Labour was accused yesterday of trying to smear David Cameron over his support for the NHS.
One of the Tory leader's closest allies lashed out after he was branded a "fraud" and "two-faced" by Gordon Brown and Lord Mandelson.
Mr Cameron has been engaged in desperate damage limitation since his MEP Daniel Hannan went on US television to warn against copying the British health system, saying he "would not wish it on anybody".
The remarks were quickly dismissed by Mr Cameron as "eccentric", who cited his experience with his disabled son Ivan - who died in February - in stressing that his party stood "four square behind the NHS".
But one of Mr Hannan's Conservative colleagues in the European parliament, Roger Helmer, has expressed support for his position.
There have also been claims that senior Tory frontbenchers favour fundamental reform, and have close links with US politicians who have condemned the NHS as "evil" and "Orwellian".
Gordon Brown stepped up his attack in a letter to Labour Party members last night.
"It is understandable that the Conservative leadership have tried to distance themselves from those in Tory ranks who criticise the NHS," he wrote. "But the reason why their comments have generated so much anger is that they spoke to a larger truth.
"That truth is that there are two Tory faces on the NHS. Behind all the recent talk of commitment, the party has not truly been reformed."
Lord Mandelson said that Mr Cameron "likes people to think he's cuddly and compassionate and has a belief in social justice. He is fraudulent in two respects," the business secretary said. "He's different when he thinks people aren't listening or looking.
"And the sentiments he expresses in Britain are not shared by his party so there is a double fraud going on."
Shadow Schools Secretary Michael Gove hit back yesterday, saying Mr Cameron believed "heart and soul" in the principles of the health service because of his "life experience" with Ivan.
"I think Labour, because they are ruffled, are trying to concoct a series of stories to smear David," he said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article