So what happened to politicians’ pledges to treat their opponents with respect?

I was shocked and disgusted by Nicola Sturgeon’s blatant attempt to discredit and humiliate Ruth Davidson at First Minister’s Questions on 20 April.

To a cacophony of ugly jeers and loud applause from SNP ministers and MSPS, the First Minister hurled abuse and shouted down Ruth Davidson’s suggestion that she could get rid of the so-called “rape clause” by merely using the powers at the Scottish Government’s disposal to change the two-child tax policy.

Ms Davidson was then fur- ther abused by protesters at a demonstration conveniently orchestrated outside the Holyrood Parliament.

It seems hypocritical in the extreme for Angela Constance and Jeane Freeman to hand back to Westminster those welfare powers already devolved. This frees the Scottish Government from meeting the cost and making hard decisions about emotive issues likely to lose votes prior to another Scottish independence referendum.

At the same time, it provides yet another opportunity to stoke up grievance and criticise the Tories.

In making a fresh case for independence, Nicola Sturgeon promised “to lead by example in urging supporters to treat opponents with respect”. In my view, because of the First Minister’s unpleasant, bullying behaviour encouraged by her supporters, respectful, civilised debate was sadly lacking at Holyrood. SALLY GORDON-WALKER

Caiystane Drive, Edinburgh

With the general election just a few short months away, TV programmers will be turning their attention to televised debates. I hope steps will be taken to avoid repeats of such disgraceful scenes that the BBC allowed to happen in the second televised debate between Messrs Darling and Salmond.

There was clearly orchestrated heckling and shouting down of Mr Darling, aimed at drowning out his points.

Televised debates should be held without a studio audience and questions should be invited in advance. There could still be viewer participation by way of phone-ins, texts or emails.

This would allow panellists to make their points without interruption from ill-behaved audiences.

Panellists’ contributions as a result would, hopefully, be more substantive without relying, when in difficulty, on the same old distraction tactic of attacking Westminster, the Tories, bankers, Margaret Thatcher and the poll tax, all guaranteed to whip the baying mob into a frenzy.

I would also urge programme-makers to invite people with knowledge and gravitas to sit on the panels and avoid so-called celebrities and comedians who are there for cheap laughs and self-aggrandisement and who contribute absolutely nothing to the debates.

These debates are supposed to be for the enlightenment of the viewers and there is no place for the type of audiences that we now see on Question Time, the X Factor and Strictly Come Dancing. DONALD LEWIS Beech Hill, Gifford,

East Lothian