3. Will the Minister make a statement on Rolls-Royce's announcement regarding new nuclear power plant sites and how this relates to Cwmni Egino? OQ58711

Thank you. We welcome the commitment by Rolls-Royce to small modular reactors. Cwmni Egino is currently technology agnostic and is engaged in a market engagement exercise with a number of technology providers, including Rolls-Royce, to identify a preferred SMR technology for the Trawsfynydd site.

I thank the Minister for that response, but I want the Minister to explain what exactly the purpose of Cwmni Egino is now, given this development. Previously, the Minister for Economy and the First Minister have talked of other plans for Trawsfynydd, such as nuclear medicine. Egino itself, in its discussions with me, has made it clear that they have an open mind and are looking at different options, and that Rolls-Royce wasn't a priority for them. There is time and public money being provided to Egino and continues to be invested in its work. But it has become clear that Egino is a bit-part player, and that the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is making the decisions. Rather than having Egino focusing on developing old and failed technologies like nuclear, wouldn't it be better to invest in the excellent workforce doing excellent decommissioning work, led by the skilled leadership of Angharad Rayner and her team, and to develop Trawsfynydd as a good practice centre in decommissioning and develop a prosperous decommissioning industry that we can export to the rest of the world?

I don't think the two things are separate or mutually exclusive. Cwmni Egino are actually engaging in work with the NDA on decommissioning, and there's a significant amount of work that is being undertaken, and we do think the work that is being done there will give examples to other sites around the world in the decommissioning of nuclear sites. I don't think that prevents a new generation of nuclear technology on the wider Trawsfynydd site, and I think it's important to just tidy up and clarify the recent announcement by Rolls-Royce. 

They have identified four sites in the ownership of the NDA, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and two of them, Wylfa and Trawsfynydd, are in Wales. But that does not mean that they have reached agreement with the NDA for their technology to be deployed on those sites, and, for Trawsfynydd in particular, Cwmni Egino already have an agreement with the NDA about looking at options for the site, so Rolls-Royce aren't able to circumvent that. They need to continue to engage with Cwmni Egino and with the exercise they're undertaking. It may be that Rolls-Royce emerges as the preferred option, but that isn't guaranteed. That's why the exercise they're undertaking in the ongoing market engagement exercise is important, understanding the technology, and, crucially, an SMR could still take place on Trawsfynydd, together with or alongside the opportunities that exist for scientific research and the generation of radio-isotopes for use in our health and care system, and the opportunities to export. 

So, I hope that helps to clarify, because I understand that, otherwise, the press release from Rolls-Royce could be read in the way the Member suggests, but it doesn't reflect the reality of the site, and Cwmni Egino are very much fit for purpose and looking to engage on the future of that site to the maximum benefit.

I thank Mabon ap Gwynfor for submitting today's important but also timely question, because it was just last week I chaired a round-table discussion on nuclear energy in Wales, with representatives from Rolls-Royce, along with Bechtel and UK Research and Innovation. And I'm convinced that nuclear energy is not just an opportunity in terms of bringing jobs and investment into north Wales—and you mentioned a few moments ago, Minister, the opportunities in places like Deeside in terms of manufacturing and advanced manufacturing in particular—it's also absolutely necessary in complementing renewables in providing a baseline of energy for the country, and especially when those renewable energy schemes, such as wind and solar, aren't able to function at 100 per cent due to the elements. 

I'm also convinced that north Wales is a fantastic place to see this investment, because of the facilities that we have in existence, because of the workforce we have there with the skills, because of the sites that we have already, as you mentioned, at Trawsfynydd and at Wylfa as well, and also the supply chain to make nuclear energy a success in the region. So, I'm convinced on those parts, Minister, and I wonder what is your assessment of the benefits of nuclear energy in Wales and what discussions are you having with the leading figures within the nuclear sector to ensure that we can attract that investment and support carbon-neutral energy in the future as well?

I recognise there are different views in this area. I'm very clear that, from my own point of view and the Government's point of view, future nuclear developments are part of the future energy mix, together with the significant opportunities we have around Wales, including of course off our coast as well as onshore, in energy generation. There is a challenge about baseload, but we're also interested in what the future of battery storage technology will mean, to make even better use of our renewable sources of power. And of course, you've heard me and the Minister for Climate Change talk on many occasions not just about decarbonising the way that we produce and use energy but the economic opportunities that come with it and how far up the value chain we can get the Welsh supply chain, which is one of the things I am most concerned about and interested in, and that point about the wider economic benefit with the skills that would be required. 

Rolls-Royce are someone who have a current and proven technology, and part of their offer is that they say that that means they could generate energy quickly and more rapidly than larger nuclear developments. There are others who are interested in the field, and this is the exercise that Cwmni Egino are undertaking, to understand the different technologies that are available, rather than simply setting on one of those technology solutions. And of course, the size and the scale of any energy development will make a difference to how quickly it's deployed and also decision making. And we also need to see clarity from the UK Government on the future funding model for large nuclear projects. It's one of the undeniable fall-outs from the churn, to be as polite as I can, in Ministers: it means we haven't got a settled position. We do need that for the future of development in this area.

So, it's a balance in our future energy mix and, of course, when it comes to new nuclear of any size and scale, it must make sense that sites that have already housed nuclear facilities are the preferred options. And we also, of course, not just have communities that are broadly used to them but also the opportunity to re-engage wider supply chains and people who want to work in the industry. So, I remain optimistic about the potential, and I look for clarity at a UK level, and we will certainly do our part to make sure that we see the economic benefit as well as a reduction in carbon in the way that power is produced.   

That point with regard to clarity is very important, I think, from the Minister. I also noted the statement by Rolls-Royce with regard to Trawsfynydd and Wylfa too. I happen to be excited about the renewable schemes, marine schemes, off Anglesey, and I also think that SMR nuclear technology is more suited to Ynys Môn than large-scale nuclear schemes. I tried to get a Wylfa newydd scheme that would meet the needs and the concerns, of course, on Anglesey. But the truth is of course that, because of the failure of the UK Government to deliver Wylfa newydd, we are back at square one, aren't we? Does the Minister agree with me that the uncertainty from the Conservative Government in London has caused economic damage and community damage, in a way, by leading people to go in one direction and then pulling the rug from under them?

It's undeniable that the failure to get the previous Wylfa option with Hitachi over the line has created a challenge. There's lost economic benefit, because otherwise, we would have seen significant activity already taking place. The people who did go through the skills training opportunity on the basis that there would be this development, they've still got work, but not all those people are local. I've met some people locally, actually, who have stayed and have got work in different sectors, but actually, I think there would have been much greater opportunity with even more people going through, getting those skills and having the opportunity to work. There's undoubtedly been an economic loss, but I think you're right to point out that going part way up the hill and then coming back down again does mean that there is an extra mountain to climb when it comes to trust, that people will believe it really will happen, and not just on the island, actually, but across north Wales. Some of the conversations I've had with the Member for Alyn and Deeside, actually, are about people who would have been interested right across the north Wales region in securing work there. So, it's important that if there is to be a future proposal, of whatever size and scale, whether at Wylfa or Trawsfynydd, that there is certainty from the UK Government about what will happen in terms of when decisions will be made and then that those are followed through. So, the funding model for nuclear is really important to make sure that investors and communities have options and opportunities to engage on a basis where there's much clearer understanding. And then of course, a Government that is prepared to follow through on the choices that it makes. I recognise the points the Member makes, and I have great sympathy with them.