Mary Reid

This has been a really challenging decision to make. I had the huge advantage of being able to meet and interview both Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg, and if anything that has made it even more difficult to choose between them.

The interviews threw up aspects of each, both in terms of policy and personality, that had not emerged in the public arena. Both are personable and warm, both are intelligent, both are enthusiastic evangelists for liberalism.

James Graham, who also came on both occasions, has contributed an insightful account of the two contenders and their strengths and weaknesses on the Guardian's "Comment is Free" blog. He writes: "Tantalisingly, Huhne seems to have the right answers, but Clegg seems to be asking the right questions."

The one thing I have said all along is that whichever wins we will have placed the party in good hands. But as a team the two of them would be even stronger as they balance out each other's weaknesses. I'm sure that will happen - the slightly heated exchanges between them on TV were natural sparring and shouldn't be interpreted as personal animosity.

I wasn't too bothered about minor differences in policy between the two of them, because policy is decided by members not by the leader. So for me it came down to two things:

Policy v pragmatism: When Chris Huhne was asked about empowering citizens he framed the answer in terms of philosophy and policies; Nick Clegg was far more of a pragmatist and understood that local government and communities can bring about change whatever the national policy. It was about solving problems, and this key difference in approach was evident across a number of social issues.

Presentation: Nick is a fast thinker and expressive speaker, but is too reactive. (Calm down, dear.) Chris ponders and phrases his ideas elegantly, but should learn about Plain English.

At the start of this contest I leaned towards Chris, because he seemed to resonate with the social liberal axis within the party, even though he has a strong appreciation of the core significance of economic policy. As time has moved on I have begun to see that my impression of Nick as the shallower of the two was inaccurate; he too has a real commitment to social reform and liberal principles.

So do we settle for safe, thoughtful Chris Huhne, or risky, inspirational Nick Clegg?

Last time I went for the safe choice. Ming Campbell turned out to be an excellent leader within the party but just didn't make it with the media. Before him Charles Kennedy was the media darling but was pretty disastrous in terms of party organisation.

I do believe that in Nick Clegg we have someone who will be attractive to the media and will appeal to floating voters; on top of that he has the support of most MPs so they clearly feel he will be a good leader of the Parliamentary team.

So Nick has it - but it was a real struggle....