I worked for Remploy from 2007 until 2011 so I can speak about the Remploy closures with inside knowledge. The factories can be made viable if politicians local and national have the will to make this happen. Unfortunately this country has a history of closing and selling off manufacturing whereas our partners in Europe especially Germany have retained a strong manufacturing base which has been hugely beneficial to exports.
The Remploy workforce is skilled in making many products. Extensive training is given to anyone wishing to better themselves. The Remploy factories are not institutions as some politicians like to think, they are work places where loyal workers want to put in a days work just like any other workplace. Unlike the House of Lords where most of the participants either fall asleep or don't attend but still get paid. I did not want to drag my comments down to this level but Government should look at its own back door first.
Remploy must be leaner, but not by reducing the workers. Central overheads need to be reduced and the factories need greater autonomy. I don't believe enough thought has been given to make the Remploy model work. I have spent over 40 years running factories so I speak from experience.
The figures given by Marie Miller don't add up. Very few of the workers can expect to get jobs so will have no choice but to go onto benefits. Empty factories will need to have security and there will be other hidden costs.
Lastly if the Coalition can spend billions each year on foreign aid, some of which will find its way into the pockets of corrupt governments, surely they can support Remploy until each of the factories is properly evaluated with involvement from the workforce so that the correct decision can be made. The government themselves could be putting more work into the factories.

The Labour Government didn't saddle the country with £1 trillion debt.
This was a bankers bailout.(50% of Tory funding comes from the banks)
Otherwise are we to blame Labour for every other country's debts?
The Tories achieved 33% of the vote from a 68% turnout. That in a time when Brown was the most unpopular leader for decades.
The British people are instinctively liberal.
The Tories only aim is to push wages down whilst maximising share dividends.
The Tories also changes their term to 5 years straight away when elected. Also making it take a 55% vote against them to make a vote of no confidence.
They allowed a man who is currently being investigated by Scotland Yard (Coulson) into the heart of government, whilst Cameron hung around with more criminal suspects in his private time.
The Tories did not put any of their policies before the British people.
If as they claim, the cuts were necessary, then why did both Cameron and Osborne vote with the Labour governments spending plans whilst in oppposition?
This is a coalition of corruption.
There is no other way a decent society could look at it.
We all contribute.
We all deserve something back.
To state that unemployment is in some way beneficial makes us look as idiotic as the neo-rightists standing for the Republican nomination in the US.

@ Ray, in the early 90's I pounded the streets of Speke, Toccy, Maghull, Bootle, Crosby, Fazack, Waterloo etc. etc. Canvassing for the REAL Labour party. When John Smith died we were instructed that although we had a good chance of winning the next General Election, we would have a better chance if we all nominated Tony Blair as new leader. I voted for Roy Hattersley as he was a man I had met on several occasions and who was an incredibly intelligent man with scruples to match. The rest is history. I find that opposing for opposition sake is lazy politics and when I was younger I looked up to the Dennis Skinners of the world who opposed skilfully with an intelligent, alternative argument rather than jumping on bandwagons as is the wont of most current politicians. Modern politics seems to be all about opportunism and spin rather than debate and substance and that was the basis for my comment earlier. To imply I am deluded shows your own limitations not mine and if we cannot get a better standard of politician (either in opposition or in Government) than the current swathe then politics is dead in this country and the money men have won!

I would like those who are vilifying my response to take note: I am a low paid, Labour voting worker who lives in constant fear of losing my own job under the current financial climate. I pointed out some FACTS about the reality of the closure of this particular unit and some of the others that are affected and asked if the Unions and Mr Reed wouldn't be better trying to gain a positive through initiative and alternative thinking. Were any of my comments untrue? Where do I say I am unsympathetic? I am simply being realistic and for that I am insulted and libelled. As for 'Observor's@ comments about me, I am surprised that anyone could issue such a vitriolous tirade against someone and have it published without knowing the person they attack nor their personal circumstances.

I'm not suprised that Jamie Reed has come out against this as;

a) He's a Labour MP and it's their job to oppose everything Tories do, even if it's a good idea.

b) He's a socialist who'd rather see companies employ a million people they can't afford than make redundancies - companies should provide jobs, not make money.

The original Remploy industries were segregating disabled people apart from mainstream society and paying them limited wages to make products that no-one wanted at a loss to the tax-payer. The money would've been better used to pay them disability benefit supplements and getting them a job in the mainstream employment market where they can be part of regular society.

Far from giving disabled people jobs and employment, these places hid the disabled away and paid them pittance to do work no-one wanted. It's changed over the years and now it's nothing more than a glorified employment agency supported by tax-payers money.

Anyone who denouces this move as 'despicable' or 'cowardly' evidently isn't aware of the real situation.

If a disabled person can work, then they don't need benefits. Split the money between helping companies employ disabled people (special facilities, tax-breaks, etc) and helping the disabled person with aspects of their lives they struggle with (mobility equipment, home appliances, etc). If a disabled person cannot work, then they do and rightfully deserve to be supported by society. Having some form of middle-ground where we treat disabled people like they cannot get jobs on their own is demeaning and discriminatory.

What is shamefull about this story is the unions jumping on the disabled band waggon and calling it barbaric etc,well unions equal rights in the workplace whether disabled or not and if that means unemployment to them they are no different an employee than anyone else who has lost their work due to the economy, shame on you for jumping on the disability bandwaggon afterall it is you and the pc brigade who wanted equality in the first place whether for the good or the bad.

anyone else feel dejavu. last time tories ran this country she destroyed it, then claimed she did everything she intended to do. the only difference this time is that it has balls. (i think). shame this countries people didn't have some to demand him stand down now, before its too late.

@craig you must be one of his millionaires that he protects, for comments like that - or you're simply deluded - until your income is effected, which it will be, when he gets to slice or stop your income levels.

Perhaps if the previous Labour government hadn't saddled the country with a £1 trillion (£1,000,000,000,000) debt there might have been money for worthwhile projects like this. The £11.4 Billion on the failed NHS computer system, £469 on the failed Fire Station project, £7 Billion lost selling off our gold reserves or the £1.4 billion whitehall spent trying to save £126 million would haven more than paid for it.

Why do people have short memories when it come to labour but long ones for the Tories?

@Observer - Very well said. This Government plays to the gallery of those, like Craig, who take pleasure in seeing those less advantaged than themselves worked over. As the viciousness of the cuts begins to bite even more, perhaps even the Craigs of this world will realise that this is an assault on all of us (well, those of us who aren't millionaires)- but beware, Craig, it may be too late to by then!

Come on, hands up, who voted this lot in because I know I certainly did not!