SCOTS would be “perfectly happy” to see the end of universal free prescriptions from the NHS, the Scottish Tory leader has claimed.
In a speech delivered on Monday, Russell Findlay argued that the free prescriptions policy – which was brought in in 2011 under Alex Salmond’s SNP government – was an example of “unnecessary and wasteful spending”.
“I think it’s agreed that almost everyone, but especially the wealthiest, can afford 39 pence for a packet of paracetamol or Ibuprofen instead of getting it free on prescription,” he said.
Responding to media questions, Findlay later said he and most Scots earning equivalent salaries would be “perfectly happy” paying for prescriptions.
Pushed on how a system of paying for medication would work in his eyes, the Scottish Tory MSP appeared to suggest means-testing or a cost floor.
READ MORE: Wee Ginger Dug: Embrace of hard right spells trouble for Russell Findlay
As well as suggesting a major overhaul of prescription fees, Findlay used his first major set piece speech since becoming leader to call on the Scottish Government to cut taxes – including scrapping the 21p rate – and merge some public bodies.
Speaking to party members in Edinburgh, Findlay said Scotland had been governed by “different types of socialism” in the quarter-of-a-century since devolution, as he hit out at a “political class at Holyrood who just don’t get it”.
“Going forward, my party will not only make the case for tax cuts, but for a smaller state that better serves the public,” he said.
“It’s a markedly different approach to the left-wing consensus in the Scottish Parliament that favours a big-state approach, expanding both its size and reach into our lives.”
The reduction of the state, he said, would not have an impact on public services, but would be achieved through efficiencies.
“I don’t want to cut public services, I want to cut the cost of delivering services,” he said.
“The only solution Holyrood ever seems to come up with is to put more money in, as if that will fix the problem on its own – well, it hasn’t, and it won’t.
“The left-wing parties in the Scottish Parliament spend all their time on inputs, never on outcomes.
“Proper funding of public services is crucial, but it’s only part of the solution – public services must become more effective by being more efficient.”
Part of that work, he said, could include scrapping or merging some of Scotland’s 131 public bodies, including a suggestion that the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa) and NatureScot could be combined and the Scottish Land Commission could be shuttered.
READ MORE: Scottish Tories will try to block debates on independence, says Russell Findlay
But asked by the PA news agency if this would mean redundancies in the public sector, Findlay said there was “no talk” of job losses.
“I think you are getting a bit ahead of yourself, what we’re saying is that this is a starting point of a conversation that we need to have going into the 2026 election,” he said.
The public sector currently operates a policy of no compulsory redundancies, with a previous attempt to shrink the size of the civil service by Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes when she was finance secretary relying on voluntary redundancies and vacancy management.
With the Chancellor’s Budget due on Wednesday and the Scottish Government’s tax and spending plans to be outlined in early December, Mr Findlay made a plea to the Scottish Government to cut taxes, including by removing entirely the 21p rate.
“The SNP will try to claim that this unfair mess of a tax system is progressive,” he said.
“But it’s not progress to pick the pockets of Scotland’s teachers, nurses and police officers – leaving them worse off than they would be elsewhere in the UK.
“We need fairness and justice for Scotland’s taxpayers.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel