I don’t usually find time for novels, but I’m enjoying Quintin Jardine‘s two crime series at the moment. Having tracked down a copy of his first book, Skinner’s Rules, I’m two-thirds of the way through and it’s been enjoyable so far – humorous, not too dark, enough mystery to maintain interest. I’ve already read the second but I’m now aiming to read them in order. After this one, I need to choose between the third Skinner book or the new Oz Blackstone novel.

Many of the novels are set in Edinburgh which is helpfully expanding my knowledge of the city. Last night, on the way to a pub rendez-vous, I went via the sites of the first two (fictional) murders, Advocates’ Close and Jackson’s Close. Such are the trivial little things that entertain me…

As you might expect after this story, theguardian reports that Mark Oaten is going drop out of the leadership race. And then there were three.

With a week left before nominations in the LibDem leadership election close, I have decided which candidate I will be supporting.

His launch speech, the best of the four candidates’, set out an exciting agenda for the party. Immediately he turned what looked to be a staid, predictable election into a policy-based, wide open contest.

Then, at the "Meeting the Challenge" event on Saturday, he gave a strong speech. He seemed abreast of the challenges facing the Liberal Democrats and, arguably more importantly, the country.

On Monday, he defied those critics who labelled him as inexperienced by proving that he could hold his own in a debate with other candidates who have been in the House of Commons for much longer. He showed that being a leader isn’t about racking up years inside and that political experience gained outside – plus experience of the wider world outside politics – is equally valuable.

He is the candidate who has already proved he can bring the party together on public services. As an MEP for six years, he is well placed to debate the future of Europe. On the economy – and “It’s the economy, stupid” – he has a wealth of knowledge and experience.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I’m supporting Chris Huhne to be the next leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[yellow balloons fall from the ceiling]
[cue awful rendition of #It’s time for a Huhne beginning#]

It’s been reported that Menzies Campbell intends to make age less of an issue in the leadership election by surrounding himself with younger people. He did so on TV this evening. Unfortuantely, the younger people in question were the three other candidates as Sky News hosted the first debate between the Campbell, Simon Hughes, Mark Oaten and Chris Huhne.

I hope I don’t have to sit through another Sky News debate. Topped with a simplistic package attempting to sum up the LibDems, and making some dubious comments – for example, wrongly equating support for civil liberties with being left wing (it’s being liberal) – the presentation was unimpressive. Sky’s rather dim summary on the party branded equated with “If the party wants more votes, it needs to appeal to more voters.” D’oh.

The debate itself was good, though, with all the candidates performing fairly well. There was plenty of agreement, which will hopefully put right those who thinks the party is drastically split on policy.

The presenter compared Chris Huhne’s time in parliament with Menzies Campbell’s longer service, perhaps not realising that Simon Hughes has been an MP for longer than Ming. For someone accused of being inexperienced, Huhne appeared at ease debating with the three media-appointed “big beasts” and made plenty of sensible points.

Ming Campbell was asked how many seats would be a good result at the next election and sensibly avoided setting himself up for a fall. Simon Hughes jumped straight in with 100 seats. It reminded me of his arbitrary promise, when standing for party president, to take the LibDem membership figure past that of Labour. Judging from the number of voters in this election, it’s barely moved.

There was no clear winner in the debate, and subtle policy differences only between the candidates. Campbell held his ground, although dodged a question on private involvement in the NHS. Given that Huhne should, by conventional wisdom, have been miles behind the other three and gave a strong performance, he was the candidate with whom I was most impressed.

Final note: well done to Rob Fenwick for submitting a question that was used, and to Tom Paul for getting an on-screen comment.