An article from our latest policy bulletin is below (27.04.12). The full bulletin can be found at: Issue 58 E-Bulletin (Rich Text). Our older bulletins are at the bottom of this page.
Breakthrough UK's Position on the REMPLOY Factory Closures
Current discussions about REMPLOY tend to follow two approaches: the first one is that the government is castigated for targeting disabled people for job losses - disabled people with little chance of finding future work either because of the economic situation, because of employer reluctance, or because they are 'too disabled' to survive in open employment.
The second approach is that REMPLOY factories provide segregated employment, which is not an appropriate solution to the unemployment that disabled people experience, nor does it support people towards independence or foster their opportunity to be responsible citizens.
For more than forty years the disabled peoples' movement has argued in favour of an end to segregated employment, demanding better educational opportunities, better training, and better career progression for disabled people. It is ironic now to see some disabled peoples' organisations making the case for keeping REMPLOY factories open: where is the analysis, we wonder, where is the application of the social model? Because a lot of disabled people think REMPLOY factories should remain open, does that make it the right option?
Breakthrough was originally part-funded by the closure of a segregated employment project, after full consultation with disabled people in Manchester. Whilst we do not support the enforced loss of livelihood for disabled people, neither do we believe that segregated employment should continue. We do believe that no disabled person should start employment at REMPLOY from now on; that the government should strongly consider how existing factories can be handed over to the control of disabled people; that support to develop them into successful businesses should be provided; and that support for current REMPLOY staff at threat should be exemplary. Above all, we believe there should be more debate about these issues with disabled people and their own organisations.
2012 E-Bulletins
Issue 58 E-Bulletin
Issue 57 E-Bulletin
Issue 56 E-Bulletin
2011 E-Bulletins
Issue 55 E-Bulletin
Issue 54 E-Bulletin
Issue 53 E-Bulletin
Issue 52 E-Bulletin
Issue 51 E-Bulletin
Issue 50 E-Bulletin
2010 E-Bulletins
Issue 49 E-Bulletin
Issue 48 E-Bulletin
Issue 47 E-Bulletin
Issue 46 E-Bulletin
Issue 45 E-Bulletin
Issue 44 E-Bulletin
Issue 43 E-Bulletin
Issue 42 E-Bulletin
2009 E-Bulletins
Issue 41 E-Bulletin
Issue 40 E-Bulletin
Issue 39 E-Bulletin
Issue 38 E-Bulletin
Issue 37 E-Bulletin
Issue 36 E-Bulletin
Issue 35 E-Bulletin
Issue 34 E-Bulletin
Issue 33 E-Bulletin
2008 E-Bulletins
Issue 32 E-Bulletin
Issue 31 E-Bulletin
Issue 30 E-Bulletin
Issue 29 E-Bulletin
Issue 28 E-Bulletin
Issue 27 E-Bulletin
Issue 26 E-Bulletin
Issue 25 E-Bulletin
Issue 24 E-Bulletin
Issue 23 E-Bulletin