At the final leadership hustings, which was hosted by The Independent in London this week, three things were immediately apparent. First, that the contest had engaged party members and sympathisers no less than the Conservatives' contest galvanised their party. It has done the Liberal Democrats, and politics in general, a power of good.

Second, it is clear that the choice for party members is about personalities as well as policies. The three contenders are very different characters. As the campaign has gone on, Sir Menzies Campbell's age has come to seem more of a liability than it appeared at the start. His decision to present himself latterly as the ideal person, if elected, to bring on a new, talented generation of Liberal Democrat leaders makes him appear even more as a leader for the short term than for the duration. Simon Hughes, while genial of manner and fluent of speech, has been unable to banish the trust issue as exemplified in the false start over his private life. Chris Huhne, relatively unknown outside Parliament and his constituency before, has undoubtedly been the greatest beneficiary of the contest. He has thrived under the spotlight, making up for a shortage of charisma with an air of calm competence.

And the third point that has come across from this campaign is that policies do matter: above all economic policy where there are potentially damaging divisions within the party. Given his professional life before he entered politics, it may not be surprising that Mr Huhne seems so at ease discussing the big arguments. But it is an asset to the party, and to his candidacy, that he is able to set out the options with such evident mastery of the principles and what it would take to put them into practice.

At the start of this campaign, we expressed our support for Sir Menzies Campbell as an experienced and honourable leader to see the party through the next election. We made clear at the time, however, that the field could have been stronger. There were younger, less experienced candidates, who had chosen not to stand. The campaign has changed things. Had he shown a little more lightness of touch, were he able to project more personal warmth, Mr Huhne might already be the all-round winner. Even so, this contest is close.

Sir Menzies has many admirable qualities. He yields to few in his expertise in foreign affairs and defence. He advised opposition to the Iraq war from the start. His defence of civil liberties has been consistent and sure; his moral compass is true. Guantanamo, he said memorably in response to Mr Blair this week, "is not an anomaly; it's an outrage". We also agree with Sir Menzies that there should be no summary withdrawal from Iraq. A speedy departure, as advocated by the other contenders, is tempting - especially now - but it would be quite wrong not to try harder to bring order to the chaos our invasion helped to create.

To press his Iraq policy, however, Sir Menzies does not need to be leader: he could be president or an honoured elder statesman. Rallying the party, propagating its ideas, and steering it through the parliamentary rough and tumble are jobs for a younger man with fresh ideas. Because of his showing through the campaign, we now lean towards Chris Huhne.