HC Deb 03 February 1953 vol 510 cc1633-5
12. Mr. Padley

asked the Minister of Labour for what reasons the Remploy factory at Maesteg has been closed; and what plans he has for securing employment for the seriously disabled persons in the district.

Mr. Watkinson

The small factory at Maesteg has been found uneconomic to operate and the 11 workers concerned have been transferred to the larger factory at Bridgend. I cannot offer any immediate prospect of an expansion of Remploy activities in the area.

Mr. Padley

Is the Minister aware that in the district there is a strong suspicion that the imposition of charges upon surgical boots is leading to this unfortunate occurrence, in so far as the workers concerned were employed on the making and repairing of surgical boots; and is he further aware that the latter part of his answer means that something like 60 seriously disabled persons in that area have virtually no opportunity of getting jobs in the near future?

Mr. Watkinson

I think that the hon. Gentleman will admit that this is really the end of an experiment which was started about four years ago to try to use local village halls and local buildings for very small Remploy units. Unfortunately—and my right hon. and learned Friend regrets it as much as I do—that experiment has not proved a success. I think that the hon. Gentleman will know that the Ferndale factory had to be closed in April, 1951, for the same reason, and that it had nothing to do with the reason which he has advanced to the House

As to the second part of his Question, I am afraid that we must face the facts that the immediate task in front of Remploy is to re-organise and consolidate its position in order that it may start in a proper manner and give reasonable employment to the people which it now employs. My right hon. and learned Friend did say, in answer to a Question in this House recently, that there was no opportunity for increasing the factories engaged in Remploy until that reorganisation and consolidation had been carried out.

Mr. Fernyhough

Does the answer mean that where Remploy is not self-supporting it will be closed down?

Mr. Watkinson

No, it means nothing of the sort. In the interests of Remploy and of all those who work for it, we look most carefully into these matters and try to make it as efficient as possible for the sake of the men who work for it.

16. Mr. K. Thompson

asked the Minister of Labour how many disabled persons are at present employed in Remploy factories on Merseyside; how many suitable men and women are waiting appointment in such factories; and what increased facilities are planned in the near future.

Mr. Watkinson

The number of severely disabled persons employed in the two Remploy factories on Merseyside at 15th December, 1952, was 164. At the same date, the number of unemployed severely disabled persons on Merseyside who would be eligible for consideration, but not necessarily suitable, for employment in a Remploy factory, was 332. I am afraid I cannot hold out hope in the near future of any increase in the number of Remploy factories.

Mr. Thompson

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that this figure of 332 is really a serious one, and is only part of the general problem of unemployment on Merseyside? May we have his assurance that he will constantly bear this figure in mind?

Mr. Watkinson

I shall be very pleased to do that, and I do not want anything that I have said to imply that my right hon. and learned Friend and I do not look on Remploy with the greatest sympathy, but we must have some priority, and, unfortunately, the first one is to try to put the organisation as a whole on a rather more efficient footing.

Mr. Ellis Smith

Does the Minister agree that there is a certain amount of works development within a reasonable radius of Merseyside, and, if so, will he give special attention to that in the hope of providing employment in these factories for disabled men?

Mr. Watkinson

I should like to thank the hon. Member for that suggestion, and I will bring it to the attention of Remploy.