Parties face off on battle lines
Not, all in all, the most comfortable session for Alex Salmond.
He was very far from being cast down - but he was undoubtedly confronted vigorously by his political opponents.
In a sense, you could see the shape of the election campaigns to come from all three of those opponents.
For Labour, Iain Gray majored on teachers. Party research indicates that the education sector is notably disquieted: hence the questioning.
Mr Gray reminded the First Minister of specific SNP pledges on teacher numbers and class sizes. The FM spoke of progress being made - and of an economic crisis created by Labour.
Ah, retorted Mr Gray, but how about those promises...
Therein lies the Labour approach. Analyse, scrutinise and target the SNP by highlighting their specific promises.
Therein lies the SNP approach. Argue that, in government, they have successfully deployed resources made scarce by Labour at the UK level - while pointing to the relative absence of alternative Scottish Labour plans.
Graduate costs
From the Tories, Annabel Goldie went on university funding. She challenged the First Minister to accept, in principle, that there would have to be a graduate contribution in some form.
Mr Salmond declined. There would be a full consultation, he said. There would be a Green Paper before the end of the year.
Then, with all contributing ideas, there would emerge a distinctive Scottish solution "in the second half of 2011".
The astute among you will compare the proposed timetable with the fixed date of the next Holyrood election.
NHS row
Perhaps the most substantive contribution of all came from Tavish Scott of the Liberal Democrats.
His party's research had disclosed a three-fold increase in non-clinical senior staff in the NHS since 2007 - with a concomitant increase in salary costs.
Mr Scott suggested this meant that the cut of 25% proposed by the SNP would scarcely return matters to the status quo.
The LibDems are preparing what will come close to a shadow budget - with heavy emphasis on cutting top public sector pay.
Again, understandably, the First Minister declined to trade specific figures. Rather, he said that his government's aim was to focus on the front line.
The only figure which truly mattered, he averred, was patient satisfaction in the NHS which was at a record high.
Later, after investigation, Mr Scott's figures were challenged by the Scottish Government. The LibDem leader had asked health boards to list senior staff earning more than Β£50k in 2007 and now. That produced the three-fold increase.
By contrast, the government's independent statisticians say the number of senior managers has declined since 2007 - with the wage bill only rising very slightly. Further, Nicola Sturgeon plans to reduce the number of non-clinical staff.
How to explain this? It is conceivable that the two documents are based on different questions.
The LibDems asked about senior managers earning Β£50k or more.
Arguably, that excludes managers who, in 2007, were earning just below that level. So, again arguably, they would not feature in the head count or the salary total in that year - but, by salary progression, would be above Β£50k in 2010 and would be included.
As a public service, here are the two sets of figures.
The LibDems say there were 617 non-clinical staff in the NHS in Scotland earning more than Β£50k in 2007: a total pay bill of Β£24,860,218. By 2010, that had risen to 1,790 staff and Β£104,280,982.
The government's statistics division says that in 2007 there were 1,914 individuals listed as senior managers in the NHS. In 2009, that figure had reduced to 1,377. The wage bill figures are for 2007 and 2010 - and are Β£98m and Β£102m.
I'm 
Comments
or to comment.