THE F-word - Falkirk, that is - did not cross Ed's lips; not publicly anyway.
When the Labour leader got to the key passage of his big speech on reforming union funding, delegates clenched their buttocks, folded their arms and listened in stony silence.
Their faces did not belie the view that Mr M was like an unwanted relative dropping in to a happy family get-together and plunging the atmosphere to somewhere below zero.
When Red Ed, Blairlike, implored the comrades to have the courage to embrace change on union funding, a pin was heard dropping on the far side of the hall.
The best that could be said was the delegates listened with quiet respect, applauding when Red Ed pressed the right buttons on apprenticeships, public ownership of the East Coast railway franchise, bankers' bonuses and, of course, how wonderful trade union members were; they were, he told them, the "backbone of society".
As the brothers and sisters endured rather than enjoyed his speech, one member came close to pointing out the king had no clothes. Janice suggested she was confused about the apparent contradictory and confusing Labour policy. Are you in favour of or against austerity, she asked.
There was applause and cheers mingled with a sigh of relief that someone had finally asked a penetrating question.
Ed blinked and blinked again and declared: "No, we are not in favour of austerity. I'm absolutely clear about that." Phew, thank god for that.
Yet he has pledged to stick to the Tories' spending plans, at least initially, if he gets into power and spoke about how he had to make Labour "credible" - with voters, not necessarily trade unionists.
Remarkably (or not), the Q&A session that followed did not have one question about the elephant in the room - union funding. The brethren of the Press suspected a conspiracy of silence. While Mr Miliband's reception was far from enthusiastic, the chief comrade left breathing a sigh of relief there was no barracking or heckling, and no eggs.
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