The Health Secretary has denied that decisions on local NHS services are being delayed until after the Holyrood election.
Shona Robison launched an attack on "rag, tag and bobtail" Labour after being accused of being dishonest with the electorate over the future of some wards and hospitals.
She criticised her opponents' "lack of self-awareness" during a Holyrood debate on reported plans for potential closures.
Labour's motion called for the continuation of current services such as the Royal Alexandra Hospital children's ward, emergency care services at the Vale of Leven Hospital, Lightburn Hospital in Glasgow and the children's ward at St John's Hospital in Livingston.
Equalities spokeswoman Jenny Marra said "question marks" hang over many local communities.
She said: "The injustice of these question marks and the reason we bring this to the Cabinet Secretary today is that it is simply not fair that these questions persistently hang in the air and it is certainly not fair that these question marks hang in the air until after the election in May.
"Honest governments, I believe, will make decisions that are in the best interests of people and work with them to manage any change that that decision brings, but they should have the courage of their convictions and the confidence of their arguments.
"But it is not right that all of these crucial decisions are left in the balance because the Government does not want to be asked any difficult questions or face any opposition from local groups before the election in May."
She added: "I do not think that is a fair and honest way to run the country or our health service and the Scottish people deserve honest government."
Ms Robison said that despite the motion calling for the retention of emergency care services at the Vale of Leven, the hospital's A&E department had closed in 2002 under the previous Labour-led administration.
She pointed out that the SNP had in 2007 overturned that administration's decision to close the A&E departments at Monklands and Ayr hospitals.
The Health Secretary said: "There are no proposals for closure of any of these services mentioned in the motion, none of them have come to me or indeed have even been approved by closure by any of the local boards themselves. None of them, unlike of course the record of the previous administration.
"We have a coherent plan in the national clinical strategy and of course the national conversation launched last August seeks public views on these ideas and asks them what their priorities are.
"I would just contrast this with the rag, tag and bobtail motion written clearly on the back of a fag packet which has more to do with trying to save the seats of a number of Labour MSPs and has nothing to do with wanting to protect vital local services.
"Labour have no coherent health policy, bereft of ideas, nothing to offer the Scottish people - the paucity of their motion demonstrates that."
Scottish Conservative health spokesman Jackson Carlaw said the next Scottish Parliament will need to take some difficult decisions on health.
He said: "Do we in this election use that potential agenda of difficult decisions as a political football, or do we stand back and accept that it will require a degree of courage in the next parliament and for the Government to know that it has a broader level of support.
"If the Government can consult with the other parties, and involve us in the decisions that have to be taken, then we continue to take the view that in this election health must be removed from that political debate and a constructive approach is one that we have to follow.
"We commit in the election to maintaining a constructive approach in how we deliver that sustainable model of health in the next parliament."
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel