I won't repeat articul8's points, which I think have dealt with most of the meat of this discussion, but it is worth pointing out that this last point above is spurious. It is quite obvious that having the backing of trade unions doesn't make a party into a workers party, as examples as wide ranging as the US Democrats and the old Liberal Party show. New Labour apologists on the left are therefore left arguing, as Fisher_Gate does above that having trade union affiliations is what makes New Labour different.
Nigel. I dont want to risk your wrath because I enjoy your posts.
I just wish to point out that it is not just affiliation that is important. In the LP the unions are affiliated AND have a constitutional say in policy ( even though this say is ignored)
If the SP is trying to build a new workers party on affiliation alone without considering what that affiliation represents in terms of members and what their say means then I think you dont understand the idea of a workers party.
Dont get me wrong, I am all for real working class representation. Lets just have an organisation connected with the workplaces because that is where the working class are.