Hilary Benn's 90 seconds. Very statesmanlike. I'm a bit biased but my dad Norman says "Very impressive".

Hazel Blears' 90 seconds Quite obviously reading her speech. Norman says "She seems to speak well but I'm not sure what she's done as a minister"

Harriet Harman's 90 seconds Quite measured - seemed to me to be just a bit too close to Gordon. Norman says, "She's got a lot of experience"

Alan Johnson's 90 seconds "Robin Hood to Gordon's Batman" rather stuck with me. Norman says, "I've seen him on television a number of times and he doesn't really grab me"

Peter Hain's 90 seconds Seemed in a hurry to me. Not sure either that he is personally responsible for saving South Africa and Northern Ireland on his own. Norman says, "Don't think we have full unemployment just yet - there's still a million people unemployed"

Jon Cruddas' 90 second. Again, in a hurry and focused on building up the party. Norman say, "Maybe he should start by rebuilding the party in Dagenham".

Iraq: Regrets, I've had a few.

Harriet and Jon regretting their support for the war, very much with Harriet following Jon's line. Hazel and Peter regretting but saying to move on - Hilary and Alan pressing the importance of having got rid of Saddam Hussein and looking forward. Norman says, "They're all very naive not to have forseen the mess Iraq's in now... and it's very unfair of them to put Hazel next to Hilary"

What's Gordon going to bring to the Party?

You can see an indent on the side of cruddas' head where he clearly wears glasses. Just an observation.

WOW - they've really kicked off. Harman has attacked the government (in which she serves) over a recess announcement of new stop and question powers - Hain and Hazel get into a tiff over how it happened. Hilary comes off best but Paxman asks him something different on trust

Short questions Trident, Nuclear Power and Charitable status for private schools

Has the last ten years just been a dream (more like a nightmare)? or have I just witnessed 6 Blairites denounce Blairism and all its evils!

Got a bit lost on this next question - caps on academies? sharing aspirations? Inequality? A bit of bickering breaks out. Hilary gets the best opportunity by speaking after the bickering ends. Raises the line - "We've taken 600,000 children out of poverty - now we have to focus on getting the next 600,000 children out of poverty". Norman says, "they're a bit divided aren't they".

HH - "we don't have to have the stinking rich" this gets better and better

Should there be a cap on election donations?

Should there be an amnesty for illegal immigrants?

How would you differ from John Prescott?

Who would be your second preference

My personel view; JC needs to assert himself more, PH is coming over the better of all, HBENN seems to be a bit snooty, AJ comes across as smarmy, HH keeps saying sorry (a bit late for that H), HBL although I dislike her she does bring a bit of life to the debate, but she lacks any substance in her arguments

Norman says, "Interesting to hear their views and the differences between them. Hilary and Peter Hain came off well - almost equal those two. They have all got their strengths. I wouldn't say anyone came off particularly badly - but at the bottom you'd have to say Cruddas and Johnson. I think Blears would more or less go with whoever was leader and not necessarily fight her corner. Harman might be more likely to stand her ground".

Harman was the best.....Johnson and Blears abysmal.But none exactly inspiring......

On the betting markets: Moved against Hain, Blears improved rest stayed about the same. Johnson pulled back closer to Benn. Not enough fireworks for me.

Hmmm. Very interesting.

My conclusion from the evening's events:

Cruddas is definately going bottom of my list - I didn't like what he had to say and I didn't like his personality.

Harman has rapidly descended down my list. She's sucking up far too much to left and the fact that Cruddas endorsed her is a big negative in my book.

Hain was ok, but he's still a bit of an idiot, so I'm not ranking him too highly.

I liked what Blears had to say - pragmatic and generally Blairite and is full of enthusiasm as always. But she lacks 'gravitas' if that's the right word - she might make us look like a laughing stock. But overall she was the third best in my view.

Now I'm torn between the big two. Johnson has a lot of good to say, but wasn't outstanding tonight. Benn on the other hand really impressed me. He came across as very statesman-like and looked competent and he wasn't as dull as I expected him to be. But occasionally he does swing between outright leftieism and then in the same breath goes on about how he's in favour of Iraq, Trident and nuclear power stations, so it's hard to judge him.

But I really am torn now between Benn and Johnson - I think I'll need to wait a bit longer before making my final decision. But the biggest loser of the night for me was Harriet Harman - being endorsed by Jon Cruddas is like being kissed by the devil and she's lost my support completely.

Cruddas was very solid and honest. I was mightily impressed and, since invoking relatives is the order of the day, so was my mum. Harman put in a good performance, until she fluffed a decision over her second preference. At least Cruddas answered the question and said what he thought. Meanwhile, Hain is finished. Pompous, arrogant and so obvious all the others hate him.

Cruddas and Harman had the best things to say. They were both very good.

Benn was academic and enthusiastic, but seemed to lack substance in terms of actual policies (kept refering to what Labout had already done).

Johnson was totally uninspiring.

Blears was as reactionary and nauseating as ever.

Hain looked and sounded weak.

So many questions arise: if Harriet Harman wants the next deputy leader to be a woman, why would she not commit to supporting Hazel if she herself was not standing? Why did Peter Hain feel the need to make a last snide comment to Cruddas regarding his lack of ministerial experience, when neither Blair nor Prescott had any when they took over the reins in 1994? Why does Hazel come across so well at many other hustings but not on the TV? If there was a winner on this show, surely it was Cruddas - to the point, relaxed, frank and fresh, compared to some old faces who have been around some time?

I'm on a roll - thinking about live-blogging The Family Guy

Hain, having failed to dupe the 'leftie' vote, has resorted to snide comments and defamatory media briefings. Unfortunately, he has failed to realise his behaviour simply makes him look more mean-spirited and unplesant than he did before. His campaign is moribund and he is trying to take others down with him. Disgusting.

I refer you to the Newsnight website where as of 00:24 Cruddas is the clear winner in the public eye, with 45.08% saying he won the debate.

The one thing that stuck out from the Newsnight debate was that Jon Cruddas seemed to be the only person to give a straight answer to many of the questions. I do like that. I thought Harman did quite well, Benn was quiet but decent, Johnson was really disappointing, Blears looked terribly short and was robotic in her Blairism, Hain was outrageous for claiming he delivered peace in Northern Ireland and made a few nasty and snide remarks. Overall, I thought Cruddas and Harman stood out the best and I was not previously inclined towards Harman at all . Mrs G, who is a Labour member but doesn't go to any meetings (and certainly doesn't listen to me) previously expected to be voting for Blears and then Hain. Her conclusion at the end of the show was that Blears was `dreadful, simple and deluded', Hain and Johnson were `both smug and just in it for themselves', Benn was nice in a `churchy kind of way', Cruddas was `pretty good' but that Harman was the most impressive.

From a non-Labour view, for what it matters I watched the debate to take a view on the person vying to be..well, this is the point actually - are they hoping to be my country's deputy prime minister, or, are they just fighting to be the deputy leader of a political party? So, from the rough notes I made... Cruddas - impressed. He is clearly the small fish in the pond, but had a lot of clear, and honest responses. Blears - the chipmunk drove me nuts. Reading from a prepared script did not impress me. I was not convinced by her "move on, move on" attitude to every question. Harman - she seems to stand back from her own answers sometimes, if you know what I mean, but seemed fair and reasoned. Putting the boot into the current leadership may not help her though. Benn - the best natural performer and the strongest responses to questions, but he seemed prone to leaving out full details when pressed Hain - never being a fan of the man, his attempt to lay claim to bringing peace to all corners of the world drove me mad. He seems quite eager to become an authority on everything which is not convincing at all Johnson - strong if a bit lacking in detail, I thought he was the more natural media performer. Now, this was all very good television, but what the nation surely wants is a Newsnight special with Brown, Cameron, and Campbell....

Latest Newsnight poll numbers are

Hilary Benn 8.69%
Hazel Blears 9.94%
Jon Cruddas 37.25%
Peter Hain 7.10%
Harriet Harman 20.05%
Alan Johnson 15.45%
1761 Votes Cast

Blears and Hain have greatly improved since from their dismal numbers just after midnight following poor performances (Hain was 0.67%) - smell a supporters campaign there. Personally I was most most surprised by Harman who gave a honest and somewhat feisty performance, and Cruddas did well; both reflected in their good numbers in this poll.