By Mark Davies BBC News Online political reporter

Those carrying notebooks, he said, were in for a disappointment: he agreed with a lot of what Clare Short had just said.

You could see what he meant. Among those in the packed tent attending a fringe meeting addressed by Mr Reid, Ms Short and former foreign secretary Robin Cook were a number of journalists expecting sparks to fly.

They were there to see the threesome debate the question "What is a Labour government for?"

And if the fireworks many had hoped for failed to materialise there was undoubtedly a certain amount of tension in the air.

Mr Cook, who has been one of the busiest speakers at conference, arrived late for the event, organised by the Independent newspaper.

But he when he did turn up he made a strident speech in which he said the Iraq war had been "a first class political disaster".

The former foreign secretary said further interventions by the US remained a possibility, and also turned his attention to domestic matters, urging Labour to celebrate its "redistributive" approach and embrace a left-wing agenda.

Ms Short had opened proceedings with the view that whatever a Labour government was for, it wasn't simply about keeping a Labour government in power.

And nor is it simply about "keeping quiet and doing what the leader says".

In case that message wasn't clear, she underlined it: decision making in the party has become "non-participatory and elitist".

Incidentally, these weren't the bits Mr Reid agreed with.

"Tony" hadn't told the party why he decided to join the war with Iraq, Ms Short said. And he was allowing a small group in Downing Street to make very bad decisions.

Furthermore, he should quit now to allow the party to rebuild.

Again, these were not sentiments with which Mr Reid agreed.

But the overall message, in essence, was that Labour should be about consultation and participation. On this, Mr Reid did agree.

But if he disagreed with Ms Short in other areas, it was not out of concern for his political career, he said.

US stance

Where they do disagree, of course, is over Iraq. And Mr Reid stood by the decision to go to war against Saddam Hussein. Not, he insisted, for reasons of personal ambition or through mistaken loyalty, but because he believed it was the right thing to do.

Challenged head on by one delegate who said backing the US stance on Iraq was wrong, he posed the question, is action wrong because the US believes it is right?

Britain should have said (to the US) 'do it right and we are with you. Do it wrong and you are on your own,' and we didn't have the guts for that Clare Short

And he said the left of his party had in the past shown a tendency to back fascist dictators over democratically elected leaders it did not approve of, pointing to the Falklands war as an example.

He also warned that amid concern among Labour activists about the approach to the war and a range of other issues the party "had the capacity to destroy the opportunities before us".

Such warnings are developing as a theme of the conference, and the view appeared to hold some sway among the audience.

But Ms Short said the "tragedy" of the Iraq war was that there had been alternatives to the action taken.

"Britain should have said (to the US) 'do it right and we are with you. Do it wrong and you are on your own,' and we didn't have the guts for that," she said.

Values

Mr Cook stayed away from Iraq, concentrating his speech on Labour's domestic agenda. And he began with words of praise for Mr Reid, saying he backed his plans to move the NHS out of central control.

He said Labour's mission should be to change the values of society.

If you are not careful the first time the poor discover how much was given to them by Labour is when the Tories come into office Robin Cook

He said he was concerned about the party's approach to the public services and in particular the involvement of private companies.

And he said he believed the government was the most redistributive since that of Lloyd George - and should shout more about its achievements.

Party leaders were overly worried about the reaction if they mentioned such things, he said - as though redistributive policies are kept in a back room away from the spin doctors, but only to be visited quietly and when no-one was looking.

Social justice, he said, could not be delivered "by stealth" - people need to know what is going on.

"If you are not careful the first time the poor discover how much was given to them by Labour is when the Tories come into office," he said.

The answer, he said, was to be bolder - and to take the political debate to the left.