LAST weekend in Perth, Scottish Labour demonstrated it is a party of the left which has democracy at its core.

Whilst it is tempting to focus on the differences of opinion expressed in the many debates (“Labour votes to scrap Trident”, The Herald, November 2), it is important to note how those arguments were made and received. As a first-time delegate to the conference, I was impressed by the atmosphere of respect and tolerance within which the debates were conducted. There was no acrimony.

During the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Trident debates in particular, I watched as speaker after speaker was warmly applauded (and often cheered) even by those who did not agree with the arguments which were made. This was not a conference of robots being dictated to by a leader which could not be questioned, but a gathering of comrades agreeing on how to reach a common goal – a fairer and more prosperous Scotland.

During the Trident debate in particular, we heard fantastic speeches from the conference floor. MSPs, councillors, trade unionists, and ordinary delegates all offered differing views. The key debating point was the impact of cancelling Trident on Scotland’s industrial capacity.

But whilst the delegates had to make a difficult decision, it is important to note that Kezia Dugdale did not try to influence the debate – she remained inscrutable throughout. Her leadership and the nature of the debate made us stronger, not weaker.

The Trident motion does not mean that Scottish Labour can demand Trident is scrapped, or that UK Labour must change its policy on the nuclear deterrent. It does, however, mean that the party can speak with authority in the broader debate surrounding Trident renewal.

The same is true of the many other motions that were proposed by members and often passed unanimously – meeting Shelter’s social housing targets, protecting public services from TTIP, defending trade union rights, buying back PFI debt and many others. Progressive policies and mature debate from a party which is worth a fresh look.

Scott Arthur,

27 Buckstone Gardens, Edinburgh.

HUBBLE, bubble toil and trouble, Labour in Scotland dished up a Halloween cauldron of a conference which left Kezia Dugdale looking a bit of a pumpkin when her leadership failed its first major test and her party chose to ignore her widely known views and vote against the renewal of Trident.

Jeremy Corbyn and Ms Dugdale, like a latter-day Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, now find themselves heading in different directions not only from each other, but from the people they are supposed to be leading. However, for Scottish Labour, the crunch is about to come and they need to decide whether their opposition to Trident is of more importance than their obedience to the UK Labour Party, which supports a new generation of nuclear submarines of mass destruction sailing in Scottish waters. By the pricking of my thumbs, I fear that Labour's Scottish branch office will continue to walk with Westminster's dinosaurs.

Ms Dugdale has asked the voters to take a fresh look at Labour. But before that happens, Labour needs to take a fresh look at itself.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.

YOU report that Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has appealed to “moderate” Labour MP’s to maintain their support for a nuclear “deterrent” (that is, British H Bombs), and support Trident renewal.

So, a person who is willing to launch Trident and slaughter millions is a moderate, but someone who refuses to do this is an extremist. Now you know.

To quote the immortal words of Humpty Dumpty: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

Lewis Carroll meets George Orwell in the crazy world of standard-grade British nukespeak. How can honest discussion be possible with people who habitually abuse language in such a twisted and dishonest fashion?

Brain M Quail,

2 Hyndland Avenue, Glasgow.

I AGREE with your leader comment that the position taken by the SNP and the Labour Party on unilateral disarmament is a political risk (“Trident risks for Labour and SNP”, The Herald , November 2).

In the west we seem to have adopted an inured position where living with terrorism and sacrificing a relatively small number of people to it is somehow preferable to the consequences of all-out war.

However, it seems to me that we have forgotten that terrorists, individually or in groups, only carry that name because they are seriously limited by them not yet having been able to acquire the technological resources of war which the west has. As a result, we know they are there from their irritating threats and criminal actions. As we know from the Song of Solomon, it is the “little foxes that spoil the vines: for our vines have tender grapes”.

We must recognise that the Twin Towers were brought down in 2001 in New York with our very own technology but in the wrong hands. I feel that much of the current situation in the Middle East was largely propagated by the US military, being rather unimaginative, leaving much hardware behind when they left the Iraqi army to get on with it.

Once an organisation of so-called terrorists manages to get hold of nuclear weapons they cease to be terrorists and become apocalyptic riders.

I would have thought that the casualty statistics of two world wars would have taught everyone that while we should display open and international trust and universal love and friendship, we should always carry a big stick.

Bill Brown,

46 Breadie Drive, Milngavie.