Item 5 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Economy and Transport on Tata Steel. I call on the Minister for Economy and Transport, Ken Skates. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Yesterday, I issued a written statement following a press release from Tata Steel outlining details of their proposals for transformation of the European business. Today, I would like to take this opportunity to update Members on this announcement, which I know will be of concern to many of you and your constituents.

Following the announcement in May of this year that the proposed joint venture between Tata Steel and ThyssenKrupp would not be going ahead, Tata announced that it was working with restructuring consultants to develop a new transformation plan. Yesterday’s statement from Tata Steel is the first announcement the company has made concerning the outcome of their transformation planning. 

The statement said that the programme was needed to urgently improve the company's financial performance to make sure the European business becomes self-sustaining and cash positive, whilst enabling investment to safeguard its long-term future. 

The statement sets out the four areas on which Tata intends to focus to improve financial performance. These include improved sales and product mix, efficiency gains by optimising production processes, reduced procurement costs and lowering employment costs. As part of the focus on lowering employment costs, Tata steel has announced an estimated reduction in employee numbers of up to 3,000 across its European operations. It is expected that about two thirds of these roles will be office based. 

The statement does not provide any information on the geographical spread of job losses or timescales for implementation. However, I have today spoken with the company and I was told that further work will take place in the coming months to identify, function by function, what jobs will be lost. Then, an assessment on the site-by-site impact will be made, with implementation by March 2021. Regular discussions will continue to ensure that we, as a Welsh Government, offer full support to people directly employed across the six sites in Wales and indirectly employed within the supply chain.    

In terms of job losses in Wales, we will do everything that we can to support those affected, and our ReAct programme stands ready to provide assistance to workers across the Welsh Tata Steel sites, including co-ordinated support from local partners. The Welsh Government remains committed to working with the company and trade unions to secure a long-term future for steel making in Wales. 

The statement follows the disappointing news on 2 September concerning Tata Steel’s proposed closure of the Orb Electrical Steels site in Newport. The First Minister and I both visited the Orb site on 13 November to meet with the Community union, which has worked with consultants Syndex to produce a report outlining an alternative to the closure of Orb. Following this visit, I spoke directly to Henrik Adam, chief executive officer of Tata Steel Europe, and raised the importance of allowing sufficient time to consider Community’s proposal and, indeed, any other offers that come forward that might offer a viable future for the plant. I will continue to press the company on this very point.

The steel sector continues to face a huge range of challenges, both globally and domestically, including global overcapacity, rising carbon and raw materials prices, slowing sales, increased imports, high energy prices in the UK and a downturn in demand from key supply-chain sectors such as automotive.

In the face of these challenges, the Welsh Government has provided significant support to the steel industry in Wales over the past three years. Specifically for Tata, in 2016 we provided £11 million in skills funding, of a total offer of £12 million. In addition, we've also offered £8 million investment to support the Port Talbot power plant plans and £660,000 for research and development into new products.

More widely, we have supported the steel industry by providing £2 million of funding for the establishment of the steel and metals institute at Swansea University; we've published a procurement advice notice supporting the sourcing and procurement of sustainable steel in construction and infrastructure projects in Wales; and, of course, we became the very first signatories to the UK steel charter. We have also provided £6.8 million in funding to Celsa Steel for environmental improvement projects for the company's sites here in Cardiff.

I am proud to say that the Welsh Government has demonstrated its steadfast support for the steel industry and has done everything within its power to support the sector. It is now time for the UK Government to do the same and play its part in supporting the steel industry, which is a vital strategic sector for the UK as a whole, sitting at the foundation of many supply chains including construction and automotive.

I continue to call for the UK Government to take action on non-devolved areas such as energy to address the huge electricity price disparity between UK steel producers and their European counterparts, and the adverse impact this has on competitiveness.

I also continue to press the UK Government to urgently progress a sector deal or equivalent for steel, to provide the foundation for a sustainable industry. The sector is calling for certainty around Brexit and its No. 1 ask of Government is tariff-free access to EU markets. Both the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language and I continue to raise Brexit-related trade issues with the UK Government at every opportunity.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I wrote to Andrea Leadsom, Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy on 8 October, asking her again to convene a meeting of the UK Government, Welsh Government and the steel industry, along the lines of the UK Steel Council. I was pleased when the Secretary of State agreed to convene a UK Steel round-table to take place on 24 October, but I was extremely disappointed and frustrated that with less than 24 hours to go, the meeting was cancelled.

Yesterday’s announcement is further proof that the steel industry in Wales and across the UK is continuing to face an extremely challenging operating environment. The UK Government must now treat the situation facing the steel industry with the urgency and importance that it deserves, by reconvening the steel round-table at the earliest opportunity and taking decisive action to address some of the issues facing our steel producers.

Can I thank the Minister for his written statement and his statement today? And, of course, I would agree with him that this announcement yesterday will be very worrying for the workforce of Tata Steel in Port Talbot and other locations around Wales.

I'm pleased you've had an initial discussion today, and in that discussion, was there any indication of how this announcement may affect the skilled workers at Welsh sites? You mentioned a couple of months as the timescale for analysis to take place on a function-by-function basis. That's what you mentioned took place in your conversation this morning. Did you get any sense of when an update may be expected, and were there any other commitments made to you during that conversation? And what discussions did you have in influencing this process, if you like, for the benefit, of course, of the Welsh sites in your conversation this morning? 

There has been a significant amount of cross-party consensus to support our steel industry to date, and I'm sure the Minister will agree that we don't want to lose this in the heat of a general election.

I was also pleased, like you, that the Secretary of State agreed to convene the UK Steel round-table to take place on 24 October. You mentioned your disappointment and frustration that that meeting was cancelled at the last minute, and I'm also aware that colleagues in the UK Government were equally frustrated that UK Steel cancelled this meeting at the last minute, despite being urged by the UK Government to continue with this meeting. I wonder if the Minister will therefore clarify that there has been a good deal of engagement between his department and UK Government officials on the future of the UK steel industry.

And turning perhaps to a few points where the Welsh Government could support, Tata Steel has said that it aims to secure the foundation for investments required to accelerate innovation and the company's journey towards carbon-neutral steel making. I wonder what more the Welsh Government can do to support this ambition. What measures are you considering to assist in reducing operating costs and bureaucracy, such as a post-Brexit business rate relief to alleviate pressure on the industry, and ensure that Tata Steel has structurally competitive business here in Wales? Was this something that you were able to discuss this morning in your meeting? And finally, will the Minister also state what specific Welsh Government infrastructure projects will procure homemade Welsh steel, which will benefit, of course, the wider supply chain here in Wales?

Can I thank Russell George for his contribution and his questions and first of all agree entirely that cross-party support on this very important issue should be maintained during the current election period? I'll come to the degree of engagement that we've had with the UK Government in a moment, but I can say that the discussion that took place this morning with Tata was very constructive. I was able to ascertain more detail, but I'm afraid I cannot give a site-by-site specific assessment of the impact of the announcement because, as I identified in my statement, the work that will be undertaken in the coming three months will be based on functions rather than sites.

As soon as the data concerning the functions is available, Tata will then be able to provide an update on how this impacts on each of the sites, and I expect that to be around February of next year, and, as I said, Dirprwy Lywydd, from February of next year through to March of 2021, there will be the implementation stage for this transformation programme.

I think it's only right to state at this point that Tata have also given me assurance that they will honour the memorandum of understanding with trade unions, and that as a consequence, they will seek to avoid compulsory redundancies. Now, we know, from the fact that the majority of the jobs will be office-based, that in terms of the announcement that had already been made regarding Orb, the jobs that are blue collar in Orb could still be—or the people who are occupying blue-collar jobs in Orb could still be transferred to other opportunities within the Tata family along the M4 corridor, and I have asked for my officials to continue discussing this and the transformation programme more widely with Tata over the coming weeks and months.

In terms of the round-table discussion that was due to take place last month, whilst it's true that UK Steel cancelled the meeting, they did so out of frustration, a frustration that, unfortunately, the Secretary of State was not able to attend for the full meeting, and so I have every sympathy for UK Steel. It's absolutely vital at this incredibly challenging time that every single Government puts its weight behind a collective effort to deal with the challenges that the sector faces. That said, Dirprwy Lywydd, I did have a very constructive meeting myself, on a bilateral basis, with the Secretary of State just last month, and I suggested to the Secretary of State that it would be advantageous for us to share, where possible, human resource of our two Governments, and I was very pleased that the Secretary of State agreed that this was a good idea and we're now progressing with just that. I think on two fronts—one the future of steel, the other the future of the automotive sector—our Governments need to be working very closely together and I expect our officials to do so.

Tata did talk in their statement about the carbon-neutral future for steel producing and Russell George rightly asked what sort of support may be available from the Welsh Government with regard to this. Through our economic action plan, we have now created the new lens for assessing bids for grant funding and one of those calls concerns decarbonisation. I think that if we can dovetail opportunities from the UK industrial strategy and the Welsh Government's economic action plan, we can support Tata's endeavour to achieve carbon-neutral steel production, but in order to maximise those opportunities within the UK industrial strategy, we need, with urgency, a steel sector deal to be completed.

And in terms of other support that may be available, other means that may be available to provide opportunities to Tata and other steel producers in Wales, well, the city deal in Swansea bay is one obvious means of supporting the sector, and also, as Russell George identified, major infrastructure programmes. And as a consequence of the Welsh Government being the first signatory of the UK steel charter, it is clear that the Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that as much Welsh steel as possible is utilised for major infrastructure projects as is possible. And within the Wales infrastructure investment plan, which was just published this month, there are significant projects that could utilise Welsh-produced steel, and I expect Tata to be able to take advantage of the public purse and the procurement opportunities that are now available to it.

Clearly, this is more devastating news for the steel industry in Wales and the individuals involved, who are now concerned that there will be more impacts on jobs here in Wales, though, of course, it is very uncertain at this point where the axe is going to fall. I think it's clear also that we have a case here of workers, wherever those jobs go, paying the price for the way that joint venture with ThyssenKrupp collapsed, and the lack of plan B in the event of the collapse of that joint venture. And it's come to my attention, certainly, that unions had warned Tata on multiple occasions that they shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket; they should have their eyes on other options too. And I'd be interested in hearing from the Minister what similar warnings Welsh Government would have voiced.

It's been, certainly in my six years as an Assembly Member, a time of relentless uncertainty. Somehow, announcement after announcement of job losses, the odd reprieve every now and then, and I'm grateful for when finances have been made available for various projects that have given a lifeline at various points. I certainly agree with the Minister when he says that UK Government needs to pull its finger out. To me, it's not showing that it is doing what it can to support this vitally important industry to Wales.

Also, I question what influence you in Welsh Government believe you have, because, yes, Welsh Government has engaged positively, it has made money available through training schemes for various power schemes, and research and development as well, but what influence do you genuinely believe you have? And with jobs at risk, at best now, is there even an element of influencing your engagement with Tata now to protect those jobs that the millions of pounds of Welsh Government money has been able to do in terms of training? Are those jobs that have been trained up using Welsh Government money safe? Are those jobs that have benefited directly from assistance packages over the past few years going to be protected because you believe you have some sort of influence?

The issue of Orb steel in Newport is one that is concerning, too, of course. We have Tata here saying that they want to diversify into new products—products that future markets will need. We know that's what was being produced in Newport. And when you said a minute ago that you had asked Tata's chief executive for sufficient time to consider proposals that had been put on the table, could you give us an idea of what 'sufficient time' means? What is the timescale here? And, you know, when I and my party have been talking about convening a major manufacturing summit for Wales to really start mapping out the shape of manufacturing in Wales for years to come, the kind of thing I have in mind is a manufacturing sector, an industrial base, that needs Orb to be in Newport, that has ambitions, be it in electric vehicle manufacture or associated elements of the EV sector, that needs Orb to be in Newport. And that in itself could help make the case. So, I'll leave it there for now.

It's a relief, in a way, that job losses, where they happen, aren't due to happen until, I believe, March 2021, which at least buys a little time. But we need to know now that Welsh Government, of course, is trying to use its influence, as much as it believes it has, whilst at the same time looking to UK Government to show that it's serious about the steel industry.

Can I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth for his questions and for identifying some very significant and important points? One: the question of how much influence Welsh Government has over what is largely a UK problem—and you could extend it and say that it's actually, in some respects, a European problem, and in other respects, it's a global problem. Does Welsh Government have the ability to truly influence global capacity issues? No. Does Welsh Government have the ability to address the disproportionately high energy costs? No, that's UK Government, and it must act. Does Welsh Government have the ability to influence falling demand for steel from within the automotive sector in China and in the United States? No. Therefore, what Welsh Government must do is focus on those challenges that we can help Tata to address, to work in collaboration with Tata. And where we can clearly assist, and where we have been clearly assisting, is with the development of skills that are going to be required for advanced manufacturing in the future, including steel. We can help with decarbonisation of their footprint; indeed, we are doing just that. We can help with R&D, and, again, we're doing just that. But the big changes that could be made to assist Tata in its transformation programme within the UK are in the hands of the UK Government.

The UK Government could do three things quickly and relatively straightforwardly. First of all, convene that steel council. Secondly, the UK Government could address price disparities on energy, and it's a fact that UK steel producers face 80 per cent higher costs for energy than the French, and 62 per cent higher costs than the Germans. That could be dealt with by UK Government, by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and the Treasury working together. The third area where the UK Government could make significant progress is with that sector deal. Why? Well, because the sector deal requires contributions, investment, from steel businesses. Now, in order to get that sector deal over the line, they need to make sure that enough money is put on the table to unlock investment from Tata and other steel businesses. Tata told me just this morning that this transformation programme is about making sure that they can invest in capital expenditure in order to sustain the sites that we have in the UK and in Europe.

Now, Welsh Government will assist where it can, but that question that Rhun ap Iorwerth posed was incredibly important, and it's absolutely right that we look at what UK Government has done to date, but we look more closely again at where the UK Government needs to deliver in the future. And, I'm not going to act as a commentator on what Tata did or did not do, or should or should not have done at the time that the joint venture talks with ThyssenKrupp collapsed, but it is quite clear that the transformation programme is that plan B that unions have asked for. Now, we will work with the sector as a whole, we will work with Tata to identify opportunities to provide resilience where we possibly can, but we have to work in collaboration with other Governments.

Can I thank the Minister for his statement yesterday, and, again, for this statement today and the opportunity to ask questions and to clarify a few points in relation to the news from Tata of its possible 3,000 job losses and other aspects that the four points had highlighted? It is important that we recognise that the 3,000 job losses are across Europe, but if we consider a third of those perhaps to the UK, that's going to be one eighth of the workforce in the UK, that's 1,000 jobs across the UK, and most of the UK Tata plants are going to be in Wales, so it's a huge impact upon Welsh jobs and the Welsh workforce.

And let's be honest with ourselves: it's been four years since we saw the challenges coming through to Tata when Redcar was closed in 2015, and we've seen steel workers having rollercoaster rides in those four years—up and down—difficult times and then they'd be relieved, then more difficult times coming and more challenges. And this has taken a terrible toll on steel workers and their families, with the stress and worry about it. And the announcement that you've just indicated today, Minister, that it's unlikely to know where those job losses will fall and we won't know the implementation until 2021—another 18 months—is going to add more uncertainty for those families and to those steelworkers, as they'll go into work every day thinking to themselves that there might not be a job for them in 12 months' time. It's something that, really, Tata needs to address more quickly, rather than leaving it so late. I appreciate that they're doing their job, in the sense that they're going to take a detailed look at this, but it's leaving that uncertainty in people's minds for those months ahead of us, and we need to address that, importantly.

I also welcome you highlighting the supply-chain element, because, again, the supply-chain aspect of this is, 'What are they doing over the next 18 months? Where are they going to be putting their workforce and their emphasis? How are they going to look at investment and securing that aspect to ensure that they address the efficiency gains and optimisation that Tata are highlighting themselves?'

Another worrying part of that statement—if you look at it very carefully, it says an earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation drop of 90 per cent in this financial year. That's a drop of 90 per cent that they've forecast. It's a huge, huge drop in those figures, and therefore we've got to look very carefully at the sustainable future of steel making.

They also highlight dumping in their statement, and how that has impacted upon the global market, and, again, we must call upon the UK Government to do more to get the EU to put higher protections on, whilst we are still members of the EU. But also, if we're going to leave the EU, what is the defence mechanism that's going to be in place for the UK to protect from dumping of this steel from elsewhere, because of the trade war between China and America? That's what's causing some of those problems. To be blunt, we knew, last time, the UK did nothing to push the EU to actually put the tariffs on steel from China. It was other EU countries that did it, so I have no faith, at the moment, in the UK Government actually putting anything in force to stop that dumping happening. Will you, again, raise those issues with the UK Government to ensure that we can protect UK steel from being attacked by cheap imports from other nations?

Minister, the statement also highlights increasing high-end sales, and that means capital expenditure. Have you had discussions with Tata as to where they might want to put capital expenditure in place to actually get the high-end sales, get the products, like the cable galvanising line in Port Talbot or the Zodiac line in Newport, to ensure that we can have a product that sells in that high-end market? Because they've often told me, if they can get more of that, it increases their returns and profit margins as a consequence of that.

He mentioned Orb, and, again, the question comes, when the Orb announcement was made, they were talking about transferring those jobs to the plants in south Wales, particularly in Port Talbot: where does this fall within that, because, if they're talking about job losses within Port Talbot, and we've heard that this is about a third blue collar and about two thirds white collar, so there are blue-collar jobs going, where are those job losses going to be? If there's going to be availability for people from Orb going into the other plants, how does that fit together with this plan?

You also mentioned the Swansea bay city deal as part of your answer to Russell George, and, again, perhaps the Welsh Government can give a commitment to how it will work with the Swansea bay city deal, particularly the steel science project, to look at, perhaps, the carbon-neutral agenda that Tata are talking about as part of that deal, and we can actually show the continuing commitment to the future of the steel industry here in Wales through that project. Again, the Welsh Government's commitment to that would be very much welcome.

I also agree with you, very much so, that the memorandum of understanding with the trade unions must be honoured, must be kept to, because steelworkers gave up their pension contributions and rights and changed to a new scheme with that commitment given by Tata. They cannot walk away from that commitment. They must make sure that the non—so, the compulsory jobs are gone. It's 2026, if I remember right, the date that they would keep no compulsory redundancies to. They have to deliver that. They can't walk away, because steelworkers have given them everything. They've given them their pension contributions and changes, they've given them their commitment, they've given them productivity changes. They've even accepted job losses when necessary. It's time now Tata actually returned some of that to the workers and gave them protection, and honoured that commitment—

And finally.

And, finally, I join you, Minister—. I appreciate, Deputy Llywydd, but to my constituents this is crucial. It's vital to the future of my town, and therefore it is important we get these aspects clear. I join with you in the question of the UK Government. We've been deeply worried for many, many years about their commitment to the steel industry. This is a foundational industry, not just for Wales, but for the UK. Any manufacturing nation must have a strong steel industry, and, if they don't want to be a manufacturing nation, say it loudly. Say what they're going to plan; don't go doing this behind closed doors. We need a steel sector deal. We need a steel council. We need commitment from the UK Government that it sees that steel has a future here in the UK. Can you please take those messages up to London?

Indeed I will, and can I thank Dai Rees not just for his questions but also for his tireless fight for Port Talbot steelworks and indeed for UK steel more broadly? Deputy Llywydd, Dai Rees made the very important point that the US-China trade war is influencing the challenges and contributing to the challenges that Tata and the steel industry in the UK face right now, suppressing demand within both countries. I do not believe that Donald Trump will do the UK steel sector any favours, but, once that trade deal is agreed, that will unleash potential for steel producers within the UK and Europe and provide opportunities specifically for Tata within the automotive supply chain.

Dai Rees is absolutely right that capex has to be invested in those products that will offer the highest value and the highest levels of return, and one of the four work strands of the transformation programme concerns the need to improve the product mix within Tata. I would agree with Dai Rees that worker loyalty has to be repaid with an honouring of the memorandum of understanding, and I'm very, very relieved that I was given the assurance yesterday and indeed today by Tata that it would honour the MOU.

I can tell Members today that plans were already being made for an automotive summit on 5 December, and for a broader manufacturing summit in the new year, to look at the opportunities, but also the challenges, that advanced manufacturing and the steel sector face in the twenty-first century. I'm going to touch briefly on Orb. I know that this was an announcement that was separate from yesterday's news, but a number of Members have asked about the consequences for those workers at Orb of yesterday's announcement. I also struggle to figure out how it could be that Tata will be losing 3,000 jobs in Europe but at the same time will be able to find opportunities for so many loyal and skilled workers from Orb, but, as I said a little earlier, the majority of jobs that will be lost because of yesterday's announcement will be office based, whereas the majority of jobs that are going to be lost at Orb are blue collar. I was told again today that they are very confident that they will be able to identify opportunities within Tata for those workers who wish to remain in employment with Tata.

I referred to the supply chain in my statement. Dai Rees also talked about the need to provide some certainty for the supply chain, and, again, that's the reason why I think it's so important that a steel council round-table is convened at the earliest opportunity. I also think that the earlier that Tata is able to indicate to workers what their fate may be the better. Clearly, going through Christmas and the new year with the question of their future prosperity hanging in the balance is not a good position to be in. It will be addressed by February of this year, but I'm hopeful that Tata will be able to provide more detail to as many people as possible before then.

And, in terms of the city deal, as I said in my statement, we have already provided several millions of pounds to establish the institute at Swansea University, and I was pleased also that HEFCW awarded the institute a further £3 million. Now, in terms of the Swansea bay city deal, there is a proposal for a national steel innovation centre—it was formerly called the steel science centre— and that's designed to build on the institute now. The proposal sits within a wider project called supporting innovation and low-carbon growth. The project is still in the development phase—it has not been formally submitted to Government—but I am in no doubt that it could contribute to the development of a wider selection of products that Tata could deliver in the future.

Thank you for your statement, Minister, and of course we will work across party for our constituents, because this has been a worrying time for them, as half of Tata's UK workforce work at the Port Talbot steelworks where I live and represent. The fact that there are many further job losses will have a chilling effect on the town of Port Talbot just weeks before Christmas. While politicians blame sometimes the Tories or austerity and Brexit, we all know, and we can't brush under the carpet, that the EU has a huge role to play in this mess.

It's the EU who blocked Tata's merger with Thyssenkrupp, a merger that steel experts from across the globe said was necessary and that consolidation was the best way for the industry to survive. But the EU blocked that merger, and the EU's bureaucracy has doomed steelworkers in my region. As highlighted by the Welsh Government's own guidance on public procurement, EU laws are designed to promote free movement of goods—[Interruption.]—and services—it's true—and to prevent 'buy national' policies. Those 'buy national' policies are absolutely essential if we are to save Welsh steel, Welsh steel that is suffering as a result of other EU policies, such as the ones pushing up energy prices in the UK by forcing taxes on energy bills and suspending—[Interruption.]—and suspending UK firms' access to free carbon permits.

It's a fact-free zone.

It is—yes, it is facts.

So, Minister, what hope does Welsh steel have if you get your wish and you scrap Brexit? How will your Government mitigate the most damaging EU rules in order to save our steel? Finally, Minister, you are campaigning to see, obviously, your leader in No. 10 and John McDonnell in No. 11, and they have outlined a slew of policies that will devastate the UK economy and totally undermine our competitive advantage. So, Minister, how will totally destroying our economy help workers at Tata? Will you—[Interruption.] Will you—[Interruption.] Will you be—[Interruption.] Will you be fighting to add steel to the list of industries a future Labour Government will nationalise? It's clear that the best way to help steelworkers at Port Talbot is to deliver Brexit as soon as possible, and free us from the EU. We need to have a fuller picture of exactly what is happening. Thank you.

Okay, look, I know that the Member began her contribution by saying that we had to work on a cross-party basis and we shouldn't attribute blame, but she then used the contribution for pure party political opportunism. The fact of the matter is—[Interruption.] The fact of the matter—[Interruption.] The fact of the matter is that Nigel Farage has talked about the need for a clean Brexit break with the EU, which would in turn revert us to WTO tariffs and rules, which in turn would decimate the steel sector in the United Kingdom; it would destroy the steel industry in the UK. That's not me as a politician saying that—that is steel sector experts. There is no doubt that, if Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party has its way, UK steel production would cease. It would cease in virtually no time whatsoever. It would be a gift to China, it would be a gift to the United States, it would be a gift to the people that the Brexit party loathe, to the Europeans, because they would be able to harvest the hard-fought-for industry that UK steel producers have been able to serve over many, many decades.

There's little more that I can add to the points that I've tried to address that were raised by the Member, but I would say, on another opportunistic point that was made, regarding Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour campaign in the general election, Labour have published incredibly ambitious plans for a green new deal. That green new deal would have to be delivered by taking full advantage of carbon-neutral steel production. It would have to be delivered by ensuring that renewable energy production is supported by the UK steel industry. There is no doubt whatsoever that if Labour came to power at a UK level we would see immediate and decisive action on energy disparity, we would see immediate and decisive action on some form of a steel sector deal to benefit the industry, and we would also see immediate and decisive action to stimulate a sustainable level of economic growth based on green growth.

Minister, can I thank you for bringing forward this statement, on what is extremely troubling news? I fully agree with Dai Rees's contribution, as I always do, with regard to steel, but I cannot say that for some other contributions we've heard this afternoon.

As you know, Minister, steelworkers in my constituency are desperately looking for this information, and I would welcome anything you could do to get that information to the workers and to the trade unions before February of next year.

Steel production in Shotton and across Wales is a crucial part of the economy. Quality home-produced steel does keep us competitive, but you were right to say, Minister, that it is non-devolved issues that need to be addressed at a UK Government level. The workforce at Shotton are as skilled and dedicated a workforce as you will find anywhere in the world. Minister, we need to know that those who govern us support that workforce, and while you have consistently done all you can, the same cannot be said for the UK Conservative Government. If they consider the steel sector at all, it is an afterthought, and the fact that they have failed to hold a steel council meeting for 18 months, at a time when the global situation is so precarious, really spells out their failings.

For the workers, their families and the community of Shotton, this is a familiar story. We have been let down before by the Tories in the 1980s—the single biggest redundancy in modern European history. Despite the general election, Minister, UK Government Ministers are still in office. Can you join me, and Members like Dai Rees, in urging them to engage and urging them to act, and, for once, to speak up and stand up for the British steel industry the way this Government does? 

Minister, finally, can I pick up a point that you raised in your response to Russell George with regard to infrastructure and projects across Wales using Welsh steel? What support, as a Welsh Government, can you offer in bringing projects and infrastructure projects, like the Heathrow logistics expansion hub, to Alyn and Deeside, to Shotton, where Tata Steel is shortlisted at the moment? Hopefully, with the right procurement of the UK steel charter, we can use UK steel and Welsh steel to build and bring that manufacturing hub to Alyn and Deeside.

Can I thank Jack Sargeant for his contribution and for his questions? I was only reflecting earlier this afternoon on the experience of having grown up, obviously, in north-east Wales and seeing Shotton steelworks almost fully close. We did manage to fight, albeit for a smaller number of jobs than once existed. But, as a consequence of further investment by owners of the site and by supporting it from here in Cardiff Bay, the Welsh Government was able to assist in the resurrection of the Shotton steelworks site. Of course, there is now uncertainty, but that particular facility is operating incredibly efficiently and returning a good profit for Tata.

I think Jack Sargeant is absolutely right in identifying, amongst many, an opportunity for the Shotton site—that being the Heathrow logistics hub. I know that Tata is working very keenly to try to secure one of the logistics hubs for Heathrow Airport.

But, this is, as Jack Sargeant said, a UK problem that requires a UK solution. There are some factors that are beyond the UK Government's control as well, and one of them we've identified: the China-US trade war. There is no doubt that that will only be resolved once Donald Trump decides that a trade deal has to be agreed. It will not be secured just on the basis of one of the two sides wishing to resolve differences. 

I think it's absolutely right and proper that Tata informs employees as soon as possible of the outcome of the assessment that's going to be undertaken between now and early in the new year. I will press upon them the need to share any details about specific job losses with employees as soon as possible. 

Clearly, this isn't a surprise to anybody who understands the steel industry. Many of the people I've already spoken to today and yesterday, since the news, have said, 'Well, this is something that we saw coming', after they saw the joint venture fail. Can you tell me—? In the statement yesterday, you said you wanted to have an urgent meeting with Tata as a result of the announcement, and I know you've spoken to them today, but can you give any indication as to when you may have known that they were going to make this announcement, so that we can be assured of what actions you were taking in Government to ensure that this type of news wasn't going to come before us?

I'm not sure I understood from your answer to Rhun ap Iorwerth, my colleague, in relation to back-up plans to the joint venture, and whether there were any other alternative solutions. I saw in the Financial Times at the time when the joint venture was put on hold that Tata Steel's chief financial officer said then that all options would be explored in relation to the EU business, so what were all those options? I certainly don't know what they are. For example, has a steelworkers co-operative been thought about? In Mondragon, the biggest co-operative of its kind in the world, they do have an interest in steel, and would this not be something that we could consider here in Wales so that the steelworkers don't feel as disenfranchised as they currently do? Why not look at all possible solutions?

In relation to the resources that Welsh Government has given, of course, Plaid Cymru have supported that, especially with regard to the power plant, but my unease now today lies in the fact that the job cuts will come in 2021, and by that point Welsh Government will have put continued substantial investment into Tata Steel. At what point do we start to say, 'How far do we go as a Welsh Government?', because if they're going to say how many jobs are going to go in Port Talbot in 2021, then what happens to that investment? What happens if they cut many, many of those jobs and we're left in a very weak position here in Wales? We don't want to be here at that point saying, 'Why did we put so much more investment in at this time when we knew, potentially, that there were going to be cuts, and that they were going to undermine some of the agreements that we have had with them?' I want to be assured that we can have an open and frank discussion about that.

My other question is, I hear you talking about Tata steelworkers and the need to meet with them and, of course, I would agree with that, but I want to understand when that will happen. I've had some workers telling me that it's been very secretive at the moment; they don't know when they're going to get recognition of a meeting. I'd like to speak up for the contractors, because when we had the last tranche of job cuts, they were the first to go. They lost their jobs, they were sitting doing—. I mean, they had to look for alternative jobs in that time, and then they have been re-employed by Tata since some of the work has picked up. I'm curious to understand how they will also be engaged with this process, because they're local people too. They are important too.

And my last question is with regard to your statement about this function-by-function assessment that Tata Steel is saying they're going to do. I'm very concerned about that, actually. We know that when they look at different types of jobs in different companies—we know from Ford as well—they try and pick off workers against one another. If they look at a certain tranche of worker, they will potentially be offering them something different to each other. So, what reassurances have you got that it's going to be fair and equal across the board, so that they don't play workers off against one another, and that they can be secure in the knowledge that whatever support is given to them will be on an equal footing, and that they will be supported all along the way because, ultimately, that's what's key here, the livelihoods of those who work in the industry?

Can I thank Bethan Sayed for her contribution and the many important points that she's also made in the questions that she's raised today? I think it's fair to say that when workers tell Members that this hasn't come necessarily as a surprise, it's probably because the four strands of the transformation programme include one that specifically states that they wish to reduce employment costs. And therefore, it shouldn't come as a surprise that Tata Europe are looking to reduce the number of people that are employed, and that's why for months upon months I was calling on the UK Government to deliver the sector deal and to convene the steel council, so that we could be in a position right across the UK, working together, to respond very rapidly to any requirement for assistance, not just from Welsh Government but from UK Government as well. That steel council has still not taken place, and I have again called on the UK Government to convene it as soon as possible.

But it's also fair to say, I think, today that the joint venture was also going to lead to job losses across Europe, and members of Bethan's own party regularly highlighted the very real risk that this could happen. The fact is, for Tata to ensure that it has a sustainable future going forward, it needs to make savings, but it also needs to invest in capex. This morning, when I spoke with Tata, I was assured time and again that the savings that it seeks to make will be diverted straight back into investment in capex projects.

We were given barely any notice, for commercial reasons, which I'm sure the Member would respect. However, I have asked for Tata to ensure that we are kept abreast of any information regarding the identification of functions that could be lost. I've been assured that they'll not pick off individual workers and that the trade unions will be fully engaged between now and February and during the implementation process as well.

Bethan raises the important question of asking, 'How far do we go in supporting Tata?', 'How far do we go in supporting the steel sector in Wales?' We will go as far as we possibly can to ensure that it has a bright and sustainable future, but we will not relax the conditionality that we apply to our funding. We will not water down the support conditionality that is applied to Tata or any other business, no matter how difficult the operating environment is for them, because when we use taxpayers' money to support a business and we apply conditions that we expect to be honoured, we enter into a contract with a business. As many Members in this Chamber are aware, we've introduced an economic contract that seeks to ensure that a company can demonstrate growth, not just for itself, but also for the supply chain, and we will not give up on contracts of that nature. We will not allow conditionality to be relaxed.

I think the Member also raises the question of whether we could essentially sever Welsh interests from the wider UK Tata Steel interests, in order to look at all opportunities. I don't think it would be possible to sever away Welsh interests. Once you do that, you open the door to individual sites across Wales also suggesting that they should sever links with other sites, and the fact of the matter is that pretty much all of Tata's sites, in the short term at least, are dependent on Port Talbot, and I think we need to be very, very careful when we raise the question of whether we could look at opportunities for specific sites, no matter whether they're in a collective within Wales rather than the UK as a whole or on an individual site-by-site basis.

Finally, John Griffiths. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Minister, in Newport, we're in a particular position, of course, where we had the announcement in terms of Orb and the almost 400 jobs that are there and now this general Tata announcement across its European operations. So, we have Llanwern potentially affected, of course, as well as Orb. I very much welcome what you said about the Orb jobs and the assurances that you've had and I'd be very grateful, and I'm sure the workers will, if you keep a very close eye on that situation because it is very worrying, but I am grateful for the assurances that you've given.

In terms of Orb, it was very good to see you and the First Minister come along for the meeting, and we may be in a position of redeployment of those old workers, but, of course, we hope very much that the expressions of interest in buying the Orb plant lead to a purchase and the retention of the plant and the jobs on the site. So, in that respect, Minister, I'd be very grateful again if you do your utmost to ensure that the greater time that you've called for, to allow those expressions of interests to mature and hopefully result in a purchase, is given by Tata. What became apparent, I think, during the march and the rally that we had in Newport to protest against the proposed closure of Orb, which was a great deal of public support for what Members have called for—many Members have called for here today a proper industrial strategy, a proper manufacturing strategy from UK Government—that that comes about and there's a recognition of a sort of sub-set of that, which is the future for electric cars and electric steel. Because people told us in no uncertain terms that they simply cannot understand why UK Government cannot appreciate and act on that case, that if we want to be part of the future revolution towards electric cars worldwide and ensure maximum benefit for jobs and economic development in the UK, and for us here in Wales, we must have electrical steel production in the UK. And the Orb, with the investment identified in the Syndex report, is the perfect opportunity to realise that investment and that future for electric car production on all the component parts of it here in the UK, and in the case of Orb, electrical steel here in Wales.

Can I thank John Griffiths for his questions and also for coming along to Orb with the First Minister and me last week? I thought it was an incredibly productive discussion that we had with Roy Rickhuss and Community union with workers from across the site? Of course, with a potential loss of 380 jobs, some people would choose to retire, some people would choose to go into employment with a different employer. But I was promised again today that Tata would endeavour to find anybody who wishes to stay within the company a job elsewhere within the Tata family. But before that happens, I have been pressing upon Tata the need to ensure that as much time is given, as is needed by Community and Syndex or, indeed, as much time that is needed by any other interested party that may emerge looking to take over and transform Orb.

I won't specify how long is required for Syndex or anybody else to have their proposals fully assessed; I think that's better for them themselves to specify. But I do recognise that it would come at a cost for Tata. But, overall, the cost of transforming the Orb site in order for it to produce the advanced steels that are used for electric vehicles is not that considerable—something between £30 million and £50 million. Yes, it sounds a huge sum of money compared to other investments, but, actually, this money would secure enormous opportunities within the development and manufacturing of electric vehicles. And as we look to phase out pure diesel and petrol-driven cars, there are massive opportunities for the UK automotive sector. But we're not going to realise those opportunities if we allow specialist steel manufacturers to go by the wayside, if we take our eyes off the challenges that the automotive sector currently face, and if the UK Government fails to get over the line important sector deals, as they are failing with the steel sector deal.

Thank you very much.