Why Do The Unions Fund New Labour?

Over at Conservative Home, Tony Makara, a regular contributor, writes:

What surprises me most is that the unions even want to be associated with the Labour party anymore. After all, class distinctions have widened under Labour. The poor are denied access to basic health care like dentistry. The unemployed are forced to work for 50pence an hour under the work-experience part of the NewDeal. Unemployment has risen under Labour with youth unemployment up by an astounding 20%. Our inner-city suburbs are crumbling and family life is falling apart.

This Labour government has hit the poorest sections of our society the hardest, while at the same time Labour have looked after their wealthy donors. I was raised in a socialist household and most of my family subscribe to ideas of wealth distribution and making life better for the poor. So I have seen their disgust at this Labour government and can compare that with the hope and optimism they had in may 1997. Most Labour supporters and most rank and file Labour members are disgusted with this 'Animal Farm' Labour government and its attacks on the poor. So why the union barons still continue to back Labour defies all conceivable logic.

The unions should identify 10 “dream” policies and 10 “nightmare” policies, with 10% funding to any candidate (regardless of party, if any) for subscription to each of the former, minus 10% for failure to rule out each of the latter. Union and other money should also fund the development and delivery of a qualification for “non-graduates” with life and work experience who aspire to become MPs.

Just as well that there is a real party of labour, of everyone who works for a living, of everyone who can be sacked.