They look a little queasy, these days, on Labour's backbenches.
Perhaps it has something to do with things the colleagues are being asked to swallow.
Johann Lamont, their leader, was trying to make a big, happy meal yesterday out of government dishonesty. You could probably rustle up a snack or two from that, most weeks.
"When will the First Minister face up to reality," said she, "and be straight with the people of Scotland?" It counts as a fair question. If Alex Salmond is straight with them, the opposition will be straight with him, and then with the rest of us. That would be the way of it, surely?
"When will he face up to the cuts happening now, in the real world?" asked the leader of the party formerly known as socialist.
Ms Lamont wanted us to know that the Auditor General isn't entirely optimistic about NHS finances. Who'd have thought? For Labour, though, this is "a public spending crisis".
When last we heard, the SNP had more spin doctors than decency should allow. So why didn't one of them supply Mr Salmond with the obvious riposte?
This one: so what would Labour cut? If Ms Lamont is doing fiscal responsibility under a Tory Coalition – pour encourager les autres, no doubt – where would her little hatchet fall?
Mr Salmond said she was after bus passes for senior citizens, he mentioned the notional £163 million we pay for Trident. But – to give him his official title – the Longest Blethering First Minister the World has Seen missed a trick.
What would Labour cut? As a supplementary, why would Ms Lamont cut? Is there something going on within Ed Miliband's party that has to be tested first, out of harm's way, on Scotlandshire?
On the Labour backbenches, lunch wasn't going down well. What Scotland can afford and what the former People's Party can entertain involve two different sets of calculations. Ms Lamont might care, one day, to share her sums with the rest of the class.
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