Labour's cynical opportunism on prescription charges

Yesterday the Scottish Parliament voted to scrap the charge for NHS prescriptions once and for all.

This move was supported by the SNP Government and Labour, and opposed by the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives.

I have written often enough that I think that a small prescription charge for those who can afford it is not really a big deal so I'm glad that the Lib Dems stuck to their long held position on this. Health spokesman Ross Finnie said:

"NHS Boards are making difficult choices on cutting nursing staff and hospital beds as they struggle to cope with the funding squeeze. But the Scottish Government is still determined to extend reduced or free prescriptions to all. 

"In the present economic circumstances, Liberal Democrats have made it clear that it is inappropriate to proceed with the final stage of abolishing prescription charges."

I can forgive the SNP for doing it - it's been their long held policy and something they've been working towards for the last 4 years, and supported before. Fair play to them, even if I disagree with them.

What I don't get is the Labour Party's position. They didn't support abolition of prescription charges in 2006 when Colin Fox tried to introduce that measure. Last year Mr MacNumpty reported in his Sunday Whip column that Labour had abstained on the issue. I'm sure there have been many other votes in between, too. The BBC reports, however, that Labour supported the SNP's abolition plan.

Why would they change the habits of a lifetime? It's not as if there's an election round the corner or anything..... Oh wait.........

Whatever their motivations, it looks as though the Labour Party has been prepared to back something it doesn't believe in, costing money that we can ill afford. They don't seem to have learned anything about financial responsibility since Liam Byrne left his chilling note that "there was no money left" last May.  Labour have shown in office at every level, from Council to UK that they can't be trusted to keep the public finances on an even keel. Cllr Jenny Dawe, leader of the City of Edinburgh Council, wrote for Liberal Democrat Voice last year about the mess they found when they took over from Labour in 2007. We know that at Westminster part of the reason we have such a massive deficit is because Labour failed to mend the roof when the sun was shining. Do we really want them doing the same at Holyrood?

SNP's priorities - cutting taxes for the rich

Well, we can see where the SNP's priorities lie from their plans announced at their Conference, and they're not with the poorest and most vulnerable people, that's for sure.

This reminds me of research done by the Scottish Liberal Democrats last year which shows that over the whole of their four year term, the SNP will have given 133 times more every year to a household on £100,000 than they have to households on £15,000. That doesn't seem very fair to me. At the time, Tavish Scott said:

“Over four years, the SNP will have spent £950m on a set of distorted priorities and hand-outs that give more to the rich than to the poor.

“If you have two children and earn £100,000 then you will have gained £802 per year from the SNP.

“But if you have two children and you earn £15,000 then you will have gained just six pounds and seven pence.

“So that’s enough champagne and lobster every night for the rich, but a fish supper for the poor.

“So I mean it when I say that, in Scotland, the only party at the General Election for a fairer society will be the Liberal Democrats.”

I'm not sure why we haven't made more of this. I mean, to give £802 per year to a family on £100,000 and only £6 a year to the poorest is not something the SNP can be proud of.

The Nationalists seem to be even more in denial about our financial circumstances than the Labour Party when they were in power at Westminster. It worries me greatly that in the current climate, they intend to continue their Council Tax freeze which gives most benefit to the better off. This was only supposed to be a temporary measure until they introduced their Local Income Tax,but they gave up on that one with undue haste. If they'd agreed that local authorities should be able to set their own rates, this could have been up and running by now and people would be paying their local taxes according to their ability to pay and not the size of their house. The elderly widow on a low income paying the same as 2 lawyers across the street under the Council Tax doesn't get any fairer. Yet another failed SNP pledge.

And then there's prescription charges, which they still insist they're going to abolish completely next year. I can think of many  better uses for the £40 million it's cost us. There are more efficient ways of making sure that those who need help most get it. Under the Scottish Liberal Democrat plans unveiled in our 2007 manifesto, we'd have limited prescription charges so that people with chronic conditions who needed a lot of medication would only pay the equivalent of one full prescription charge per month. That seems fair to me.

Under the current system, I,with my dodgy thyroid, am entitled to free prescriptions. I need to take one tablet a day and I am prescribed 8 weeks' worth at a time. Even if prescription charges up here had remained at the same level as in England, my drugs would cost me less than a glass of wine in an Edinburgh pub per month. That's easily affordable. I don't need it.

I may be sick, and I'm certainly not rich, but paying for my prescriptions is not going to cause me any great hardship. I'm sure I can't be alone in that.

The SNP Government has, to add to its pretty shameful record on education, the mantle of being the Party that does most for the rich. For that reason alone, they need to be kicked out of office come May.

Why should I get free prescriptions?

Regular readers of my blog will know I had a wee bit of a break at the end of last year when a mean virus knocked me for six. I haven't felt right since then and have felt particularly rubbish for the last 2.5 weeks or so. Last Friday, my GP decided to take all my blood and send it for analysis. If I ever forget in the future, please remind me that my blood is in my left arm, not my right. I remembered from when I was pregnant that one arm gave up blood easily and one stubbornly held on to it as though my life depended on it. Unfortunately I couldn't remember which and so he had to try both. What a delight that was for a state registered needlephobic coward like me!

My latent hypochondria had kicked in and I was convinced that I had something scary. I was therefore quite relieved when my GP phoned on Monday evening to tell me that I had Glandular Fever. Sure, I have to respect it and err on the side of sense for once in my life - so I will be spending Valentine's Day with my husband rather than campaigning in Dunfermline, even if I have to kiss him through clingfilm like Chuck in Pushing Daisies!

So, I thought, that was that. Then I got a phone call from the GP yesterday to say that the next lot of tests showed an underactive thyroid and I'd need to take medicine forever more. He then told me that there was a silver lining - that this would entitle me to free prescriptions forever as hypothyroidism was one of the narrow list of conditions that was given free prescription status way back in the 1960s.

To be honest, I feel a bit guilty. Why should I get free prescrptions and somebody with Cancer has to pay for them? In the end of the day, I can afford the fiver every couple of months and I feel a bit bad about taking health service resources from people with really scary, life threatening conditions.

I know that the SNP Government up here plans to remove all prescription charges eventually, but I'm sure I could find a better use for the millions that would cost. I just wonder if there isn't some more sensible solution to prescription charging. I just don't think I'm a deserving case to get free prescriptions for everything for the rest of my life when others who have much worse illnesses have to pay.

What do other people think?

LibDig This!