THE Scotland Bill proposals will see more powers and responsibilities coming to the Scottish Parliament but irrespective of how these new powers will be practiced, the debate about the scope of power and control will rage on. 

What is clear, however, is that the labour movement in Scotland must get on the front foot of the devolution debate rather than reacting to the eventual lie of the land. 

That’s why Unite made it clear in our contributions to the Smith Commission that we wanted the devolution of the necessary powers to improve justice in the workplace.  That’s also why we called the exclusion of these provisions from the commission’s recommendations a “missed opportunity.”

While the spotlight shone brightly on the economic and social debate — issues like income tax and welfare, important as they are — there was a distinct lack of debate over employment rights from anywhere other than the ranks of the trade unions. 

Now, following on from the Conservative election victory, that “missed opportunity” looks like a glaring omission because the future prospects for British employment rights are grim. 

No sooner had Sajid Javid’s feet crossed the door at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills than he announced that a trade union reform Bill would be brought forward in the first 100 days of the new government — including proposals to “modernise” trade union ballots and restrict the right to strike. 

The increase of ballot turnout thresholds is an attack on democracy, further exacerbating legislation concerning trade union freedoms that were already among the most regressive in Europe.

The mainstream rationale is that this will curb industrial action and union “militancy” to protect the fragile economic recovery but that in itself is a false flag to hide the bigger picture. The trade union Bill is not just about undermining workplace democracy, it’s also a tool for economic control and the continued imposition of the austerity agenda. 

It’s a fact that the hallmarks of the more prosperous and egalitarian economies include free trade unions with high levels of collective agreements and bargaining rights covering their workers. 

It is also fact that the assault on trade union and collective rights during the 1980s and early ’90s proved a significant driver in the increase of income inequality in Britain over the last 30 years.

There is a direct correlation between trade union decline and the rising gap between the rich and the poor and with it the ability to address this inequality. 

This is precisely why we have been arguing for the devolution of employment law to Scotland. 

We need an opportunity to demonstrate that the left can achieve something better than a programme of resistance while trying to fight the decline of employment incomes, standards and rights — which austerity only exacerbates — with both hands tied behind our backs. 

The current debate on further devolution presents us with that opportunity. We are told that we have a social democratic, left-of-centre consensus in Scotland. Well, if that is the case, let’s put it to the test because the challenges we face are plain.

The real value of full-time wages fell by £1,900 over the last five years, 250,000 people are classed as working poor, 100,000 people are employed on zero-hours contracts; and one in five children live in households blighted by poverty.

Yes, these conditions are reflected across the rest of Britain but let’s be clear, the current Westminster government is not going to bend or bow to proposals from the left of centre to remedy these inequalities — and we cannot wait for five years on a British Labour Party to get its act together either.

So on the question of devolution instead of debating “what if” our attitude should be “why not?” 

Why wouldn’t we want the powers to raise the minimum wage in Scotland, setting a target date for the convergence of the minimum wage and living wage rate to be implemented across our private and public sectors? 

Why wouldn’t we want the powers to create a new culture of employment relations in Scotland, where we could enshrine trade union freedoms in law and promote new approaches to collective agreements and bargaining as a driver for growth and prosperity? 

Why wouldn’t we want the powers to create a Scottish modern apprenticeship centre of excellence, with a compulsory target percentage of school leavers being recruited from the most deprived economic areas, to support and sustain the jobs and skills needed for our growth economic sectors?

Irrespective of whether you voted Yes or No in last year’s independence referendum or whatever your ambitions for the constitutional future, we have to be more ambitious and bold about how we can maximise the opportunities that further devolution and constitutional change will bring.  

Now, the devolution of employment law may not be forthcoming in the Scotland Bill but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be making the case for its future devolution — far from it. 

The labour movement has spent far too long being overly cautious and conservative in our ambitions for devolution and the future of Scotland and as a consequence, more people in Scotland are finding their activism and engagement in other circles.

We have to get on the front foot of the debate because the vast majority of the country is already there.  

So this is most certainly not about abandoning workers across the rest of Britain and neither is it about kowtowing to the SNP in absence of a Labour government or a robust Labour opposition.

This is about our relevance, our place and our role in the future of our country.

We can either get on the bus and make a compelling, modern and democratic socialist offering to tackle the gross inequalities in Scotland today — acting as a beacon for the left across the rest of Britain — or we can sit on our hands in protest while the opportunity passes us by.

It’s time for the labour movement to be brave, bold and lead by example from Scotland.

• Pat Rafferty is Scottish secretary of Unite the Union