One of the candidates battling to become the next Prime Minister argued that Scotland was “heavily subsidised by the English”.
Energy minister Andrea Leadsom also railed against the “enormously costly layers of government” created by Scottish devolution.
The subsidy claims came in a 2007 blog criticising the SNP Government's decision to abolish university tuition fees for Scottish students.
Mrs Leadsom emerged earlier this week the surprise challenger in the fight for the Tory leadership, knocked Michael Gove out of the race exactly a week after he appeared to do the same to Boris Johnson.
Read more: Boris Johnson backs Andrea Leadsom for Conservative leader
The pro-Leave campaigner now faces a run-off with the Home Secretary Theresa May, who called for the UK to stay in the EU.
Around 150,000 Conservative party members will now hand one of them the keys to No 10 on September 9.
The SNP claimed that the comments showed that Mrs Leadsom was “itching” to cut Scotland’s funding.
SNP MSP Michael Russell, the convenor of the Scottish Parliament’s Finance Committee, said: “We know that elements of the Tory party have for years been itching for the opportunity to hammer Scotland’s budget even further – and Ms Leadsom is just the latest senior Tory to raise questions over Scotland’s funding in recent weeks, following hot on the heels of Michael Gove and several others.
“It’s imperative that both leadership candidates now make it absolutely clear that they respect the fiscal framework signed up to by both the Scottish and UK Governments just a few months ago – and if they fail to do so, people in Scotland will be under no illusions as to what they have in store for our budget."
He also said that when the choice for the next Prime Minister is between Mrs Leadsom and Mrs May it was clear that whoever wins "Scotland will lose.”
Meanwhile, a Tory peer added his voice to calls for a shorter leadership contest.
Lord Cormack described Mr Cameron as a "lame duck" Prime Minister and said that he should be replaced before September.
Former party chairman Grant Shapps is among dozens of Tory MPs also calling for a swifter process.
But some have suggested that the move could unfairly favour the higher-profile Mrs May.
She picked up another high-powered backer yesterday (FRI).
The Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said that she was the candidate who could keep Britain safe.
Read more: The Midge: Tory hopeful Leadsom is it Maggie, Maggie, Maggie, back, back, back?
He said: "I think at this point she has the experience, the track record, to take this country forward now, to stabilise the economy."
In the wake of the shock Brexit vote the Home Secretary has insisted she can unite the party.
But her call to stay in the EU was rejected by most of the party’s members.
Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson has said that she backs Mrs May, but called on her to guarantee that all EU nationals currently living in the UK would be able to stay.
Mr Johnson also put pressure on the Home Secretary to make the same commitment.
Mrs Leadsom has said that she would allow all those currently living here to remain.
But her opponent accused her of inexperience, saying the pledge would include foreign criminals.
Mr Johnson said: "I think Andrea Leadsom would do a great job because she understands the positive advantages of leaving the EU and how you can turn that to a great opportunity for our country.
"There's one very important thing I think that both candidates have got to make clear - that is that EU nationals living here now have absolutely no problem and they are welcome, they are a vital part of our economy.
"Andrea has made that clear I think but I think that Theresa should make that clear as well."
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