CWU Dissafiliation Campaign
Since coming to power the Labour government has shown that it does not represent the interests of workers. We have seen our cost of living rise while Labour continues the politics of austerity. We have seen that Labour will continue to line the pockets of the rich while making life harder for the most vulnerable in society.
We believe that the CWU should disaffiliate from the Labour Party so that our funds can support representatives who will act in the interests of workers and support the values of the CWU whether they are Labour candidates or not.
Rebuttal to the NEC Special Report: Labour Party Relationship.
The NEC Special Report attempts to present a balanced assessment of the Labour government while justifying continued affiliation. In reality, it exposes a contradiction at the heart of CWU’s political strategy.
The report acknowledges serious failures — yet proposes continuity.
1. Praising Reform While Excusing Structural Failure
The report highlights the Employment Rights Act and other reforms as historic gains. Improvements to employment law are welcome, and trade unions rightly campaigned for them. However, incremental legislative advances do not offset the wider political direction of the government.
The report itself admits:
• Failure to tackle wealth inequality
• Cuts to disability benefits and winter fuel allowance
• An economic strategy shaped by corporate influence
• A collapse in public trust
• Growing disillusionment among working-class voters
These are not minor errors. They reflect a deeper alignment with corporate power rather than structural redistribution.
If a government fails to address inequality, public ownership, and the erosion of the social contract, then selective policy wins cannot justify unconditional political loyalty.
2. The Affiliation Contradiction
The NEC argues that:
• Labour’s culture has become factional and exclusionary
• The government has failed to deliver transformative change
• Corporate influence distorts economic policy
• Working-class voters are drifting away
Yet the proposed response is to continue affiliation.
This is the central contradiction.
Political funding is leverage. By continuing to pay affiliation fees — even while abstaining from additional donations — the CWU signals that its institutional support remains guaranteed. That weakens our bargaining power.
Affiliation without consequence is not strategy — it is habit.
3. Members’ Money in a Cost-of-Living Crisis
CWU members contribute to the political fund during one of the most severe cost-of-living crises in decades. These are workers facing:
• Soaring housing costs
• Energy insecurity
• Wage stagnation
• Underfunded public services
Continuing to transfer substantial funds to the Labour Party while the government fails to materially confront inequality raises serious questions of accountability.
Political funding must be conditional on:
• Strengthening collective bargaining
• Advancing sectoral agreements
• Public ownership and economic democracy
• Meaningful redistribution of wealth
If those commitments are absent or diluted, funding should be reconsidered.
4. The Rise of Reform Is a Warning — Not a Justification
The report rightly criticises Nigel Farage and Reform’s divisive politics. However, the rise of Reform is not simply a communications problem — it reflects political vacuum.
When Labour does not materially improve working-class lives, space opens for right-wing populism. That vacuum cannot be filled by rhetorical opposition alone.
Continuing affiliation without demanding fundamental change risks tying CWU to the very failures fuelling political fragmentation.
5. Affiliation Restricts Political Independence
Continued formal affiliation does more than preserve a historic relationship — it narrows the union’s political field of operation.
By remaining structurally aligned to one party, CWU limits its freedom to engage openly and strategically with emergent political forces such as the Green Party of England and Wales, Your Party, and other developing working-class or community-based initiatives.
Even where these organisations advocate policies aligned with trade union priorities — public ownership, climate investment, democratic reform, redistribution — CWU’s formal affiliation creates an implicit barrier. Engagement risks being framed as disloyalty rather than strategy.
In a fluid and shifting political landscape, this is a strategic limitation.
If Labour’s electoral coalition is fragmenting and alternative forces are gaining traction, the union must retain freedom of movement. Our objective should be to advance members’ interests wherever leverage exists — not to anchor ourselves institutionally to a single political structure whose direction we openly criticise.
True leverage requires independence.
Independence would allow CWU to:
• Engage multiple parties on a conditional basis
• Support policies rather than party brands
• Build issue-based alliances
• Deploy or withhold funding strategically
Affiliation constrains that flexibility and risks positioning CWU as an appendage of one political organisation rather than an independent working-class force.
6. “Calling for Change” Is Not a Strategy
The NEC proposes to:
• Call for a significant change in direction
• Continue affiliation
• Withhold additional donations
• Work with other unions
But calling for change while maintaining financial commitment lacks credibility.
If “this cannot continue,” as the report states, then continuity of affiliation is not a turning point.
A genuine shift would involve:
• Consulting members directly on the future of affiliation
• Making funding explicitly conditional on policy commitments
• Developing an independent political strategy
• Building broader working-class alliances beyond one party
7. A Turning Point Requires Structural Change
Trade unions were not founded to be permanent financial partners of political parties. They were founded to represent and advance workers’ collective power.
Political relationships must serve that purpose — not tradition, not inertia, and not internal party dynamics.
If Labour wishes to rebuild trust with the trade union movement, it must demonstrate — through action — that it is prepared to confront corporate power, reduce inequality, and materially improve working-class lives.
Until then, continued automatic affiliation weakens the CWU’s leverage, restricts its independence, and limits its ability to engage with emerging political alternatives.
If this is truly a turning point, then it must involve more than rhetoric. It must involve structural change in how we deploy our political power.
The original report can be found here
Political Funding Must Be Earned: Lessons from Gorton and Denton.
The result of the Gorton and Denton by-election marks a watershed moment in British politics. The victory for the Green Party of England and Wales in what had been considered safe Labour territory is not simply a local upset — it is a political earthquake for the Labour Party.
Gorton and Denton has long been regarded as part of Labour’s electoral heartland. For the Greens to overturn that majority signals a profound rupture between Labour’s leadership and its traditional base. Voters who once lent Labour automatic loyalty are now prepared to look elsewhere — particularly when faced with a party that many feel has drifted from its founding principles.
Under Keir Starmer, Labour has prioritised “stability” and fiscal caution over transformative economic change. On issues ranging from public ownership to climate investment and workers’ rights, the leadership has often appeared more focused on protecting corporate profits than mobilising communities. The result is disengagement among activists and frustration among working-class voters — a vacuum the Greens are increasingly willing to fill.
For the trade union movement, this result should prompt serious reflection. Unions exist to advance the interests of their members, not to bankroll political parties as a matter of tradition. If Labour can no longer be relied upon to champion collective bargaining, public ownership, and meaningful redistribution, then continued financial support becomes harder to justify.
The Gorton and Denton result demonstrates that Labour’s historic coalition is fragmenting. When even core urban constituencies are willing to turn away, it signals more than protest — it signals realignment. Trade unions should take note: political funding must be earned through action, not inherited through history.
Labour is not going to save the NHS
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has accepted significant funding from donors tied to private-health interests, and his policy agenda aligns closely with those commercial priorities. His backing for expanded outsourcing strengthens companies such as Centene/Operose, Virgin Care, and Serco, while echoing the disastrous PFI model that enriched firms like Carillion, Skanska, and Balfour Beatty and left the NHS burdened with long-term debt.
Streeting’s position also accelerates the NHS’s dependence on Palantir, the US data-analytics giant now embedded at the heart of the NHS Federated Data Platform Under his leadership, Palantir’s footprint in NHS infrastructure has grown — a shift that critics argue hands unprecedented control over patient data and operational planning to a private, profit-driven corporation.
Taken together, Streeting’s donor profile and policy direction show a clear trajectory: deeper outsourcing, increased corporate influence, and the entrenchment of private actors — from traditional service contractors to powerful data firms like Palantir — at the core of our health system. This approach risks hollowing out publicly delivered care and driving the NHS further into a model shaped by corporate profits rather than public need.
Labour are not on your side
Since Labour took power in 2024, wealth inequality has continued to rise because the government has largely preserved the economic framework created under years of Tory austerity. Labour’s commitment to “fiscal discipline” has meant real-terms cuts in services, public-sector pay restraint, and no redistribution of wealth from the richest to the rest. Meanwhile, asset owners have continued to see gains from rising property values and investment returns, widening the gap between those who already hold wealth and those who don’t. In practice, Labour’s approach has extended the same policies that entrenched inequality, leaving working people facing growing financial insecurity.
No Support For Genocide!
Our campaign is clear: CWU should stop funding the Labour Party. Labour’s actions in Gaza are not an aberration — they are a stark demonstration of why workers’ money should no longer be handed to a party that acts against the principles of justice and solidarity.
Declassified UK has shown that the Labour government has actively enabled Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza. Under Keir Starmer, the UK authorised over 100 spy flights over the territory, providing intelligence that supported Israeli military operations. Arms-export approvals continued throughout the onslaught, ensuring components for F-35 jets and other weapons reached Israel. This is direct, taxpayer-funded support for mass civilian suffering.
Labour’s refusal to impose a full arms embargo — even as international courts warned of the risk of genocide — meant public money continued to facilitate intelligence cooperation, military alignment, and diplomatic cover. Legal experts argue that these decisions represent a misuse of public resources with potential implications under international criminal law.
Trade unions have contributed millions of pounds of members’ money to Labour. CWU members in particular expect their subs to back a political force that stands with oppressed peoples, not one accused by Palestinian human-rights lawyers of potential complicity in war crimes.
Keir Starmer and David Lammy, long criticised for their proximity to pro-Israel lobbying networks, symbolise a leadership fundamentally misaligned with trade-union values.
Our position is simple: the CWU and other unions must stop funding Labour. Gaza is not the only reason — but it is a defining example of why continued financial support can no longer be justified, just like Blair’s catastrophic and illegal war on Iraq, Labour's actions on Gaza expose the danger of backing a Labour Party willing to support mass violence abroad and austerity at home.
We use cookies to improve your experience and to help us understand how you use our site. Please refer to our cookie notice and privacy statement for more information regarding cookies and other third-party tracking that may be enabled.
© 2025 Your brand name
