up by his general message - relentlessly positive, but light on the details of how to achieve it. He talks of great ambitions for the party, but can point to little achievement in his time as Party President. He also seems unwilling to take on difficult issues that may divide the party. Having said that, he is undoubtedly a passionate advocate of our cause and must have a leading role to play in the future.

Chris Huhne is undoubtedly the surprise of the campaign. When the race looked like Campbell vs Hughes vs Oaten, I was entirely sure that Campbell would get my first preference and quickly came to the conclusion that Hughes would get the second. But Huhne gave me considerable pause for thought. His economic experience was an obvious plus point for me - I generally think that we need a much more in-depth discussion of economic issues in politics and Huhne seems very willing to do that. His campaign has shown purpose and drive, something that is needed. Following Kennedy's laid-back approach, Huhne looks like much more pro-active. However, I do have to take issue with his approach of laying out policies, particularly his green taxation proposal. In another context, his proposals would be very useful, but it is not the leader's job to make policy by fiat. Nor should the leadership campaign be a referendum on policies - we have a conference for that.

That brings me to Ming Campbell. His campaign has not been policy-heavy, but it has demonstrated a solid commitment to liberal principles. I believe that when voting for a leader, I should vote for the person most likely to stand up for the principles that I believe in. Of all three of the candidates, Ming Campbell is the most consistent in doing this. Much has been made of his "gravitas" and, although I think this can be exaggerated, I think he has the credibility to ask serious questions of the government. His questions at PMQs have been good, regularly putting Tony Blair on the back foot. A lesser debater than Tony Blair would have been seriously embarassed by some of the questions, and it is only Blair's ability to ignore the details and focus on the soundbite for the evening news that shields him. Against Gordon Brown, Campbell may well fare better.

Ultimately, I want a leader who reforms the party. Not in the way Labour have reformed, by purging themselves of their history in the pursuit of something "new", nor in the way the Conservatives have reformed by pursuing policies at odds with the opinions of their core supporters. The Liberal Democrat reform must be about organisation, strategy and ambition. It must be based on a confident belief that our message is strong and that we are offering something that people will vote for and want to see implemented in government. We must focus on putting forward a united and coherent argument about what a Liberal Democrat Britain would look like. I believe that all of the candidates could do this, but on the balance of the evidence available to me, I think that Menzies Campbell is the candidate most likely to achieve it.