Q: We know who will win the election, so how are the broadcasters going to make it interesting?

Firstly, we don't know who's going to win. That's what makes it interesting right through election night and into the next day. And one thing we can be sure of - one of the parties is going to have a pretty horrible campaign. So as soap opera, we can all enjoy that. If Labour do win, and Blair is as quick as he was last time, we'll also have a reshuffle to look forward to, although I think he'll want to reorganise Whitehall departments too, so that may be further down the line.

Q: What advantages, and disadvantages, does television have in covering the election?

I think television and websites like your own are the new civic spaces, where people can challenge politicians. A news resource like the web, where huge information resources are constantly online, is a great boon for democracy.

I personally think we should have A levels in current affairs, as one way of keeping debate alive and countering apathy, but until then the internet is an incredible tool for an informed public.

Similarly with live, rolling news, we have the space to keep a civic consciousness going - whatever's going on, you can be there through the TV. What we can't do, which the papers can, is run on the "lobby terms", ie unattributed comments and remarks. I can, of course, put these to politicians myself.

There is the "CNN factor", whereby more saturation news coverage, as during an election campaign, does make figures sag, but the interested, regular viewers tune in more. No one watches Sky by accident, in the way that you see the BBC or ITV news come on after watching a soap or serial, so we're very pleased with the figures we get. But in some ways there will be less political coverage than ever before in Britain this time around; with the two main channels clashing at 10pm, there will be less audience share than ever before for news.

There'll be plenty of coverage on Sky - I'll be hosting "The Boulton Report" twice a day, six days a week, where we will interview the leaders and wrap up all the day's events.

We are also developing "the worm" - our polling tool we used during the budget to gauge public reaction to what's going on. It's something we've been planning for five years. There will also be animated party leader graphics reflecting how they've fared during the past 24 hours - should be fun.

What's great for broadcasters during an election campaign is that for once we set the agenda rather than the newspapers. We'll be covering the three main parties election news conferences live every morning, which will set the ball rolling for the whole day.

In fact, if I could claim anything for Sky, I think broadcasting press conferences live, which the BBC was loath to do until we came along and did it, has made one of the biggest differences to broadcast journalism in the past decade.

Q: As a journalist, obviously you have no view as to who will win the general election, but what's your prediction for turnout?

I'm optimistic it will keep above 70%, for three reasons:
• There's a big, live controversy - foot and mouth - which is a major national news event
• Recently Blair and the Labour party have come under some pretty heavy fire: that should get out both angry Tories and disaffected Labour loyalists
• You get longer daylight hours for a June election, which should help keep people voting.

Q: Are there still politicians who get nervous about appearing on TV, or refuse to appear, or are they a dying breed now?

Gordon Brown is famously reluctant to appear on telly, and Alan Milburn and Stephen Byers both dislike shows where the public can ask questions, although I noticed Byers was on Question Time last week.

MPs can be their own worst enemy sometimes - running in late to show how important they are, then getting sweaty under the lights because they're in a rush and haven't had the make-up.

With the party leaders there's always a little game-playing. They'll come on, but you have to go to them, they won't come to the studio. Or, they will, but then the night before there's a call, and all plans are changed. It's part and parcel of the whole thing.

Q: What about televising the lobby briefing given to political journalists by Alastair Campbell - presumably you're in favour?

Actually, I'm quite cautious about that. It would change the nature of political reporting forever. There's a danger that ministers, and in particular the prime minister, would appear less and less before the cameras if we had footage of their press spokesman or an unelected civil servant answering questions every day, and that would be a bad thing.

Secondly, like prime minister's questions in the Commons, it would probably be reduced to once a day, which doesn't help accountability.

And thirdly, it would make political journalism more hierarchical. At the moment, the reporter from the Wolverhampton Star is in there with everyone else. If it were televised, there'd be less access for the smaller players.

Mind you, my sources say if Blair does win a second term, there is likely to be another look at the whole issue of press relations.

Special report
Election 2001

Related article
12.02.2001: Sky News boss clashes with BBC's Hall

Useful links
Sky News
Biography of Adam Boulton