The Labour Party I joined in 2006, when I was 15, was ambitious to use the powers of devolution.

Scotland's political impotence under Margaret Thatcher's long reign was folklore. Holyrood was the natural home of politics in Scotland.

Margaret Curran (Agenda, October 31) is right that much was achieved in those early years of the Scottish Parliament. She is right that "the partnership between the UK and Scottish governments was central to that, as was the underpinning of public spending agreed through the Barnett formula". Under a prosperous New Labour Government at Westminster, health, housing, care and education policies were essential tools for enhancing Scottish society.

She is also right to speak in the past tense. The first set of Labour MSPs may have sought to repair the Thatcher legacy and renew Scotland for the future, and their effort was sincere, but we are learning that Conservative damage goes deeper than the powers of devolution can cure. With a Tory-led Government cutting budgets, privatising services and dismantling welfare support, our devolved administration mostly has to resist and protect some early gains of the Scottish Parliament with shrinking Barnett budgets.

The limits of the Scottish Parliament were becoming clearer even before the last General Election. In 2008 I campaigned for Margaret Curran in the Glasgow East by-election. After a decade of devolution parts of Shettleston were still blighted by low-pay, no-pay cycles, chronic health patterns that stunted lifespans and lifestyles and child poverty rates of almost one in three. It's not for want of trying that devolution has not renewed such parts of Scotland: toxic problems require stronger solutions than the Scottish Parliament can offer.

The Scottish Labour leadership often says we need powers for a purpose but opposes bringing full powers to Scotland. Donald Dewar said it's what we do with our Parliament, not what we do to it. But to do right with our Parliament, we need powers over the economy; full powers to secure and improve the livelihood of ordinary people.

In campaigning for this we carry the natural support of people in Scotland. According to the Social Attitudes Survey, people trust Scottish Governments to make better decisions than Westminster. A poll in September confirmed that people generally believe powers over tax and welfare should be located in Scotland.

This is why there is natural Labour support for a Yes vote next year. The welfare state is being dismantled beneath us and corporations are cutting wages of people already on the breadline. Underemployment leaves thousands of people, especially women, without economic security.

More people are aware that good policies of devolution (social housing expansion, free education, a public NHS) are undermined by Westminster, and that to change Scotland we need independence.

We don't have time to ponder devolution when people in constituencies like Margaret Curran's are being crushed by Tory policies.This is what I want to know: what would Scottish Labour do with the limited powers of devolution to reverse the Tory impact on people's lives? Those who campaigned for the Scottish Parliament are rightly proud of their achievements. But they have a blinkered view if they insist Scotland has the powers it needs to change the lives of ordinary people. In times to come I will be all for an audit of devolution but I suspect it would raise uncomfortable issues for a Labour Party opposed to radical extension of powers to Scotland.

The regime of alternating Tory-Labour governments is the Westminster rule. This is why many Labour members and voters are campaigning for independence: to change this history, with common powers to renew Scotland on the basis of shared prosperity, economic security, and social justice. Margaret Curran says Donald Dewar's ambition "wasn't about a continuing constitutional battle; it was about changing Scotland". So is ours.