
SNP's £100million bill for spin doctors amid crisis gripping Scotland's health service
More than £100million of taxpayers' money has been spent on spin doctors by Scotland's public sector while the NHS and other services are in crisis.
SNP ministers have been urged to stop squandering so much money defending their 'atrocious' record after the extraordinary spin bill was racked up over the last three years.
An army of 642 spin doctors is now employed by the Scottish Government and 93 other Scottish public bodies, including councils, quangos and health boards, to promote the work that they are doing in the media.
The annual cost of press and communications staff has rocketed by nearly a fifth over the course of just three financial years, from £30.7 million in 2021/22 to £36.7 million in 2023/24.
Scottish Conservative finance spokesman Craig Hoy said: 'Taxpayers will be astonished that, at a time when they are making swingeing cuts, the SNP Government are squandering an absolute fortune on spin doctors.
'This is money that could be spent on frontline services but is instead effectively being used to try to defend the SNP.
'It's breathtaking hypocrisy from John Swinney, who, before he came into office, was an arch-critic of public money being lavished on spin doctors. The Scottish Conservatives believe in getting value for money for taxpayers by spending funds on public services, rather than vanity projects.
'But while our NHS is in crisis, John Swinney's priority is to waste taxpayers' cash trying to defend his party's atrocious record. It's just another example of the bloated public service the Nationalists are presiding over.'
The Scottish Government's own press and communications bill was £11,971,508 in the three years to the end of 2023/24. It increased from £3,739,924 in 2021/22 to £4,097,722 the following year and £4,133,862 in 2023/24.
Over the three year period, the 32 local authorities spent just under £32 million on press and communications, while 10 NHS boards which provided figures spent £7.8 million.
The full time equivalent number of press and communications staff increased from 609 in 2021/22 to 642 in 2023/24.
The lavish spending came over a period where the SNP Government imposed income tax hikes, with everyone earning more than £30,300 now paying more in Scotland than the rest of the UK.
All 32 local authorities have also forced through a series of council tax rises, including an average increase of £116 in the financial year which began last month with individual councils imposing rises of up to 15.6 per cent.
At the same time, Scotland's NHS has been mired in crisis with major concerns about waiting times for key treatments, delays in accident and emergency wards, and growing pressure on GPs and the Scottish Ambulance Service.
Mr Hoy said that the £100 million spent on spin is the same amount as the SNP has budgeted to 'mitigate' the Labour Government's cuts to the winter fuel payment, and also how much they were prepared to spend to support mid-market rents in a housing emergency.
He added: 'But when it comes to protecting their reputation with taxpayers' money, the SNP are happy to spend like a sailor on shore leave.'
The biggest spend on press and communications by any public body in 2023/24 was the Scottish Government's £4.13 million bill, followed by Police Scotland's bill of up to £3.79 million, Glasgow City Council at £1.52 million, City of Edinburgh Council at £1.41 million and NatureScot at £1.29 million.
Other seven-figure sums were spent by exams quango the Scottish Qualifications Authority, at £1.27 million and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, at £1.06 million.
Of the 10 health boards to provide figures, total spending increased from £2.39 million in 2021/22 to £2.59 million in 2022/23 and £2.83 million in 2023/24.
The biggest bill for a single health board last year was £654,790 at NHS Lanarkshire, followed by £361,145 at NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and £356,946 at NHS Grampian.
A Scottish Government spokesman said: 'Effective communication, including through work with journalists and through social media, is essential to raise awareness of government policies and to encourage uptake of key public services.
'Public sector organisations have a vital role in delivering on their priorities for the people of Scotland. Decisions on spending on communications are operational matters for individual organisations to make.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scotsman
16 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Specsavers Goalside Guides selected as visually impaired fans set to enjoy enhanced Scotland matchday experience
Two budding commentators have been selected to become Specsavers' Goalside Guides for Scotland's upcoming game against Iceland. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... As the Official Eye and Ear Care Partner of the Scottish FA, last month Specsavers launched a Scotland-wide campaign to find emerging commentating talent to pair with visually-impaired fans for Friday night's match at Hampden. Steve Clarke's Scotland men's side take on Iceland in the friendly encounter, with Andrew Morrison and Sam Smith selected to be on audio description duty. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Andrew, who is from Thurso and studies at Edinburgh Napier Uni, and Paisley lad Sam have been put through their paces by commentator, pundit and former Scotland international Leanne Crichton, who has been sharing her top tips for audio-descriptive broadcasting. Sam Smith, Leanne Crichton and Andrew Morrison. The pair are ready to provide real-time audio commentary for the fans on Friday night and can't wait to get going. Sam said: 'I've always wanted to commentate on a match at Hampden so I'm absolutely buzzing to be doing this, thanks to the support from Specsavers with this initiative. 'Leanne's words of advice and stories about her time in the game were brilliant and very valuable ahead of us picking up the mic on Friday night.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Andrew added: 'Being selected to become a Specsavers Goalside Guide is a real privilege and I'm buzzing to be able to do it at Hampden for a Scotland game. 'I'm a proud Scot and can't wait to help bring the game to life for a fellow-fan – I've been practicing my Icelandic pronunciation in preparation!' Former Scotland hero Leanne shared some words of wisdom with the guys as they spent time in the Hampden gantry warming up ahead of the match. She said: 'It's not until I started working in broadcasting that I fully appreciated the value and power of the spoken word and audio commentary. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'I get to work alongside some of the best in the business at the BBC and, what I'd say, is preparation is key. 'Knowing your stuff and getting immersed in the game can only help supporters, particularly those with vision impairments, get lost in the action as well.' Jenny Stephenson, Divisional Chair for Scotland, said: 'We're thrilled to bring this project to life in partnership with the Scottish FA. The campaign will give fans who are blind or partially sighted a new way to experience the excitement of live football direct from the stadium. 'Hearing loss is a growing global health issue that can significantly impact a person's quality of life. For those with visual impairments, however, good hearing health becomes even more critical. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'This is a great example of how hearing health can make a tangible difference to people's lives, and we're excited to raise awareness of the importance of good hearing alongside this impactful initiative.' As the Official Eye and Ear Care Partner of the Scottish FA, Specsavers is here to change lives through better sight and hearing, by making expert care accessible and affordable for all. Visit or go in store to book an appointment with one of our experts.

The National
29 minutes ago
- The National
Anger as TWO Labour politicians get key BBC slot on by-election eve
The BBC is hosting a 'Glasgow Special' episode of the show tonight, featuring the SNP's Glasgow Council leader Susan Aitken, Scottish Tory MSP Annie Wells, artist David Eustace as well as both Scottish Labour MSP Paul Sweeney and Labour peer Willie Haughey. It comes as voters are set to go to the polls tomorrow (Thursday) for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election on June 5, which is widely considered to be a three-horse race between the SNP, Labour and Reform UK. READ MORE: 'New low': SNP slam Labour over MP lobbying trip to Israel amid Gaza genocide An SNP source told The National that Debate Night appears to have 'thrown the BBC's proposed guidance on balance out of the window' by including two Labour representatives. "Debate Night appears to have thrown the BBC's proposed guidance on balance out of the window - the night before a crucial by-election,' the source said. 'Does Sir Keir Starmer really need two apologists to back up his woeful record?" Announcing the guests on social media site X, the BBC described Haughey as an 'entrepreneur'. (Image: Canva) But the millionaire tycoon (above with Sweeney) was actually made a Labour member of the House of Lords in 2013. He donated over £1 million to the party between 2003 and 2010. More recently, he gave £3900 to Scottish Labour MP Michael Shanks ahead of the General Election last year. Scottish Greens councillor Jon Molyneux also called out the BBC. 'Labour MSP and Peer for a "Glasgow Special" but no Glasgow Greens representative despite having 4 times as many elected representatives in the city than the Tories,' he wrote on Twitter/X. 'Farce.' The SNP also took issue with last week's BBC Debate Night by-election special for not including the actual candidates. It comes as Labour's candidate Davy Russell has repeatedly dodged not only the STV debate earlier this week but also local hustings and radio interviews during the campaign. The BBC have been approached for comment.


STV News
33 minutes ago
- STV News
Former St Mirren director defamed colleagues over comments on charity build
Two St Mirren directors were defamed when a former colleague accused them of pursuing a 'secret plan' to build a charity centre on the club's land, a judge has concluded. Alan Wardrop claimed that children's charity Kibble – a shareholder in the Premiership side – had applied for a £2.65m grant from the Scottish Government. Mr Wardrop claimed the application was to allow it to finance a 'first of its kind' wellness centre for disadvantaged children on ground belonging to the side. He then claimed the charity had lied about what it was doing. He then made allegations against Jim Gillespie and Mark MacMillan, the chief executive and director of corporate services of the charity, who are also directors of St Mirren. These remarks prompted Mr Gillespie and Mr MacMillan to launch a legal action against Mr Wardrop, who was a Buddies' director between 2016 and 2022. The two men claimed the remarks made by Mr Wardrop had damaged their reputations. They instructed lawyers to pursue a defamation action at the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court. The remarks were made in May 2023 during his campaign to become elected to the board of the St Mirren Independent Supporters Association – an organisation which owns 51% of shares in the club – and the Herald newspaper. Lawyers for Mr Wardrop told judge Lord Clark that Mr Wardrop's comments were covered by sections six and seven of the Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021. Section six covers matters of public interest – that somebody being sued for defamation can defend themselves against the action if they can show that the remarks were made in the public interest. Section seven covers honest opinion – that if a person can show their opinions were formed as a consequence of scrutinising evidence available then this can be a defence to the action. In a written judgement published by the court on Wednesday, Lord Clark concluded that the statements made by Mr Wardrop were defamatory. He said that the evidence showed that the two pursuers and the charity weren't planning to build the facility on land owned by St Mirren. But he did not award the two pursuers any damages. He said this was because lawyers for Mr Wardrop had shown that his remarks were covered by sections six and seven of the 2021 Act. He wrote: 'The central issues in this case are whether the statements were true and, if not, whether the defences under section 6 or section 7 of the 2021 Act succeed. 'Each side had sound reasons for the positions they took before the court, with evidence giving a fair degree of support. As has been explained, there was sufficient material before the defender which allowed him to reach his understanding about what the pursuers planned to do. 'But, on balance, it has not been shown that his allegations were true. They were defamatory. 'However, the circumstances result in the defence under section 6 applying in relation to the campaign statement and Herald statement, and also the defence under section 7 being made out for the Herald statement. 'As a consequence, the pursuers' claims for damages have not been successful. 'It is not necessary to grant an interdict against the defender from making any such statements again, as sought in the pursuers' first conclusion in the summons. 'The defender will be aware, from the reasoning I have given, that the statements made were defamatory and, but for the defences, would have led to awards of damages. 'There is no right or basis for him to be able to make such statements again and if he were to do so the defences would not apply. 'It would not be in the public interest to make such statements, since the true position has now been determined, and as he now knows the statements were not true he could no longer have an honest opinion.' Lawyers believed the case was the first time that the Scottish defamation law was considered by the courts. The judgement tells of Mr Wardrop's defamatory remarks. Lord Clark wrote that in the supporters association statement, Mr Wardrop said that Mr Gillespie and Mr McMillan 'failed to disclose' to club shareholders, officials and supporters that the charity wanted to build a facility on land owned by the club. Mr Wardrop said that 'together with Renfrewshire Council they applied to the Scottish Government for a £2.65m grant under the name The St Mirren Wellbeing and Regeneration Masterplan.' Mr Wardrop also stated: 'It was not disclosed to other SMISA club board directors and no prior agreement was secured. 'Both Kibble employees did not declare their plans to build on St Mirren owned land to St Mirren SMISA board members but denied any conflict of interest. 'Having discovered the issue under Freedom of Information, I raised it at the club's AGM. I, like many others, no longer have trust and confidence in Kibble's directors serving on the board of St. Mirren FC and I put my SMISA board application forward on the basis I wish to remove them'. The judgement also states that Mr Wardrop told the Herald: 'I have been made out to be a liar by Kibble and the board of St Mirren, now it should be clear to everyone what a huge cover-up this has been, in denying, denying and denying, when they were actually lying, lying and lying.' Lawyers for Mr Wardrop argued that these comments were made on a matter of public interest. They also argued that he made them after scrutinising publically available information and that the legislation covered him in the action. Lord Clark upheld these submissions. He wrote: 'It was apparent from the evidence that the defender actually believed that publication of the campaign statement and the Herald statement were in the public interest. 'There is no suggestion that he knew that the defamatory facts presented were untrue. 'Far from it, his post-publication conduct supports his actual belief and indeed on his evidence in court he remains in the belief that the statements were true. 'He did not unwarrantedly or gratuitously drag into the statements any allegations which do not have a real bearing on the theme of the statements generally.' He also wrote: 'The evidence supports the point that the defender took reasonably extensive steps to verify his belief that it was in the public interest to publish what was said. 'They were reliable sources. The amount of information sought and obtained demonstrates the steps taken to verify the information. 'The status and content of that information, taken together, is reasonably capable of allowing the inferences to be drawn, resulting in his view. 'He carried out the enquiries and checks that were reasonable to expect and open to him, coming across no obviously contradictory evidence.' Lord Clark also said that if the pursuers had been successful, they would have been awarded £40,000 each. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country