Answering the critics
Isn't that an intriguing range of political responses to today's vote by the EIS for potential - to stress, potential - ?
The EIS is concerned at the potential - again, that word - impact of financial constraint upon education.
Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats pursued the classic tactic in such circumstances of demanding statements from ministers.
Labour reckons SNP education ministers have been "cowardly" on the issue.
The Lib Dems reckon the same ministers are demonstrating "fudge and obfuscation".
To be fair, the two parties are explicitly complaining about the absence of an immediate response from a minister (as I write, there has been a statement from the government).
To be fair for a second time, they are reflecting concern voiced by the union that such reforms as there are in education, notably on class sizes, may be patchy at best across Scotland.
However, the first minister was questioned on this very issue by Wendy Alexander yesterday. Opposition critics may not have liked his answers - but it scarcely amounts to government silence.
Perhaps they expect a different reply from Education Secretary Fiona Hyslop or her colleague Maureen Watt.
Or perhaps they want to say something without either supporting or condemning the prospect of industrial action.
In any event, there has been a voluble response from the teachers' local authorities employers.
Pat Watters, the Cosla president and Labour councillor, said: "I cannot understand where the EIS are coming from on this."
According to Mr Watters, there has been substantial investment over "the last few years" - that is, including under the previous executive - and yet "without a word of discussion, we now have this call for strike action".
And the Conservative response? While criticising ministers for a "cack-handed" approach to the issue of class sizes, they condemn the union for holding Scottish school pupils to ransom.
As I say, intriguing.
I'm 
Comments
or to comment.