I use public chargers in Angus, Dundee and Fife. For a 30kWh charging session in the respective locations the cost would be:-
Angus - 23p x 30 = £6.90 (fees due to be introduced shortly)
Dundee - 15p x 30 + 38p* = £4.88
Fife - 15p x 30 + £1.60* = £6.10
*connection fee.
I really do wonder why one authority can offer the same charge at a cost which is so much lower than the other two at infrastructure, parts of which are within a six mile radius of each other. If the same differences were applied to petrol stations, two of them would go out of business in pretty short order.

Pretty simple, it's how they choose to balance the books. Dundee approach EV charging as part of the need to clean up the air in the city, with funding from other budgets to support it. Fife turn no surplus on the power for maintenance of the assets, with the connection fee covering the loss of parking revenue(!) as parking is free while charging. Angus turn a surplus to cover maintenance and repair costs. Have a look at the tariff guide elsewhere on the site. East Lothian, Midlothian, Highland have adopted the model the Association recommends.

So it appears that the cost of fuelling our vehicles is a matter of chance, determined entirely by where in Scotland we live. For approximately 30% of us who can’t, not won’t, have a home charger, the higher kWh fees imposed by some councils may be a significant hurdle to the uptake of BEVs by those who must use public charging. Asking us to pay three, four or even five times as much as our neighbour down the road who has off street parking may be too much to ask. The two tier system of the “haves” and “have nots” has been identified by official bodies but I have yet to see any proposals to address the issue in the short term. I’m driving my third EV but when I come to change it next year, the financial implications of owning a BEV will, unfortunately, determine the choice of my next car.

Always going to be a conundrum. Pilots such as Agile Streets seek to address this, offering low(er) cost on street charging. The postcode lottery effect is down to the choices made by local authorities. The Association has been raising this issue regularly, with some successes. Or tariff model seeks to address this, while also recognising the cost of provision. Ideally seeking to have on street charging priced as closely as possible to home charging. Taking into account the capital costs and required maintenance, warranty and admin, it will always be higher.
Charging at #JourneyChargers will always be more expensive, reflecting the higher levels of capital investment and more expensive maintenance costs. A quick comparison with commercial charging networks shows that the Local Authorities are generally offering good value.
It is a complex marketplace, with some LAs likely to need to invest significantly in equitably priced charging for those who cannot charge at home, while others will require almost no investment in this area. Most private enterprise sees no margin in AC charging, so is far less likely to invest in it, unless forced to by legislation/regulation. Which creates scenario where LAs are seen as requiring to provide the safety net. Which is not unreasonable provided appropriate funding can be found.
A further key part is to ensure that driver behaviour shifts away from "filling up" to plug in and take what is available from smart managed charging to get best value. If we ask run around looking for high power chargers to enable the old model of filling the tank, we will all see the cost of electricity go up.

Appreciate that this will not fully answer your point, but changes will come to address this, but it is a long game, with more involvement from employers, authorities and utilities required to address these issues.

Deliberately and consciously not going down the rabbit hole of those who can afford PV at home, that's a far longer and more complicated conversation.