A TORY tax cut plan for the rich would mean a reduction in money available for the NHS, education and other key manifesto pledges, according to a leading economic think tank.

The Scottish Tory manifesto released today made a pledge to cut income tax rates for Scotland's highest earners, despite this impacting the money available for other spending goals.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said the Tories' largest manifesto commitment of an extra £2 billion for the NHS by 2025-26 would need to be significantly higher.

Douglas Ross's party's plans for health spending are underpinned by a promise of a "double lock" which guarantees NHS budget increases of 2% more than inflation, or the Barnett consequentials from increases in funding for the NHS in England: whichever is highest.

READ MORE: SNP slam 'Dickensian' Tory tax cut plan for the richest in Scotland

The IFS say the £2bn figure would not be enough to deliver on this pledge as, due to large planned increases in NHS England spending over the next few years, it would have to be at least £2.6bn by 2025-26.

The Tories make similar pledges on free school meals and teacher increases to the SNP manifesto released last week, but the IFS also notes that per-pupil spending in Scotland is higher than in England already due to smaller average class sizes.

The think tank also noted that the Tory "rigid funding rule" to provide more generous funding to Scotland's local authorities is "not a sensible mechanism".

They explained this by saying that if the UK decides to top-up NHS funding in England, the Tory "double lock" on health spending would mean that any Barnett consequential would have to be passed onto the Scottish NHS.

The funding guarantee for councils would mean then require them to also receive their share, meaning funding for non-NHS and non-council services would have to be cut - because part of the Barnett consequentials have in effect been promised twice.

READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: Douglas Ross just can't stop talking about independence

Ben Zaranko, a research economist at the IFS who works on public spending, said: "The Conservatives’ NHS spending pledge of £2bn extra by 2025-26 is at least as generous as the SNP’s, despite the headline figure they cite being lower than that cited by the SNP. Importantly, though, an extra £2bn would not be sufficient to deliver on the Conservatives’ promise of a ‘double lock’ for the Scottish NHS.

"We estimate that the total increase required by 2025-26 would be at least £2.6bn, and closer to £3bn if NHS spending in England continues to increase in line with recent trends - which both the Conservatives and the SNP pledge they would match. In other words, given likely continued growth in NHS spending in England, spending on the NHS in Scotland is likely to grow by more than either the headline Conservative or SNP numbers suggest.

"Alongside other commitments, including a funding guarantee for councils, this increase in NHS spending means that without a substantial increase in UK government funding, the ambition to cut income tax to slightly below the levels in the rest of the UK may have to remain only an ambition."

The National: Kate Forbes

Commenting on the IFS analysis, the SNP's Finance Secretary, Kate Forbes (above), said: “This independent analysis confirms the Tories' true colours. Their manifesto underfunds the NHS, fails to provide a single extra penny for social care after the pandemic, and instead plans to cut public services to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy. 

“That the Tories have failed to properly fund their commitment to the NHS in the manifesto shows exactly where their priorities lie - and it's certainly not with those NHS workers who have supported and protected people across Scotland throughout the pandemic. 

“It is only with an SNP government that the NHS can be guaranteed that it will be fully funded, with an additional £2.5bn and no double-counting, and that social care will receive an extra £800m to as part of our investment in a National Care Service."

The full IFS analysis can be found at https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/15403