All 1 Debates between Ann Clwyd and Alison Seabeck

Thu 15th Dec 2011

Remploy

Debate between Ann Clwyd and Alison Seabeck
Thursday 15th December 2011

(12 years, 11 months ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Ann Clwyd Portrait Ann Clwyd
- Hansard - -

I suspect that the situation is exactly the same in all our constituencies.

The GMB union, which also represents Remploy employees, argues that the voluntary redundancy scheme is not the answer

“to the real problems facing factory based supported employment in Remploy.”

It argues that the structure of Remploy is

“top heavy with senior managers and millions of pounds can be saved”

by reducing the numbers of managers and associated costs, such as their bonuses.

Alison Seabeck Portrait Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Moor View) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend is touching on the balance of posts within Remploy and whether the organisation is top heavy, and I share those concerns. Does she also share my concern that, if people are cast adrift—that is how families in my constituency feel about potentially not being able to go to Remploy—there will be the considerable additional costs, both to local authorities and the Government, of those people not being available and in work? Is she aware of any cost-benefit analysis that is being done by the Government to look at that impact?

Ann Clwyd Portrait Ann Clwyd
- Hansard - -

Again, many years ago when I was a Member of the European Parliament, I wrote a report for that Parliament on the social consequences of unemployment. I have been trying to dig out that particular report from the terrible filing system of my office, because, as I remember, the conclusions are absolutely as apt today as they were then. Nothing has changed in about 25 years. The conclusions will be exactly the same.