WAS it was the end of term perhaps?
The soggy heat? Or the soul-shredding thought of another 83 days debating debates until the referendum?
Whatever caused the opposition to flag at FMQs, it had the reverse effect on Alex Salmond, who romped rampant through proceedings, squishing and splatting rivals like summer bugs. A windscreen would have shown more mercy.
Labour's Johann Lamont, whose political Sat Nav finds a wrong turn each week, had tootled up with quotes from BMA boss Dr Brian Keighley, who reckons the NHS is in "crisis management".
Mr Lamont gravely seconded the diagnosis. But Mr Salmond was fully prepped.
Public satisfaction with the NHS is 61% compared to 45% when she was a minister, he told her. Ms Lamont ground her gears and tried another cul-de-sac: what was his plan for the NHS?
At which, Mr Salmond simply hit the throttle.
Unlike Labour, fund it "to the maximum degree". Ms Lamont went into a ghastly skid.
"He wants to make this a cheap political debate," she screeched, to great SNP laughter.
"Settle down!" honked the Presiding Officer.
The last dignified exit behind her, Ms Lamont claimed the SNP was "not interested in the NHS".
Tory Ruth Davidson, in an orange and blue outfit that caused solar flares on the in-house TVs, listed thinktanks critical of the FM's plans, including the Office of Budget Responsibility.
"Right from the start I believe that the Tories have used the OBR not just as part of government, but as part of the Conservative Party," said Mr Salmond, his theatrical frown a dead giveaway.
"I'm quoting directly from Alistair Darling!" he then revealed, suggesting even the leader of Better Together files the OBR under mince.
The final question went to Murdo Fraser, from whom Ms Davidson burgles her best ideas, and who this week backed a federal UK.
The FM had no doubt that he would support independence soon too - Federal Fraser shook his head unconvincingly - "but I'm confident the independence campaign will survive that endorsement and go on to victory".
Mr Salmond has had a bumpy few weeks at FMQs. But as he departed for the summer, he left his foes looking flatter than roadkill.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article