2. What discussions has the Welsh Government had with the UK Government regarding the proposed centralisation of existing Department of Work and Pensions jobs at Treforest industrial estate? 169

Thank you. The leader of the house, as the Welsh Government lead Minister for Better Jobs Closer to Home, has made repeated representations to the UK Government, and in particular the Minister for employment, both in writing and in person, setting out the Welsh Government's serious concerns about this proposal.

I'm grateful for that, and I'll stand with my colleagues—Julie Morgan, Lynne Neagle, John Griffiths, Jayne Bryant and Dawn Bowden—who have raised concerns about the impact in their constituencies, and I also thank the work of the Public and Commercial Services Union who have worked very hard in ensuring that we have full knowledge of what is going on here. There was a letter from the Department for Work and Pensions, which was not as full in its explanation as we might like it to be. In Caerphilly, we've got 225 staff who are employed at the Caerphilly benefits centre. A number of my constituents work at other DWP sites in my colleagues' constituencies, and I'm quite sure that other Members will want to raise concerns—those I've not mentioned today. The closure of the DWP office on Castle Street in particular will have a detrimental effect on employment and footfall in Caerphilly town centre. It will take jobs away from an area close to residential premises, close to shops, at a time when we're boosting the Caerphilly town centre. This flies in the face of a very positive announcement today about tourism at Caerphilly castle, and no consideration has been given to the impact on how residents in Caerphilly will reach this site by car.

In the letter from the Department for Work and Pensions, they said that they want to maximise the retention of DWP colleagues—maximise retention of colleagues. It's clear, therefore, that they're actually anticipating losing some people who will not be able to get to the new location. So, we're actually going to see some new recruits at this new location, but they will categorically not be new jobs. It will make it much harder for people in Caerphilly to get there, and therefore, it is something of a misleading statement to even suggest that any of these would be new jobs.

Those that don't agree to the new premises will have to travel to work, as I've said, by car, and congestion in the Caerphilly basin is already a problem. I'd be very concerned to see issues added to that. It also flies in the face of our own stated ambition to bring better jobs closer to home, and what particularly concerned me was that the DWP letter talked about working with the 'Our Valleys, Our Future' strategy. It categorically does not do that. In fact, it does completely the opposite to that. And I was struck by the fact that the first letter I received from the DWP, from the UK Government, was addressed to David Hefin AM, which suggests that they know very little about the workings of this Assembly, and adds further outrage to the fact that they try to tie this announcement to a strategy that they likely know nothing about.

What can the Welsh Government therefore do to ensure that well-paid sustainable jobs remain in our Valleys towns, but, also, to dig deeper into what is really going on here, and the issues that I'm sure my colleagues would want to raise as part of this question?

I thank you for those questions and I couldn't agree more about the importance of having these kinds of jobs in our town centres, in terms of footfall in town centres and ensuring that we do have vibrant town centres. So, this news has come as a great disappointment. I completely agree with your comments about Better Jobs Closer to Home, and it's actually something that Julie James brought to the attention of the DWP in one of her earlier letters, where she says,

'These decisions go completely against the Welsh Government's policy for Better Jobs Closer to Home and will impact on some of our most deprived communities. We're working cross-Government to support people into employment in these areas and we also provide strategic investment to attract good jobs with clear career pathways for employees in our most disadvantaged areas. Therefore, the relocation of the DWP staff based in Cwmbran and the other offices earmarked for closure is a significant shift of good jobs in direct contradiction to this policy.'

So, Welsh Government is completely in accord with your assessment of the situation, in terms of it being very much opposed to what we are trying to achieve for the Valleys. 

You're quite right, David Hefin, that the Tories just don't understand the Valleys, and for this reason Julie James actually got a map of the Valleys out in order to demonstrate to Damian Hinds in a meeting that transport in the south Wales Valleys isn't perhaps as straightforward as you'd imagine it would be. But these arguments about how difficult it is for staff to be able to get the Treforest site just clearly didn't ring true to him, so they didn't have any impact on the decision that was made. 

In terms of any potential job losses, I would just give the Welsh Government's commitment that we would work proactively with individuals through our ReAct programme, and other programmes, in order to support people into new employment, but clearly this isn't where we would like to be. 

I would like to reinforce, Minister, that it does seem as if the UK Government is seeking political cover for the decision that they've made by trying to explain it, at least partly, in terms of aligning with Welsh Government policy on the location of jobs and relocation of jobs to the Valleys, because, as well as Better Jobs, Closer to Home moving in the opposite direction to that alleged rationale, we also have, of course, Welsh Government policy to regenerate town and city centres. In Newport, for example, some 370 jobs are located in Sovereign House in the city centre, in the benefits office, which would be relocated. So, that would then go against a policy of trying to find use for these city centre premises, and also take spend out of the local economy. So, it would be entirely opposed to a major strand of Welsh Government policy, and have a major impact on that local Newport city centre economy.

Thank you very much, and, again, completely agree that we need people living and working in our town centres to ensure that they are very much vibrant places. So, again, I completely agree with those comments and concerns that you have raised, about the impact that losing so many jobs from a town centre location could have on the ability of small businesses, for example, in the area to remain sustainable.

It also flies in the face of our Valleys taskforce working. Because, again, Julie James said to Damian Hinds that the DWP offices are in some of our most deprived communities in Wales. The Welsh Government established a ministerial taskforce in September 2016 to work with communities in the south Wales Valleys over the course of this Assembly term, with a focus on creating good-quality jobs in the Valleys, and the skills people need to access those jobs has been identified as an early priority. And she was extremely clear in saying,

'The action that you are proposing undermines this policy approach in Wales, which is about ensuring a share of the growth seen south of the M4 corridor is brought into the Valleys, and I urge you to reconsider your proposals to safeguard the jobs in these communities.'

So, your assessment that the UK Government is trying to seek some kind of cover behind Welsh Government policy is again correct, whereas we've been very clear with them throughout that what they're suggesting actually flies in the face of Welsh Government policy.

Minister, the decision to open a new base for the Department for Work and Pensions at Treforest has been welcomed by the Labour leader of Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council, coming as it does after announcements that Transport for Wales, Health Education and Improvement Wales, and the new Welsh Revenue Authority will all have their headquarters situated there—more likely the more employment and more traffic and more everything, development will go in that area, which is welcome news.

Will the First Minister welcome the department's assurance that it will look at alternative roles for those who currently work in Cardiff, Newport, Merthyr Tydfil, Cwmbran and Caerphilly who are unable to relocate to Treforest? And will she undertake to discuss with her colleagues measures to alleviate any potential job losses, such as public transport, to soften the impact on those communities, particularly in and around the south-east Valleys? Thank you.

I think that finding alternative roles for people who have found that their jobs have been moved to a place that is just completely impractical for them to get to would be the very least that a responsible employer could offer. There are going to be certain transport challenges, no doubt, in terms of people getting to the new site in Treforest, which is one of the reasons why Julie James was so clear in terms of providing the map to the UK Government Minister. We have had some confirmation, just in the past week, about the fact that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions says that the DWP will offer support with travel costs for a period of three years, for costs over and above existing costs. But, again, that is very little comfort for people who are facing their jobs being moved to somewhere that is beyond their own networks, and where they perhaps will be finding that their caring commitments will be interfered with, and so on.

I think the DWP's intentions for this relocation have been well known for some time, but it was due to a leak that we knew about the proposed site—it's only now just been confirmed. It's clear that, under this proposal, in my constituency alone, we're going to be losing more than 250—260 jobs, in fact—from Merthyr, to Treforest. And I'd reiterate exactly what Hefin and John have already said about that. Because, although most of these jobs are not being lost to the organisation, they are being relocated, and the towns that they are being relocated from will be hit economically, without any shadow of a doubt. You cannot take 260 jobs out of a town like Merthyr and expect there to be no impact at all.

Even though relocation is being offered to staff, for many, that's not going to be an option, because of the additional travelling times and costs involved in the move, and the difficulties that that's going to present for those with caring responsibilities, for example. And I've already had representations from constituents, saying that they're not going to be able to move for those reasons. And, indeed, the DWP themselves have identified to the Public and Commercial Services Union that at least 600 of those staff are going to be what they call 'outside mobility'; in other words, those are the ones that are not going to be able to be redeployed—600 staff are not going to be able to be redeployed. So, we would obviously be interested to know what's going to happen to them.

Like Hefin, I was also astounded to see the letter from the DWP to AMs whose constituencies are affected—they did get my name right, at least—saying that the move supports 'Our Valleys, Our Future', and that these would be bringing jobs to the Valleys. I've written back to the DWP to advise them—

Can you come to a question, please? 

—what our strategy actually needs, so that they know that it's not relocating existing jobs, but it is actually putting them in more accessible places.

The questions I wanted to ask were, firstly, whether the DWP has actually discussed with Welsh Government the plans for the relocation, which appear to be predicated on a private finance initiative project, or PFI-funded project, which, as we know, in the long term is going to be a huge drain on the public purse. And finally, if you could just repeat—. I think you were talking earlier on about some of the methods of assistance that might be available—the ReAct programme, and so on. What can be used for those people—those 600 people—who clearly are going to be displaced and not relocated as a result of this move? 

Thank you for those questions and, actually, one of the deep ironies of this is the fact that some of the places where jobs will be moving from are actually strategic hubs within our Valleys taskforce. So, it is just a completely nonsensical argument that the UK Government is in any way trying to support what we're trying to achieve for our Valleys communities.

You're right as well that the news first surfaced as a leak. Welsh Government had no notice of it, so the leader of the house was very clear that she was extremely disappointed that the UK Government didn't consult with the Welsh Government to seek alternative solutions prior to making decisions. And at every point she's been very clear that she's keen that her officials work with the UK Government to explore alternative solutions, including, for example, co-location where feasible with the Welsh Government. But, again, these offers to help and work collaboratively have not been taken up. 

The transport issues are very real in terms of people being able to move from your community to Treforest to take up their job. We've just had the statement on the decision of Virgin to close their Swansea plant, and offer some people jobs in Manila. Well, Treforest might as well be Manila for some people who are in this situation, because it's just completely unfeasible. 

I know that Julie James has offered to have some discussions looking at things like community transport options, and so on, but again these are just small efforts that we can make to try and make the situation better. But, at every stage, we have opposed this move.  

I'd like to thank Hefin David for raising this today and, as has been said, there's no doubt that this goes against the Welsh Government's plans for jobs closer to home. It will mean relocating 365 jobs from the heart of Newport, which will have a knock-on effect on the local economy and the footfall in the city centre. The staff at Sovereign House deserve better, and so do all the staff in other offices that are closing down in Wales.

The jobs moving to Treforest are not new jobs. This decision seems to have been drawn up by the UK Government with no understanding at all of the staff that they currently employ's commuting times, or the geography of Wales. Adding at least an extra hour each way on travel by train from Newport could put a huge pressure on parents and grandparents, and people with caring responsibilities. For those travelling by car, I understand that the planning application in Treforest only has 450 parking spaces, which seems totally inadequate for the 1,700 people who will work there. 

The UK Government have also failed to recognise the extra financial burden these workers will face because of further travel, although I hear what you've said today about it for a temporary time. But there's no doubt in my mind that this is a betrayal of all the experienced and loyal workforce in Newport. Is the Minister aware of any equality impact assessment by the UK Government, and what more can the Welsh Government do to support the workers and families who will bear the brunt of this terrible decision?  

I thank you for that question. I'm not aware of any equality impact assessment that has been undertaken by the UK Government, but I'm sure that this is something that the leader of the house will be pursuing with them now that the news has finally become formal regarding the proposed closures and the move of jobs. I just give you a guarantee that we'll work across Government to see what more we can do to support the communities that have been affected and particularly the individuals for whom moving to Treforest just isn't going to be a viable option.

Seven hundred and fourteen staff are affected from the Gabalfa site in my constituency of Cardiff North, and there are a high number of those staff who do have disabilities and do have caring responsibilities, so there is huge concern about how they're actually going to cope with this move. Can the Minister find out why a consultation hasn't already started with the staff? Because, as we know, this has been mooted for some time, and the staff do need maximum preparation for this move, so I'd be grateful if she could undertake to ask why this consultation hasn't already started with my constituents and all the other 1,700 people who are suffering in this way.

The other issue, of course, is the loss of expertise. I understand from talking to the PCS union that the staff are already under stress in terms of dealing with the welfare benefits changes that they are undertaking. So, what can we do to ensure that we do retain the expertise, because we are bound to lose a lot of people when this move takes place? And could she confirm that, in the costings from the DWP, all the costs of this move have been fully taken into account? Because there's going to be voluntary redundancy costs, potential compulsory redundancy costs, recruitment of replacement staff, new staff training costs, benefits costs for anyone who cannot find alternative work, and then, also, the impact on the local communities of losing those jobs in those areas, because it's going to have a huge impact on those areas.

It just seems an absolutely crazy policy to move jobs from places that are already struggling and suffering, and really to say that it's to be in line with the Valleys taskforce I think is absolutely disgraceful. So, I'd be grateful if the Minister could take up these issues and also the issue that Dawn raised about is this building being built by a PFI contract.

Thank you very much for those questions. I will certainly give you an undertaking to explore, alongside the issue of the impact assessment that Jayne Bryant mentioned, the other impact assessments that you have suggested and also the costs of the move. Certainly, I'll work with Julie James in order to get the kind of information that we now require, and either I or Julie will write to Members with the result of those investigations.

I agree that it's completely unfair of the UK Government to be keeping the staff in the dark about this and also to give them essentially a period now, looking towards 2021, of uncertainty. I think it's not the UK Government's intention to start consulting with staff until much closer to the time. I also understand that they're looking towards a phased movement, but, again, once we have more detail and more information about this, I'd be more than happy to share it with Members.

There is one aspect that will be interesting to Julie Morgan particularly, and this is in correspondence last week from Esther McVey, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, to the First Minister. She states that there will be capacity for 100 DWP staff to relocate to the Government hub that is currently being constructed in Cardiff, in Central Square. So, that might be of particular interest to Julie.

Thank you very much, Minister. Thank you.