THE LibDem poster boy emerged from the wings and liberal hearts immediately began to melt.
All those deep concerns about how LibDem economic policy was in fact Tory economic policy seemed to evaporate as lovely Nick appeared, skin scrubbed, tie off, hand in pocket, tickling the soft underbelly of the party faithful.
Only an hour or so before there was a serious challenge to the leadership's economic plan; the charge being that the LibDems in coalition had become an "echo chamber" of those nasty Tories.
As he faced his conference Q&A amid a tangerine backdrop of falling pigeons, Nick told the delegates how the previous economic debate had been "a wonderful demonstration of our democratic values". A thought bubbled up that it might not have been that wonderful if the leadership had lost the vote.
Consequently, the Nick Clegg show had the atmosphere of a quiet valley that had just avoided a thunderous storm. Birds sang and gentle sunlight sparkled as the party leader skipped among the daisies.
Even a mooted spat with Uncle Vince had been avoided and all the happy clappy LibDem brethren appeared to be singing from the same Cleggite hymn sheet.
The white suited shepherd told his flock that it "was not a walk in the park" being in coalition and tough decisions had to be made but, hey, the public was getting used to having two parties sharing power and it was only because of the nice band of liberal brothers and sisters that Britain was emerging from the slough of despond despite the best efforts of those ugly, callous Conservative so and sos.
As the shiny one dealt with question after question with easy aplomb, the Q&A became an exercise in how wonderful the LibDems believed themselves to be and without whom civilisation would simply not survive. The only thing missing was a camp fire, a banjo and communal singing.
Through Nick's polished performance, a woman sat, head down, knitting away. Such a homely place, the conference.
Later, another thunderstorm was even more narrowly avoided - by just four votes - when the leadership collective won a motion to keep the top rate of income tax at 45% and not raise it to 50%. The charmed life of shiny Nick continues.
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