The next item will be item 3, a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Welsh language on Tata Steel. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make the statement—Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Llywydd. Tata Steel announced on Thursday that it will proceed with its plans for Port Talbot, which will see the closure of two blast furnaces to be replaced with an electric arc furnace. The announcement follows seven months of discussions regarding their proposals with trade unions.

It's extremely disappointing that the recommendations from the multi-union report commissioned by the UK steel committee on the transition to lower carbon steel making at Port Talbot have not been taken up. This will have a devastating impact for thousands of workers, their families and whole communities in Wales, particularly in Port Talbot. 

We are proud of our steel sector in Wales. It provides a strategic asset for the UK, with a skilled workforce able to deliver the sustainable, primary steel-making capacity for the Welsh and UK economies, the capacity that the Welsh Government has argued for consistently.

Since Tata’s proposals were originally announced last year, Ministers have raised concerns about the speed of the proposed transition. Consultation between the company and unions could have secured a longer, fairer transition that minimised job losses. With that consultation now concluding, Tata will instead be taking forward its plan to close blast furnace 5 in June, and blast furnace 4 and the remaining heavy-end assets by the end of September. As part of the £1.25 billion plan, in order to be able to meet its customer needs during the three-year transition to electric arc furnace steel making, and continue production at their downstream sites, Tata will be reliant on imports from overseas. Tata has previously announced that up to 2,800 jobs are expected to be lost as part of its transition plan, around 2,500 of which would be impacted in tranches over the next 18 months, with the first tranche expected this July. The company expects that a further 300 roles would be lost in two to three years at the Llanwern site.

Llywydd, the confirmation by Tata of the ending of blast furnace steel production at Port Talbot is incredibly sad for Wales and means a very difficult time ahead for employees and their families, as well as those within local communities and the wider supply chain. It is essential that the company now does all it can to avoid compulsory redundancies within its loyal workforce and works with the transition board to ensure the affected employees receive the appropriate help and guidance to reskill or seek employment. There is also an urgent need for Tata to provide detail and timings of the impact on its workforce and on its supply chain, where many, many thousands more jobs could be lost, to ensure that the Welsh Government and our partners can provide them with the best possible support. This will include the provision of tailored support for skills and training to enable them to plan for a positive future.

We will also urge Tata to give their workers and supply chain, wherever feasible, the opportunity to work on the decommissioning and construction phase required to move to electric arc steel making. Preparatory work begins in December this year and could therefore offer continuity of employment for some workers. However, there will be a significant time lag between the closure of the blast furnaces at Port Talbot and the commencement of the operation of the proposed electric arc furnace. This means that we are in danger of losing many supply chain companies along with the expertise and cutting-edge skills and specialism that they bring to the Welsh economy.

We are concerned about the impact that the Tata plan will have on output volumes across all Tata sites in Wales, not only on Port Talbot, but the downstream plants based at Llanwern, Trostre, Shotton and Caerphilly, primarily during the transition period, but also once the electric arc furnace is operational. We need to see a clear vision from the company that will involve significant investment in all sites and one that continues to harness the innovation within our universities.

We will work with the Tata transition board to swiftly put in place the mechanisms that will allow Tata employees, businesses within its supply chain, families and communities to access all available support. The support will include reskilling and training, health and well-being support, entrepreneurship and business advice, financial advice and guidance as well as future job opportunities. Through the work of the transition board sub-groups and work streams, drop-in sessions are already up and running in Port Talbot, with advisers from the Department for Work and Pensions, Careers Wales, Business Wales, Citizens Advice, Neath Port Talbot Council and NPTC group of colleges on hand to answer concerns and questions. More organisations will attend future sessions, expanding the range of advice available, and job fairs will be arranged when the time is appropriate. Similarly, a web page is available on the Neath Port Talbot Council website that provides a one-stop-shop single point of contact for everyone seeking help and advice. The web page will have continued increase in its content and will signpost links for both individuals and businesses to all available support and guidance.

The Tata transition board has commissioned a local economic action plan to estimate the economic impact on the local and regional economy, to identify interventions to mitigate impacts on individuals, families, businesses and the wider community, and to provide a pipeline of opportunities to regenerate the local economy over the short, medium and longer terms. The plan will be used as a tool by the transition board when recommending how the £100 million support fund should be spent.

The three steel unions, Community, GMB and Unite, have or are in the process of balloting their members on industrial action. Unite members have already returned a vote in favour of industrial action. Community and GMB ballots close on 9 May. In response to these ballots on industrial action, Tata have put conditions around the elements of the voluntary redundancy package they intend to offer. We believe Tata should offer the best possible package to their workforce. Although formal consultations have finished, the company and the unions' discussions will continue during the next two weeks on a potential memorandum of understanding on future investments in the business and the impact of the restructuring on employees. A voluntary redundancy process will be launched across Tata Steel UK from 15 May.

The Welsh Government believes that steel making is a fundamental part of our future as a nation, and we will continue to support those working in the steel industry in all ways that we can.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for the statement and for giving me prior sight of it. Thank you.

I and my colleagues on these benches share the Cabinet Secretary's disappointment at what has unfolded with Tata in Port Talbot. The impact that this will have on individuals, families and wider communities cannot be underestimated. We think of those who are impacted and living with the uncertainty at this time. Our position has been clear, that we wish to see Tata continue to operate a blast furnace as they transition to an electric arc furnace.

Cabinet Secretary, your statement offers a clear commentary on where we are, but it is light on detail on how the Welsh Government is supporting the workforce and the wider community. But knowing now how Tata wish to proceed, can I ask, Cabinet Secretary, are you privy to who within the Tata workforce will be directly impacted? What skills and type of employees are due to be lost to the workforce? And, if you are aware, have you been able to reach out to them directly and what support will you be offering to them? For such large-scale redundancies to occur, an audit, in essence, of who and with what skills will be made redundant could help with finding suitable employment for them as quickly as possible. The Welsh Government has often stressed the support it has offered to the Tata workforce prior to these plans being announced last year, specifically support around skills and training. Therefore, can I ask and seek assurances that any and all skills accreditation and qualifications that the workforce received, which were Welsh Government funded, either in part or in whole, are fully transferrable to a new employer and are not constrained to Tata employment only? For example, would a forklift driver be able to take their certificate with them to another company, or would they have to undertake further qualifications?

As we look to future opportunities, we must include the Celtic free port, which promises thousands of new jobs by the start of the next decade, many of which will be in Port Talbot. Knowing that, and given Tata's decision and its timing, there will a period between the blast furnaces ceasing to operate, the arc furnace being in operation and the Celtic free port being itself fully operational too—another reason why Tata's decision is disappointing. Cabinet Secretary, can I ask how you will support the workers in this transition period so that they will be able to stay in the area and then get the jobs that the free port offers? Clearly, if there is a loss to skills in this transition period, if there is a brain and skills drain, then we simply will not be able to maximise the full economic benefit that the free port has to offer to Port Talbot and to the wider areas.

One way to minimise this brain and skills drain would be to utilise all of these skills as best as possible in the decommissioning and the construction of the new arc furnace, which you've mentioned, and that would involve using local employed people by local businesses. Therefore, can I ask, Cabinet Secretary, if, in any discussions you've had with Tata, you've been able to stress and urge the use of the domestic workforce, those already on Tata's payroll, on the construction of the electric arc furnace and on the decommissioning of the two blast furnaces too? If so, what guarantees have you had from Tata that they are willing to accept that proposal?

My final question, Cabinet Secretary, knowing I've raised quite a few detailed points this afternoon, is on the importance of, and impact on, the supply chain, which you've mentioned in your statement. Has any assessment been made as to who in the supply chain will be affected by Tata's proposals, and what jobs, if any, will be lost to those companies in Wales? Now, while we all hope that job losses from Tata can be absorbed by new job creation from the free port and elsewhere, job losses from the supply chain may not be so readily transferred, depending on their location. In your statement, the transition board is mentioned quite readily, and it seems to be doing a lot of the heavy lifting. Now that the Welsh Government is sitting on that transition board, I think it's also time that the Welsh Government contributed to the running of that transition board financially too. Diolch, Llywydd.

I thank Sam Kurtz for his observations and his questions. The Welsh Government support that will be made available is an extensive range of interventions, which match the scale of the challenge that the workforce and those in the supply chain face. So, he will know about the multi-agency approach that we seek to adopt in Wales, and will be adopted in this situation, where we will bring our support programmes into play, alongside the jobcentre, Working Wales, local authorities, trade unions and Tata Steel itself. Whether it's the ReAct+ programme or Communities for Work, whether it's the Flexible Skills Programme, which jointly funds some skills programmes, whether it's the changes that we've recently introduced to personal learning accounts, which mean that the wage qualification that would otherwise rule many employees at Tata out of eligibility, we have now removed that, expanding the availability of PLA, for both those affected in the workforce and also those in the supply chain, there is a range of programmes that we will make available, as we have in other contexts, albeit previously in the context of fewer redundancies and fewer job losses.

At this point in time, it is not possible to quantify the scale of that, though the programmes will be made available, because we are not party to the conditions attached by the UK Government to the funding that it has made available, and we are not party to the work that Tata itself has undertaken around the mapping of the numbers of jobs lost at which particular points in time. So, we await that information from Tata so that we are able to make sure that our contribution, along with that of the range of partners who will also be making a contribution, can be most effectively brought to bear to support those workers.

One of the key tasks in the work of the board—. And I wouldn’t accept the characterisation of the board doing the heavy lifting. There are a range of partners who have a considerable role to play, either represented on the board or beyond, and it’s really important that this is a collaborative effort. So, I think that is the way in which we want to be able to proceed. But, critically, we need to identify the support that is customarily available, and I’ve outlined to you what that would be from the Welsh Government’s perspective, and then identify what more needs to be done. So, that piece of work is absolutely critical, so that the resources that are available can be brought to bear in addition to what we would normally provide.

The Member mentioned a number of important points in relation to skills, and he will understand that we aren’t able to identify the particular skills mix at the moment because we are awaiting that further information, but we will be able to do that when that information is available. But there are some understood challenges already. One is the accreditation of skills that workers may have acquired during their employment at Tata, but where that hasn’t led to a qualification that would be portable outside the workplace. That is recognised as a challenge. Tata itself will be working on that, and is already working with Bridgend College on how those can be mapped onto recognisable qualifications for the workforce in that job matching that will need to follow. So, that piece of work is one of the pieces of work that will need to be taken forward.

He makes an important point in relation to the Celtic free port, but also makes the point that there is a significant time lag between the loss of the jobs at Tata and those employment opportunities becoming available. It’s really important that we maintain the confidence of those people who would invest in those future opportunities in the free port, by making sure that everything we do in the short term supports workers, and supports them to upskill or to have their skills recognised.

There are no guarantees that Tata have provided, but there is absolutely a recognition, I would say, that they will do all that they can to make sure those employees who can take roles in the decommissioning and the construction work are offered those roles. So, that has been raised in discussions. No guarantees have been given, but that is recognised as something that they will want to do. We would certainly want to see that happen. There will be specialist roles that are required for those tasks for which the skills may not be available, but wherever we can, that’s what we would want to see.

He makes a point, finally, about the financial contribution to the transition board. What we have seen is a commitment of headline figures. There hasn’t yet been a commitment to spend any individual penny within that headline figure at this point, so I think it’s worth bearing that in mind, and we all want to see that happen quickly. All parties want to see that happen quickly. The contributions we have made have been consistent over a number of years when Tata has needed support, whether that’s around skills, whether it’s around innovation, whether it’s around capital investment, which represents a significant proportion of our overall budget, and the capacity of any devolved Government to intervene in relation to an economic event such as this is obviously very, very much more constrained than that of the UK Government, not least because the impact will be felt across the entire UK economy of what we are seeing in Port Talbot. I think that needs to be recognised.

The news on Thursday was of course news we didn’t want to see, and I’d associate myself with the Cabinet Secretary’s comments as well as the comments of the Conservative spokesperson in expressing solidarity with workers in the wider communities that will be impacted by this.

I want to put on record as well my disappointment with the way in which Tata has acted over the past few months specifically, making statements of intention during their consultation period, during committee inquiries, threatening to pull generous redundancy packages from workers, and still not being transparent with information around who exactly will be affected by the closures and where they are in terms of being directly employed by Tata or in the wider supply chain. A responsible company doesn’t act like this, especially when the context is of intergenerational linkages with the place you own.

This whole situation has shown very clearly the issues we have with the Welsh economy; perhaps it even crystallises why the Government has been unable to make significant improvements to the economy over the years. It's an ownership problem, isn't it? Here we are, in a situation with a strategic resource, important in so many ways, in a situation where there is cross-party agreement that the blast furnaces should stay open, and here we are nonetheless, bystanders in our own nation's future.

I'm frustrated to no end. Two thousand eight hundred direct jobs, thousands more in the supply chain and contractors—it's all I've heard since being elected: job losses, job losses, job losses. What is the point—and I put this to every Member in this Chamber—what is the point of us here? What is the point of Members of Parliament in Westminster if when our communities need us the most, we throw our hands in the air and let things happen? Are we so eager to accept defeat?

Now, we've played the game. We've tried to appeal to Tata's better nature. We've put alternatives in front of them, but it's here, it's happening. They're doing what they want to, so what do we do now? Well, there are three options as far as I see it now, two of which Plaid Cymru has consistently put on the table: nationalisation, take ownership of a strategic resource, take control of our future. It's an idea supported by the Industrial Communities Alliance, an idea that, by some accounts, the UK Government's civil service has floated. The First Minister called it a red herring. In the face of this now, will the Cabinet Secretary agree with that statement? Of course, this would have to be done by UK Government.

The second option is an idea originally floated by Adam Price, to use the planning system to put a preservation order on the blast furnaces, to give us the time to work out how the steel industry might become sustainable. That is something the Welsh Government could do. And thirdly, accept the managed decline of a vital industry. So, which is it? What's your preference: nationalisation, preservation or managed decline? It's game night. What's the play? This can't be it. If the workers are willing to fight, we should be too.

I thank Luke Fletcher for the comments that he has made and the passion that we will all feel in the way he's put his case. I absolutely agree with him: primary steel making capacity is a strategic resource for the Welsh economy, for the entire UK economy, and to have an economy that gives that up is absolutely unthinkable. That has not been our position as a Government. We've consistently made the argument for primary steel making in the future of Wales on a sustainable basis, and have argued for the last 14 years for that to be taken seriously on a UK-wide basis without the success that we would have wished to have seen. 

He makes the point about a number of policies that Plaid Cymru have advocated. I think that the reality of the situation that the workers are facing on the ground is one that is, I think, somewhat different from the scenario that the Member paints. I think that reaching for creative solutions is always the right thing to do, but I think we need to recognise the reality of what is happening on the ground at the moment.

My own view about a stake in the business is that we've seen—. In the banking sector, we see this discussed from time to time; in the nuclear sector, I think that these things are ideas that are considered, but I think these particular circumstances on the ground are very different. We have a business that although I, and I know he, would have much preferred to have seen a plan very, very, very different from what is being pursued, and one which was much more closely like the plan that the multi-unions proposed, which provided for that just transition to a future sustainable steel sector, which we would all want to see, here is a business putting in £1.2 billion for a different vision, but that, I think, puts a very different context around the point he makes around nationalisation.

Our approach as a Government is to make sure that we do everything we can to support the workforce, to make the case strongly to Tata about the need to provide the workers with the best possible package as they face what they do face now, as the impact that will have on them, on their families, but also on communities right across south Wales is absolutely immense. So, they need the best available package from Tata, but also we need to see a commitment to invest in the future of steel production in all sites across Wales. And that involves continued investment and increased investment in the kind of research, with university partners, that provides that cutting-edge capacity, so that that is a critical part, and agreed to be, and committed to be, a critical part of the offer for steel production here in Wales into the future.

Cabinet Secretary, can I thank you and your predecessor for all the support you've given to Tata Steel workers over recent months? And here we are again. We could be back in November, because very little has changed since November, when the announcement was made: Tata are shutting down two blast furnaces, they've shut the coke ovens. And this is not a transition, because a transition moves from one thing to another; this is a closure of a steel industry, steel making in south Wales, and we are waiting for, hopefully, an electric arc furnace, which will allow us to recycle steel in the future, and now we've got a huge gap in between.

I very much welcome the cross-party support for the multi-union plan, which was, by the way, not from the unions, it was from steel experts. They actually had the knowledge and they put it together, and it was about keeping a blast furnace operational, to actually allow a transition to take place, and that's unfortunately been rejected by Tata.

The UK Government has actually honestly failed to move Tata in the right direction; they've just let them get on with it, and they've put no conditions upon any money. So, I appreciate the local economic action plan that was produced and presented to the transition board last week, but my worries about that is that it's a plan for the future, with regeneration possibly included, but no guarantees that businesses will come. No guarantees of what skills will be required. And you've said yourself that Tata haven't even done their skill assessment and supply chain assessment of their own workforce areas, so it's a huge gap we're going to have coming ahead of us.

There's no lack of ambition in the town, and I'll be putting my hand up saying I'm prepared to fight; I'm not going to give up, and my communities will not give up. There's no lack of ambition. We want to move forward. We have resilient people, but we need to have the future and hope there for us, and, at the moment, we're not seeing that hope. I want us to be able to give that hope. The Celtic free port is a wonderful idea, 10 years down the line. Where are we going to get the workforce and where are we going to be in the next 10 years? That's the crucial element of what we've got to do.

So, the reality is, Cabinet Secretary, you're doing everything you can, and I appreciate that. We've got more to do, all of us have got more to do; we've all got to work together to support our communities, to support the families, to support the workers. But the reality is—and this is the true reality—this current Government has no industrial strategy and no plan for steel. It's time we got rid of this Government, and do you agree with me that the only way we can actually move forward is with a Government with a plan for an industrial strategy, a Government with a plan for steel, and that's a Labour Government?

Well, I thank David Rees for his questions, and I associate myself with all that he has said, and acknowledge his championing of the steel sector in his own community and right across Wales. And I know how hard he works for his communities who are facing an unimaginable level of anxiety as a consequence of the news that came last week.

He is right to say that what we need to see is a Government in Westminster, as we have already in Wales, that is interested in investing in the foundations of our economy, investing in an industrial strategy, and that will provide opportunities for south Wales, as in other parts of the UK. He's right to say, I think, that the plan shows a number of potential projects in the future that, when they come to pass, will provide opportunities. But he's also right to say that we have a period of time between the closure of the blast furnaces and some of those plans coming to fruition, and so what we are seeking to do, as part of the partnership working with others, is to identify, for example—and I know, from my previous discussions with him, that he's concerned about the effect on the supply chain—what the impact will be on the supply chain. We know that Tata has done that work and we'll be receiving that information, I hope, very soon.

But then there are opportunities in high-value manufacturing, again in his part of the world, in Baglan. The developments there will provide opportunities, I hope, for some of those companies in the supply chain to have support to diversify into other sectors of the economy where their skills, where their business, where their capacity can—where they can take advantage of those opportunities.

But critical in this is that work I mentioned earlier, which is not simply to rely on the work that all of us do, in terms of a normal offer, through Business Wales and the Development Bank of Wales. All of those have a critical role to play, but what now is the additional support? What now are the additional programmes that are required that we look to the transition board funding to be able to support, so that we're able to give that support, not lose those skills, not lose those businesses, so that they're here to make the reality of those plans that are set out in the local economic action plan?

Can I thank the Minister for his statement today? It was—I agree with my party spokesperson, Sam Kurtz—a little bit light, I think, on the detail in terms of what the Welsh Government is going to practically do to help steelworkers in Port Talbot, and relied quite heavily, I think, on the actions of that transition board. It's a matter of deep regret for me and many constituents that I speak to that the Welsh Government still has not contributed towards that transition board. We've seen £80 million put in by the UK Government, £20 million from Tata Steel itself, but still nothing from the Welsh Government, and that is a matter of deep regret to me.

One issue that Sam Kurtz also mentioned is this issue of worker skill accreditation, where they've got the skills to be able to fulfil a role on the Tata site, in the Tata plant, inside that company, but perhaps do not have the right certification and qualifications outside of Tata, so if they were to move on to look for other work, perhaps they wouldn't have the right certification to be able to do that. I know the transition board is not only responsible for the improvement in the skills of workers but also the wider regeneration of the area, and obviously, the less you spend on one, the more you've got to spend on the other, and that regeneration work is important as well. So, can the Welsh Government confirm whether it will be the one to pick up the tab, if you like, for that worker accreditation programme so that the vital regeneration work can also take place to the maximum scale it possibly can?

Just to address the point that Tom Giffard made, I do think he overestimates the extent to which workers want to hear political point scoring in relation to this. I think what people want to hear is a recognition of the reality of the situation on the ground. Just to set the record straight, I think it's fair to say that the contributions that we've made as a Government to support steel production in Tata, from a skills and innovation and capital point of view, represent a much greater proportion of the budget available to the Welsh Government than the £80 million as a proportion of the UK Government's budget. But we are here to support the workforce and to do everything we can in our respective roles and powers to do that. 

The work that he talks about, the skills accreditation, is actually critical. We discussed at the board on Thursday the risk to those workers who have developed significant skills but aren't readily recognised outside Tata and need to have the support so that those skills can be accredited and qualifications recognised elsewhere. The work is currently under way with Bridgend College, and that will be extended beyond that. There are a number of different sources of funding that support that, either from Tata, from the transition board, and from the work that I've already outlined in my response to Sam Kurtz earlier—the commitments that we are making as a Government and the changes that we're making to existing programmes, including the personal learning accounts, which are there to extend the skills of those in work. There are a range of different interventions that will support the workforce, and we'll bring the full capacity that we have from our skills and employability programmes to bear in order to support them.

The news we heard last week from Tata doesn't just impact the workforce in Port Talbot and their families, but also, of course, all of the communities that I represent, and the nightmare that has hung over them for all these months is now real. It's so disappointing, but these people need to know that action is being taken by the Welsh Government to explore every possible route you could take to save at least some of those thousands of jobs that will be lost, such as those put forward by Plaid Cymru. Because you're waiting for a new UK Labour Government, but by that time it will be too late and we will have lost that blast furnace. So, are you doing any work in that vein? How do you propose getting that vitally necessary information from Tata to identify companies and contractors that need support in good time? Because I don't think awaiting it is really good enough. And on those interventions you mentioned being planned for the wider community, how are those who are going to be affected going to be involved in those? Do you agree it's imperative that the community's voice is fully heard as it navigates this difficult future?

We share with you the anxiety on behalf of the communities that are affected. I represent many, many families who have people working at the steelworks, and I know from the discussions that I've had in my own surgeries just what this means for those families. So, I identify myself with the comments that you were making at the start of your questions. But those families also know what we are doing as a Government to support job matching, upskilling, business start-ups, the supply chain work that I was talking about earlier in relation to David Rees's question, the work that we're doing to make sure there is mental health and well-being support for those at Tata who are affected and beyond. We know that there are mental health risks that are very serious that can result from large-scale redundancies, and even much smaller redundancies than this situation. So, we are working with the local health boards to make sure that support will be available. There is support in Tata at the moment, but everyone recognises there needs to be a much wider offer to support the broader well-being of those individuals, their families and the community as well.

What I've outlined in my statement today and in the answers to questions is a very practical set of actions. What we now need to see is the translation of the ambition in that plan that the board looked at and approved last week into the concrete set of actions taken by the various parties around that table—ourselves in a multi-agency approach, working together in partnership, so that we can deliver the support that we can for workers, for their families, for those in the supply chain, and for those in local communities. We have made that case consistently to Tata that we need the information about which workers are likely to be affected when, and the mapping of the supply chain, so that all that support can be brought to bear.

Cabinet Secretary, Llanwern is a major player, still, in the local economy in Newport and the surrounding area, including the Gwent valleys, providing well-paid, highly skilled jobs, and the age profile is actually a lot younger than many people assume, with, of course, a number of apprentices supported by the Welsh Government. So, as matters proceed, Cabinet Secretary, will you ensure that downstream operations, such as those at Llanwern, have all the guarantees that can be arrived at, to keep as many of those jobs as possible, and also that those apprentices at Llanwern continue to receive support so that they are retained and developed for the future?

I thank John Griffiths for those questions. He's right to say that there are steelworkers right across Wales who will be looking at the announcement last week and thinking what this means for them and for their work. In relation to the two points that he asked me about specifically, we have sought and obtained commitments from Tata in relation to both those areas. In relation to downstream production, they have confirmed that, both during the transition process and after the transition, they will protect that downstream supply through imported steel. They've said they're confident they'll have the capacity and the capability to supply that high-quality steel that is required into the future. They have also made a commitment in relation to apprentices—that they will make sure that those apprentices are able to complete their apprenticeships through retaining or redeploying them, to ensure that they get the support that they need.

I'm making a very brief statement, because I want to make sure that the Welsh Liberal Democrats are also joining together in this cross-party support in relation to the workers at Port Talbot. We share your dismay at Tata Steel’s outright rejection of the union proposals and their heavy-handed approach. We must be crystal clear: allowing an unjust transition, which is what this is, which fails the thousands of Port Talbot workers, their families and the surrounding community, is completely unacceptable. These are not faceless statistics, but real people dealing with decades of governmental negligence, a lack of vision, and abandonment by, once again, Tata Steel. Port Talbot is a resilient community, one that in 2011 performed The Passion in their hundreds. They came out and they actually joined in with something so creative. We must be by their side at this time, to ensure that we take risks, are bold, and stand up to Tata. This is totally not acceptable. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I thank Jane Dodds for that statement and questions. Our view as a Government is that a better deal, both for steel and for the workforce, is available and should have been the kind of deal negotiated between the UK Government and Tata—one that provides for a much longer and fairer transition to a more sustainable form of steel production into the future. We believe the consultation provided the opportunity for such a plan to be brought forward, and it's hugely disappointing that that has not happened. That will have a significant impact on the lives of thousands of individuals, but also their families, the local community, and communities, in fact, right across south Wales. Our task now is to make sure that we fight for the best possible future for the workers and for the steel industry in Wales. I know the First Minister will be going to Mumbai very shortly to make that case on behalf of the steel production sector and steelworkers in Wales.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. Yesterday, we received a briefing from the Industrial Communities Alliance, suggesting that the Port Talbot steelworks should be brought back into public ownership. Cabinet Secretary, is this something that the Welsh Government support, and have you had any conversations with the UK Government along these lines? Has the Welsh Government made any assessments of the risks and/or benefits of such proposals, which have also been suggested by unions? Finally, Cabinet Secretary, how are you engaging with the wider community around the steelworkers to mitigate the impact of Tata's proposals on those not directly impacted by the proposed redundancies? Thank you.

I think the Member puts quite an extraordinary point to me—that I should have advocated for the UK Government to nationalise steel production in Wales—when this is a Government that has failed to engage for 14 years on the need to deliver a sustainable future for steel in Wales and right across the UK. There were much different plans available to the UK Government if they wanted to support a sustainable steel sector, which does not require nationalisation; it requires taking steel seriously and the livelihoods of steelworkers seriously. And it's a matter of regret that they haven't chosen to do that.

There will be memories of the 1980s, when the Conservatives didn't take the steel industry seriously then, and what happened in my community. What's happening in Port Talbot is very similar now. It's absolutely devastating news, and it will be felt in steel communities right across Wales. [Interruption.] I can hear the comments, but it doesn't make the reality any different, Cabinet Secretary. You recognise in your statement the importance of other sites, including Shotton in my own Constituency. It's absolutely vital that we continue to invest in the skilled workforce in Shotton. The product that comes out the end at the Shotton site is the very best in the world, but to do this, we need the capacity to produce virgin steel here in Wales. Can I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, what conversations you have had particularly about the Shotton site and the future steel supply there?

I thank Jack Sargeant for that important point. I've had assurances from the company that its downstream operations, including the site at Shotton, will continue to operate at planned levels, and that the substrate will be secured from Tata's other steel-making facilities during the transition to electric arc furnace steel making. I agree with the Member that Shotton supplies world-class products, and I am pleased that it will continue to do that during the transition.

An election of a Labour Government with a different industrial policy in October or November will be too late to save a blast furnace that is closing in September. And we know that the company will work very quickly to dismantle, degrade and demolish the blast furnace, because they know that if it's still standing by October or November, with a new Government in place, they will have to reverse their plans. The Welsh Government, we were told by Senedd legal advisers, has the power to maintain and mothball the site. We could introduce emergency legislation. This is not me saying this; this is the Senedd's legal advisers. We could use compulsory purchase-like powers to maintain or mothball the site. If we do that, even just for a few months, we could create the space for that transition to a new policy, new investment, and we can get back to the multi-union plan. Why don't we use the power that we have? Will the Government investigate to see if the Senedd's legal advice is correct, by asking your own lawyers? And will you commit to sharing that legal advice with the Senedd as a whole?

What we want to see is a Labour Government later this year, which will have a clear plan for steel right across the UK, a commitment to invest, and a commitment to invest in the infrastructure that we need for the sustainable future of our economy in Wales. That is why it's an incredible frustration for all of us that Tata is taking the decisions it's taking, at the time that it's taking them, when, on the horizon, directly in front of us, there is a new Government committed to steel production in the way the current Government simply is not.

There is still a commitment from an incoming Labour Government to invest in steel. There is still going to be a need to invest in steel in Wales and across the UK. We will want to see a Labour Government elected to do that, and I want to see commitments from Tata to invest in all its sites in Wales, to make sure that we retain that capacity, that reputation for cutting-edge steel production, even in the transformed methods that they are planning. That investment, that commitment, is critical to our future steel production in Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you very much. It is hugely disappointing that the capitalist steel giant Tata have rejected this index report commissioned by the trade unions—Community and GMB—that examines those alternatives to Tata's plan. And everyone who cares for Wales and the UK's security needs, and the ability to be a primary steel-making nation, will lament this decision, so cross-party support is desperately needed here. But it is the lack of an industrial strategy that is at the bottom of this. 

As the Member of the Senedd for Islwyn, I'm hugely concerned about the impacts of the Tata plan, not just on output volumes across sites at the downstream plant in Llanwern, of which a major part of the largest social housing scheme in Caerphilly borough was built—which is in Ty Sign—but also on the steel security, needing to rely on China and others with strategic UK interest. Is that at the heart of that—to produce UK steel for major infrastructures and the Ministry of Defence? And so, without that UK industrial strategy, I'm hugely concerned that this is going to be detrimental to Wales and the UK. 

These are worrying times, as the plans outlined involve replacing UK production, as I've said, with imported steel instead. That is truly profits placed ahead of people and the environment. So, how and what guarantees are there for the Welsh Government, which they can potentially secure from Tata and the UK Government, to ensure that the Llanwern site, and an important employment zone to the whole of the Gwent region, will see significant investment moving forward, and to safeguard that primary steel-making capacity for the UK?

Well, the Member is right to point out the importance of steel production to the security of the nation, as well as the economic health of the nation. She's absolutely right to say that. That's the case that we've made consistently as the Welsh Government. That's why we believe passionately that a primary steel-making capacity is absolutely critical for the future needs, future health and future security of our economy. And I know that that will be the case that the First Minister makes when he goes to Mumbai next week to speak directly with Tata there. And he will be taking with him, I'm sure, the support of Members in this Chamber who want to see steel production successfully, sustainably transformed into the future, but on the basis of a just transition to that new way of steel production. 

That is the future—a just transition to that, not the plan that we saw Tata bring forward last week, and I'm very sure that's the case the First Minister will be making next week. 

And finally, Jenny Rathbone. 

Thank you. The south Wales industrial cluster's mission statement is to develop a world-leading, truly sustainable industrial cluster to meet society's needs in 2030, 2040, 2050 and beyond. It can't be done without steel—just cannot be done, because nobody's invented the material to build rail lines or renewable energy without steel. And I just feel this is not a net-zero plan, as some people have argued at the other end of the M4, but not colleagues here in the Senedd.

The purpose of the Celtic free port can't simply be to import steel from India or China. In 2013 the Welsh Government bought Cardiff Airport for £52 million. I'd like to echo the words of Altaf Hussain and Adam Price to consider nationalisation as the only route to saving our steel industry, not just for Wales, but for the whole of the UK, because, otherwise, Tata Steel is planning to just walk away from all this. So, we need a bold policy now, and I wonder if you've given any thought to discussing this, both with the UK Government—if they could ever be persuaded of the gravity of this situation—as well as with the Labour administration in waiting.

This is not something that is within the Welsh Government's capacity to deliver, as the Member I think accepts in her question. Obviously, we've seen Governments take public stakes in the banking sector, and it's certainly under discussion in the nuclear sector, so there are contexts in which that is considered. I don't think that those circumstances apply directly in this particular case; the context is different. The plan that Tata are putting forward is not the plan that I want to see, it's not the plan that Members in this Chamber want to see, but it is a plan that they are investing several hundreds of millions of pounds in, so it's a different context to the other examples that I have given.

I want to see a different deal for steel making, a different deal for steelworkers than the one that Tata is pursuing. That is the right future for steel making—one that brings about that just transition to a sustainable steel sector, which builds on the plan that Syndex has developed for the multi-unions, as David Rees was saying earlier, a plan that is costed, is credible, is deliverable, and does deliver that just transition. That deal is still available, and the First Minister wrote to the Prime Minister last week, making that very point.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.