[R] signifies the Member has declared an interest. [W] signifies that the question was tabled in Welsh.

I have accepted an urgent question under Standing Order 12.66. I call on David Rees to ask the urgent question.

Will the Minister provide details of discussions the Welsh Government has had with Tata Steel and the UK Government following the announcement of Tata's intentions to suspend the sales process of its UK steel making operations? EAQ(5)0036(EI)

Yes. Can I thank the Member for his question?We are continuing our extensive dialogue with Tata and are continuing to press the UK Government on a number of points including appropriate relief from high-energy costs, which is more critical than ever to ensure our industries are competitive, as well as the need for a solution on pensions.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that answer and for his assurances that the Welsh Government is actually continuing its pursuance of the various aspects? However, as we all know, the steel industry has been in a challenging situation for many years. In fact, this year, in January, Tata steel announced 1,000 job losses; in March, it announced the possible sales of its UK operations. My constituents—my steelworkers, their families—have all had to suffer a hellish period of time, whilst we’re waiting for some certainty from Tata Steel. That certainty, last Friday, was thrown away because of that announcement last Friday that they will suspend the sale process and now go to a joint venture with a company that, apparently, according to analysts, they’ve been having discussions with for over a year on its Dutch operations, and they’re saying, themselves—Thyssenkrupp are actually saying—that we need to consolidate steel making in Europe, puts the fear of—excuse the term—God into people’s lives and they are worried about their future; they’re worried about the town’s future. We’ve had uncertainty hanging over us; we want certainty—we haven’t got it.

Will the Welsh Government now clearly immediately engage with the new Prime Minister to get that Prime Minister to actually agree (a) the pension scheme has to be reinitiated because after Brexit it seemed to be put on hold—it’s disappeared from the scene; we need the energy prices, as you identified already; we need to start looking at, perhaps, innovative ways—I know the party opposite mentioned that we could have perhaps joint ventures with the UK Government and private partners, because if Tata aren’t going to do something, we need to do it. I’m concerned because Koushik Chatterjee, who is the group executive director and Tata Steel’s district director for Europe, has actually stated that the global steel industry is vulnerable and he cannot give guarantees of job security in Port Talbot. He can’t even have guarantees of jobs in Port Talbot staying there, full stop. That, again, puts, in my view, a position that perhaps Tata are looking at an out. We want to know their actual environmental liabilities and their responsibilities according to those. I know that the Welsh Government has been pursuing the environment and protection scheme. What are the implications of Brexit on that? That needs to be clarified.

The blast furnaces. It’s all talk about the blast furnaces. We need those blast furnaces. One thing I want the Welsh Government to do is to look at every possible option to keep those blast furnaces lit and operational to ensure that we can continue to make steel in Wales and not simply recycle steel through our furnaces.

Perhaps you want to look at innovation as well, encourage businesses that come in through innovation. It has been mentioned many times, the innovation hub in Swansea. Let’s get on with it, and let’s, perhaps, put that on the table.

This is a question, so if you can—

I’ve got several questions.

Yes, I know. You’ve asked several already. If you can come to your final one.

I appreciate it, Llywydd, but I’m sure you’ll appreciate that the constituency is dominated—

I’ll have your final question. And I understand the importance of the question.

Final question, then. The trade unions have actually expressed to me their views. They phoned me today. They don’t want the sale process stopped. Will you negotiate with Tata and the UK Government to get the sale process back on line, if nothing else, in parallel with the other considerations they’re having?

First of all, can I thank the Member for his continued passionate defence of the Welsh steel industry? I fully recognise the anxiety and uncertainty that many, many families are going through. I, myself, grew up in a family that relied on steel for employment back in the 1980s. I know full well how much anxiety and uncertainty and distress it can cause when you don’t know whether you’re going to have a job next week, next month or next year.

First of all, we continue to work closely with the UK Government to ensure that there is a sustainable future for steel in Wales, but I can offer this assurance: there has been no announcement by Tata over a suspension of the steel sale process. That is ongoing in parallel already with the joint venture considerations. That’s one of the reasons why (a) I am meeting with one of the parties this afternoon and (b) why we need to ensure the UK Government remains committed to supporting a possible sale by another party.

Now, it’s my firm belief that, tomorrow, we will have a new Prime Minister in Britain. My message, or our Government’s message, to Theresa May would be simply: show your mettle in a way that Margaret Thatcher never did by supporting British streel. You can do that immediately, Prime Minister. You can do that immediately by resolving the crisis concerning energy costs that is affecting not just the steel industry but many other manufacturing sectors as well.

I don’t doubt the sincerity of the Cabinet Secretary, but I’m afraid that answer didn’t give the clarity that the Member for Aberavon was looking for and, even more importantly, as he would also agree, the clarity that steelworkers and their families are looking for. We’ve had a situation now where the chief financial officer of Tata Steel last night refused to give a guarantee over the future of Port Talbot. The chief executive officer of their prospective partner, Thyssenkrupp, has been quoted to saying that this a great opportunity to take capacity out of the steel industry. What’s driving this? What’s the motivation here? Take out capacity: that means a loss of jobs. Where is that axe going to fall? It’s not going to fall in Duisburg in Germany. It’s not going to fall in IJmuiden in Netherlands. It’s going to fall in Port Talbot and across the other Welsh and British sites.

So, I want an unequivocal statement from the Minister that, actually, far from being this salvation of the Welsh steel industry, this merger could be the means to its demise. As it currently stands, we must oppose this merger. The First Minister earlier talked about conditions. The only guarantee that is worth anything is if the equity stake that the UK and Welsh Government have talked about taking in Port Talbot has to be a golden share, where there is a veto on any future decision of the job losses in the Welsh and the UK steel industries. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree?

Finally, he has just announced to us that, actually—this is certainly breaking news—the sale process is not suspended. Well, if that is the case, is the financial support that the Welsh Government—and we supported on these benches—has given to the employee and management buy-out bid, which is, I think, a very, very strong and plausible bid, and it may be the real reason why Tata is walking away from the sale process, because they don’t want a competitor—? The Welsh Government has been providing financial support to that team hitherto. Will that support now continue along with the sale process?

I’d like to thank the Member for his question, and I accept much of what he says, but I’m surprised that he hasn’t seen from the Tata Steel news release from last week, actually, that they state in there, categorically, that they are also looking at a joint venture, not that they are looking at it instead of a potential sale. Now, we’ve said that we will work with anybody that offers steel in Wales a sustainable future. So, it would be neglectful of us to do as the Member wishes, which is to say, ‘Do not have talks with Tata and TK over a joint venture; oppose it and only speak to one or two of the potential buyers.’ That would be neglectful. We need to talk, from the outset, with anybody who is interested and willing to give a Welsh steel making a sustainable future. To do otherwise would be neglectful.

Cabinet Secretary, a few weeks ago, I asked the First Minister whether the support package that Welsh Government had put forward, including the possible acquisition of a share—that package put together, of course, to encourage credible buyers for the Port Talbot works—would still be available to Tata were it not to sell. So, I’d like you to give a clear commitment today on what your position is on that now.

Has Tata asks Welsh Government for anything new by way of support since or immediately before the suggestion that it may change its mind about a sale in the near future? In particular, have you been asked for anything or encouraged to offer support if Tata’s future is to be predicated on some sort of joint venture with Thyssenkrupp? What commitment have you had from Tata about how long this change of heart might last? Is it just breathing space for Tata to improve its bottom line with a view to improving its chances of a joint venture, or is it something more stable and, at least, medium term? Because you’ll be aware, Cabinet Secretary, that there’s, shall we say, serious concern about the disingenuousness of Tata and its behaviour in the last few months, and an even deeper concern about the role, potentially, of Thyssenkrupp in this, bearing in mind their statement within the last six months that they would seek to close certainly the Port Talbot end of any operations they were involved in were they to take on Tata’s interests.

Can I thank Suzy Davies for her questioning and say that we have been clear throughout with Tata that any support offered would be conditional upon safeguarding of jobs and sustainable steel production here in Wales, not just for the short term, but for the longer term as well? That support is on the table, as I’ve said already. We are willing to work with anybody who is willing and determined to ensure that there is a long-term, sustainable future for steel in Wales. I have asked for, and it’s been accepted, an urgent meeting with Tata. I expect to meet with them very soon. Insofar as any alternative potential purchase is concerned, we, again, would work with anybody that can guarantee a sustainable future for the Welsh steel industry.

I’m sure that the Minister will join me in congratulating the Member for Aberavon on the eloquent, passionate and, indeed, moving defence of his constituents’ interests today. I certainly was very moved by what he had to say, but I’m afraid that the certainty that he seeks is simply not available. Mr Chatterjee, who is Tata Steel’s executive director for Europe, has made it perfectly clear that the fundamental problem here is volatility in the market, which is largely produced as a result of overcapacity in China. Unfortunately, the Welsh Government is paralysed by a lack of political will on the one hand, and legal constraints, whilst we remain members of the European Union, from doing anything practical to resolve the uncertainties that exist. But what we need to do—I hope he will agree with me in this respect—is to recover our ability to negotiate trade deals on behalf of this country in itself and also to use the powers that the World Trade Organization gives to its members to impose anti-dumping duties of sufficient gravity to prevent the undercutting of the prices of steel that is made in Britain. We do have a certain amount of latitude on energy prices, but, of course, the crazy energy price regime imposed by the last Labour Government, under the Climate Change Act 2008, makes it very difficult for us to do that. So, why doesn’t the Cabinet Secretary come clean here and tell us that there is nothing he’s actually willing to do that is of any practical use to Mr Rees’s constituents in Aberavon?

I found the Member’s contribution pretty appalling. At a time when we should be dropping the political opportunism, and ensuring that there is a long-term solution for Welsh steel, the Member always goes back to the default position of either blame everything on Europe or embrace the idea that the free market can solve everybody’s worries. The fact of the matter is, in terms of duties, in 2016, provisional dumping duties were imposed on imports into the EU—this is before the vote—of cold-rolled sheet and coil from China and Russia and reinforcing bars from China, and these investigations continue. We will be outside of Europe soon and it’s going to make it more difficult to impose tariffs of the sort that we wish to impose, by the whole of Europe, on China.

And insofar as offering that reassurance and hope to the constituents of David Rees is concerned, this Government has done everything within its power, and will continue to do so, to ensure that there is a safe, sustainable future for his constituents, and for the steel industry right across this country—in the north, south and all over Wales. It’s simply unacceptable for the Member to talk down the prospects of the steel industry in the way that he does, when the problem with energy prices can be resolved by the UK Government.

Minister, I share the scepticism about the medium-term interests of Tata. They’ve been playing a game of hokey cokey with us. They’ve been in and they’re out, and they’re in again. Given that Gerry Holtham has estimated that the contribution of Port Talbot to the Welsh economy is the equivalent of 6 per cent of gross value added, it’s important that Tata understands that this is not a cost-free option for either the Welsh economy or for them. And would he give us assurances that any future financial packages that they seek will be tied to future guarantees of investment, and that they’ve been made fully aware of the environmental and social costs that they will have to bear of any further game playing? I think it’s time we showed some steel.

Yes, I would agree with the Member. The support that’s on the table is conditional on a number of factors. The support contains environmental improvement programmes, and we are absolutely and utterly committed to ensuring that the environment is improved. In terms of the support that we’re offering, we would expect it to be, and that will be the case moving forward.

Cabinet Secretary, I heard what you said in response to Adam Price about the situation whereby the companies are currently still open to negotiating with Tata in relation to the buy-out. In another article online, it says that alternative and more sustainable solutions are being sought by Tata. Does this not then mean that they have decided that they are not compelled by the arguments being put forward by these companies that they are able to take the Port Talbot plant, and other plants in Wales, forward? We need to understand, if they are going to go back to the table to these alternatives, if they do not find success with Thyssenkrupp on a German level. If we do not get that guarantee, then we need to have an understanding as to where Tata go in the future. They have said to me that there is intent to make sure that Port Talbot jobs are retained, but that doesn’t give enough of a guarantee to me that that is their final intention. So, I would want to join with Members to make sure there is a formalised deal in place to make sure that those Welsh plants are retained and sustained for the future before any future financial backing is given by your Government to Tata.

And my other question was: in this climate whereby talks are continuing in a different way, how can you assure us that companies locally around Tata Steel are not going to suffer in this complex environment? I’ve heard, in the last week alone, that two companies have gone into liquidation, who work with Tata Steel. I’ve asked Tata for more information on this, because I can’t get hold of the companies in question at the moment, probably due to the fact that they have gone into liquidation. But, we can’t lose more jobs in the area at the moment, when jobs around Tata are so valuable to local people. So, I would want to hear what you have to say on that, as well as making sure that any talks with this new joint venture have formalised agreement from both you and the UK Government.

Can I thank the Member for her questions, and say that, with the alternative still on the table and under consideration, I wish to continue talking with some of those potential buyers? And that’s why I’ll be talking with one today, and why I wish to also speak urgently with Tata Steel themselves.

Backing, any backing, will be conditional on long-term job security, and, insofar as the supply chain is concerned, the Member is right to identify unease and uncertainty in the supply chain, and that’s why the business and supply chain has established a business and supply executive team, comprising of Industry Wales, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Welsh Government and Business Wales, who are all contacting and, where appropriate, exploring assistance to supply chain companies. There’s no doubt that this is a very difficult time for many engaged in the supply chain. The team is continuing to contact companies and offer support, and the team is focused on those companies with the highest value orders with Tata, including also the work of the Tata Steel taskforce, which has been discussing the growing impact of the situation on the supply chain in general.

Secretary, as well as Port Talbot and other sites in Wales, workers at the Llanwern and Orb works are very anxious regarding their future livelihoods, and the futures of their families, given the ongoing anxiety and threat. You will know that top-quality products are produced in Newport, such as the steel for the car industry at the Zodiac plant at Llanwern, and the electrical steels at the Orb works. Will you agree with me that, when considering the future of Tata’s operations in Wales, those operations need to have their due place in the discussions, and that you will be considering all Tata Steel sites in Wales as part of an integrated approach, in taking part in discussions, and, indeed, in taking action?

Yes. And can I thank John Griffiths for his questions? The destiny of any one plant in Wales is conditional, if you like, on the destiny of the whole Welsh steel family. And it’s my belief that Welsh steel right now is in a strong position; it has a bright future, provided it continues to get the support of Welsh Government and UK Government. The investment that the Member talks of, I think, should apply not just to one site, but to many sites, all of which employ a highly skilled workforce and people who are extremely loyal to Tata, and, in return, Tata should be loyal to them.

And, finally, Russell George.

Cabinet Secretary, one of the ways in which the Welsh Government could support and assist the company, as it pauses for thought over the sale of the business, is through business rate relief. In April, I believe the Welsh Government said then that it could not apply for a temporary rate relief because it was, effectively, hamstrung by European Union rules at the time. Now, following Brexit, clearly we’re in a different position. Can I ask what discussions that you’ve had—or your officials have had—with the UK Government, relevant bodies at EU level, and with Tata, to revisit the potential for rate relief?

The Member, Russell George, makes a valuable contribution, and I can say that we are actively evaluating a number of measures to support the steel sector with business rates, and we’re testing these against the current existing state aid law. But, of course, we take note of what happened in the EU referendum and we are also liaising, especially with the UK Government, on how business rates can be utilised to ensure that steel has a future.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.