 o'r cymdeithasol y byddai ar gyfer AIB yn gyfnodd. The next item of business is a statement by Fergus Ewing on the future of the Scottish Steel industry. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement and there should therefore be no interventions or interruptions. I just take this opportunity to say to all members who are in the chamber that we are very tight for time this afternoon and I may well have to drop some people from asking a question because we are simply not going to have the time. So if you wish your colleagues to get a question, can you keep your own question as brief as possible? I now call on Fergus Ewing, minister. You have ten minutes. Presiding Officer, I welcome this opportunity to address the chamber, albeit to talk about the extremely disappointing news from steel firm Tata that it intends to mothball its two production plants in Scotland. Two hundred and seventy workers could be directly affected if these plants go ahead, two hundred and twenty-five at the DL plate rolling works and a further forty-five at the Clyde bridge plant. Our thoughts are with them and their families as they go through this period of huge uncertainty. We also express our solidarity with the nine hundred employees at Tata's facility in Scanthorpe who are facing a similar fate. However, let me be clear from the outset, we will leave no stone unturned in our efforts to save the steel industry in Scotland. Our top priority is to secure an alternative operator to continue with commercial production. We are aware that this task is not an easy one and that there are significant challenges facing the continued production of steel in Scotland. But we are, as a Government, determined to use all our resources, devote all our individual time and attention as ministers is required, and do absolutely everything that we can to prevent the loss of steel making in Scotland. This chamber is well aware of the long and proud heritage of steel work in Scotland. The DL plant in Motherwell has been involved in the iron and steel industry since 1872, and the Clyde bridge steel works in Canberra Slang first opened in 1887. Between them, their products have been used across the world in construction, mining and energy exploration sectors. Their steel plates were formed into many of the most famous ships built on the river Clyde and around the world. Even the reputation for quality earned by DL and Clyde bridge could not help them to battle the serious problems that have been faced by the steel industry in recent years. The price of steel has fallen significantly as worldwide production has almost doubled since 2000. Cheap subsidised steel is widely available in western markets. High energy costs, particularly affecting energy-intensive industries, and a strong pound has hit export opportunities. Tata's operations in Scotland and the rest of the UK have suffered greatly against this difficult trading background, as have other steel companies in the UK. Just last week, administrators were appointed to parts of caparo steel with 1,700 jobs at risk. Last month, when SSI mothbald its red-car steel operations, the Westminster Government called for a UK steel summit. The Scottish Government was represented at the UK summit and yesterday, in discussions with Anna Subri, the Minister for Small Business Industry and Enterprise, we confirmed that we will co-operate with the UK Government and contribute fully to the work. I wrote to Anna Subri on 20 October and asked that the Prime Minister continue to urge the Chinese Premier to take voluntary action to reduce capacity in the Chinese steel sector and reduce the volume of exports. I urged the UK Government to help with energy costs for the steel sector by bringing forward the implementation of all the provisions of the energy-intensive industries compensation package from April 2016 to October 2015. I also asked for the UK Government to put as much pressure as possible on the EU to complete as quickly as possible an investigation into Chinese steel imports into Europe and whether it constitutes illegal dumping. When I spoke to Anna Subri yesterday, I stressed those concerns and assured her that we shall contribute fully to any negotiations. I welcome the UK Government's confirmation that it will co-operate fully in relation to state-aid clearance of any deal that may emerge. However, it is disappointing that the UK Government did not agree to allow Scottish ministers to participate in crucial EU discussions, which may affect Scotland's interests in the preservation of a key industry. However, I will not dwell on that today. Following Tata's announcement on 20 October that the Clyde bridge and DL were to be mothballed, we moved immediately to establish a task force with the aim of retaining functioning steel yards, employing as many of the staff as possible. The First Minister visited both sites last Thursday and met Tata steel management, trades unions and the workforce to highlight our full commitment to the issue and to emphasise the primary aim of the task force, namely to seek the continuation of steel making at Clyde bridge and DL. The First Minister specifically asked for Tata steel's commitment to maintaining the staff at both sites throughout the consultation period. It is hugely important to keep the work of the plants going as we seek alternative operators. Scottish Enterprise has already been working with Tata steel to assist the Scottish sites, including commissioning an energy review to identify savings and options for energy generation on-site, including tailored training packages and SMAS support with an efficiency review. That is the manufacturing advisory service. I am chairing the Scottish Steel Task Force, which includes representatives from both Lanarkshire Council, trades unions, the Scottish Government and its agencies, members of the chamber and the Westminster Government, and will co-ordinate the development of a joint multi-agency economic recovery plan to mitigate the economic impacts to the area resulting from Tata steel's announcement. The task force will first meet on Thursday this week and already have Tata steel's commitment to playing a full part in the task force process and to working closely with us throughout the consultation period. We are very grateful for that co-operation. The task force will also consider wider support for the workforce at this difficult time, including ensuring that the modern apprentices employed on site do not have their education affected. To that end, I am happy to confirm that, as an early step, the Scottish Government will guarantee that the modern apprentices employed here will be able to continue with the off-the-job training required to complete their apprenticeship should there be a gap in their employment. In Lanarkshire, we have a highly skilled workforce. It is essential that those skills are not lost but put to productive use. Our primary focus remains on seeking an alternative owner for those plants, which we recognise will not be easy. Whilst I do not think that it is helpful to speculate on which individual commercial organisations may be interested, I can assure you that we will work with all parties who could help with future investment in the plants. I am sure that the chamber will recognise that any discussions in relation to potential alternative operators must be conducted in commercially confidential terms. The Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise, with support from Tata, are developing an information prospectus that will allow our Scottish Development international offices worldwide to generate interest in the opportunity that is presented by this situation in Scotland. I firmly believe that there can be a viable future for a steel industry in Scotland, and I can assure you that this Government will do everything in its power to seek a secure and sustainable future for the Tata sites in Scotland. The Government will, of course, keep the chamber informed of further developments as they arise. For now, I am happy to answer any questions. The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions after which we have to move on to next item of business. It would be helpful if members wished to ask a question where to press the request speak button now. I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. There is no doubt that the mothballing of the plants at the L in Clydebridge is a very serious situation, particularly for the workers and their families, and our thoughts are with them at this time. We must ensure that everything is done, everything to ensure that those plants and jobs remain in place. Steel is an iconic part of the Lanarkshire economy and the Scottish economy, and it would be unacceptable and unimaginable if steel production were to cease at these plants, particularly as the Scottish Government rightly makes infrastructure one of the main platforms of its economic policy, and part of that is the production of steel. Scottish Labour supports the setting up of the task force, but we must ensure that it is not a talking shot. We need hard action. From that point of view, I can ask the minister two specific questions. What financial assistance will the Scottish Government provide to ensure that the physical assets of the plant remain in place while the search for an alternative buyer is found, and what financial assistance will be provided in retaining the skills of the workforce? What work has the Scottish Government done in identifying the steel requirements in current and future public contracts in order that the L in Clydebridge can bid and be successful in retaining the work for those projects so that we can build a sustainable steel operation at these plants going forward? I thank Mr Kelly for the constructive approach and welcome him and colleagues who are represented locally to take part in the work of the task force, which has its first meeting on Thursday of this week. To answer his questions, our primary objective is to seek an alternative operator from the site. That is the primary task. Of course, in the work that the task force will carry out, we shall consider extremely carefully whatever financial assistance that is practicable and legally capable of being extended in order to secure that objective. We will apply that approach throughout our work on energy costs and business rates and in all other areas. Secondly, I entirely agree that the workforce is a highly skilled workforce. We will do exactly what has been done in Wales to where the REACT provided assistance for workers there, and we will ensure that the PACE support is fully extended. Our primary objective is to continue steel production in Scotland and not make provision for what happens after it is closed. Of course, we shall also, in the task force, consider very carefully the needs of the workforce and that will be done. Finally, public contracts. Of course, we are working extremely closely with all public procurement bodies in relation to what future projects could benefit from a Scottish steel supplier. Transport Scotland is already reviewing what future projects fall into that category, and I am very happy to work very closely with Mr Kelly as regards the detail of that as the work of the task force progresses. It is a matter of greatest concern that steel making not just in Scotland but across the UK is under such serious threat. We welcome the co-operation that there has been between UK and Scottish Governments and the establishment of the Scottish task force that the minister referred to. Unite the union has identified five key issues that need to be addressed to help the industry. Help with high energy prices, action on unfair imports, reform of business rates, fair implementation of regulations and the supporting of local content in major construction projects. I appreciate that in relation to some of those, the minister's hands are tied, but business rates have been fully devolved since 1999, and he could act here if he wished. So can the minister tell me what is the annual rates bill paid by the plants at Clydebridge and DL? Secondly, what action will the Scottish Government now take on business rates, given that this has been identified as a key issue and is an area entirely under their control? I welcome the general constructive approach that we are hearing this afternoon from across the chamber, and I think that that is a very important and welcome message to send to everybody affected, that we are working hard to do everything that we can. Of course, I welcome the reference to the trade unions with whom we are in extremely regular contact, and I share the analysis of the particular challenges and the five topics that we are facing. I had a workman-like discussion with Anna Subray yesterday afternoon, where I think that we were broadly coming at it from a shared desire. I mentioned our particular appreciation that the UK Government has already pledged to assist in state aid clearance of any offer that may emerge, and that is a very valuable effort that would be necessary in that event. To answer a specific question from the top of my head, Presiding Officer, the business rates for the two plants combined are £823,000, according to my own arithmetic, carried out earlier this morning. The two plants had appeals against the rateable values at the last revaluation. Both appeals were successful. However, that matters as they stand at the moment. We have, of course, obtained advice in relation to the matter, and we are looking at all possible ways by which assistance can be provided. However, we are constrained, I think that it is only correct to say, by the state aid rules, where there is a maximum amount of assistance that can be provided to any steel company over a period of three years, and it is a relatively small amount of money. However, there are practical measures that may be applicable, depending on what future operator wishes and requirements may be, as regards space by subdivision. There are a number of other possibilities that we are looking at. Of course, I am happy to share the details with Mr Fraser and all other members of the chamber as that work progresses. Clare Adamson, followed by Willie Rennie. I thank the minister for his statement and welcome the Scottish Government's immediate swift approach in establishing the local task force. However, I can say that this is, in stark contrast with the UK Government's response to the steel industry, who have largely ignored the warnings over the past few years and have yet to act on some of the areas that have been detailed by community union, especially in the area of fuel and the energy costs for the company. Does he also share my disappointment that the Scottish ministers will not be included in the European talks? What guarantee can he give us that the case for the high-quality, highly-skilled workforce in both Dylann Clyde bridge will be heard in Europe? Of course, I fully understand that, especially among the workforce in their families, there will be considerable anger and frustration at the events that have happened. Forgive me, Presiding Officer, if I look forward not back and focus on what we might do rather than what might have been. I do, for example, think it important to place on record our appreciation for the full support of Tata in the work that we are doing. Without that full support, I suspect that things would be even more challenging than they are. I think that it is also fair to reflect, and Mr Penland will know that Tata did make substantial investment in DL in 2010 of £8 million, in a new plating operation of £8 million and the same amount in Clyde bridge the following year. It is important to put that on the record. It is simply a matter of fact to record the fact that we are working with Tata here to seek a solution in what is an extremely challenging situation. I did have a chat with Anna Subrie yesterday, as I explained. I did seek representation of the Scottish Government. I did so because we have an interest here in preserving our steel industry, and I felt that we had a constructive role to play as we always seek to do in relation to those negotiations and discussions. I have had some involvement in the past in some of those matters in other areas. That was rejected, but, as I said earlier, I am not going to dwell on that today. Rather, what I hope will emerge today is a unity across all parties in this chamber that we do our very best through the hard work of our agencies, through our leadership. We leave no stone unturned, as the Prime Minister has pledged, in securing the continued future of the steel industry in Scotland. Will he be any followed by John Penland? I thank the minister for an advanced site of his statement. I also welcome the constructive tone across the chamber, by and large across the chamber this afternoon. I understand that the two plants may be attractive to new buyers, because some of the markets have not been fully exploited by Tata in the past, particularly in flood prevention, port infrastructure and defence markets. Has the Government considered a capital investment in those plants, if it is permitted, to allow the company to enter the new markets or a new buyer into those new markets? Is there potential way to support in order to extend the 45-day consultation period so that we do not lose the workforce from those important two plants? I am grateful again for the approach that we are hearing this afternoon from all parties. I think that Mr Rennie, for the first time, has raised two very relevant and apposite issues. Of course, we are fully considering what opportunities there would be for the Scottish side of Tata, namely in Dylen Clybridge, and they offer particular expertise and facilities. Their plate mill can, although I am no expert, carry out work that no other plate mill can carry out. It can make the thickest steel plates, for example. Of dimensions that cannot be replicated in other plants, so I am told by experts. There may be opportunities for the Scottish operations to carry out niche specialist work and to do so at a more profitable level than perhaps has been possible in the past for various reasons. The answer to his first question is yes, of course. We are looking fully at these matters, as he would expect, and taking expert advice on all of those things. Secondly, on the consultation period, it is now 45 days that expires around the 7th or the 8th of December for their abouts from memory just before Christmas. Of course, we are in regular daily contact with Tata, and we will be discussing with it the procedure mechanism involved. However, it is important that we have sufficient time in order for the work that any potential alternative operator may need to carry out by way of due diligence and inquiry to be carried out. Therefore, that will be very much part of our discussions with Tata going forward. The First Minister has on record said that nothing is off the table and she would leave no stone unturned in her attempts to keep DL and Clydebridge steel works open with options that include, as with presswick public ownership. Given that this is a possibility and one that I think must be given serious consideration, what is the Scottish Government doing to assess and prepare for such an outcome? I thank Mr Pentland for his question and respect, his own experience in the industry over his lifetime. Of course, we are considering all potential options. It is accurate to say that our preferred option is to identify a buyer, a commercial operator, and I think that that patently would be the best possible option. All other options involving any element of public state support immediately risk difficulty with the state aid rules. However, I want to assure the chamber, as the First Minister has confirmed, that all options will be considered, but the main focus of the task force will be looking to secure another private sector operator for both sites. While we appreciate the Government's considerable efforts to do all the things mentioned in the statement and to find a buyer for the steel works in DL and Clydebridge, can I ask that the Government engage with Tata and the workforce to consider an employee buy-out to be exercised with a repayable loan from the Government? My experience tells me that in those circumstances and with capital investment, productivity increases, costs reduce, even higher quality results and new upmarket opportunities are defined. That can all be done very quickly. I can confirm that I have had a frequent dialogue with Tata, as have our senior officials on a daily basis. I had a discussion with John Bolton yesterday. John Bolton and Colin Timmons will be attending the task force for Tata on Thursday. All I would say to Mr Brody is really the same as I said to Mr Pentland. Sadly, this is an extremely difficult time for the workers, but it is relatively early days in the task that we have set ourselves. We need a bit of time in order to work with colleagues to explore all possible options. At this stage, it would be premature and, indeed, foolish for any option to be rolled out. Plainly, we are, as we always are, determined to ensure the input from the workforce. After all, who knows how to do things better than the people who are actually doing the job? The minister will be aware that Tata Steel has been increasing the capacity to build wind turbines at DL and Clybrish plants. Further to this, it has the potential to repurpose steel from decommissioned oil rigs. Currently, there are 11 million tonnes of scrap steel leaving Britain every year to be recycled in other parts of Europe. Any investment in those plants would help them compete in this market. Have those two areas of potential production been discussed with the task force? Will the Government support any investment needed to make this happen? The member is absolutely correct to say that the construction of wind turbines is an area in respect of which I understand that Clybrish has expressed an interest, taken a close interest, as is shipbuilding. In relation to that, I can confirm that we are looking to see what opportunities there are in respect of the building of the two ferries by Ferguson's Marine Engineering Limited. Of course, we are looking at all potential options, and the task force will consider all potential sources of business. However, we need to seek to identify, encourage and provide whatever appropriate support is sought by any potential alternative operator. That is something that we shall do informed by the sorts of issues that the member raises. Minister, high energy costs are cited as one of the problems facing UKI operators. What has the Scottish Government done to help to tackle the problem, and do they agree that the current UK Government regulation regarding energy pricing undermines not just the steel industry in Scotland, but all industry in Scotland? Well, there are two things in response to Christina McKelvie's question. Firstly, I think that it was on the 4 February when I visited DL that I instructed that there should be a detailed energy analysis carried out. That has been carried out by Mabbit and Associates. The purpose of that was to identify by what means the cost could be reduced. That report is completed. It is commercially confidential. At the moment, at least, I hope that it will be made public in the course of the work that the task force does. However, I think that it is reasonable to say that it identifies a number of opportunities to bring down the energy costs. That is why I instructed it back in February. Secondly, as the member raises, the UK has sought to bring in support for energy-intensive industries. That has been debated for quite a long time. I discussed it with Anas Subri yesterday. We had a very productive and workman-like conversation. I believe that she is doing absolutely all that she personally can in order to bring forward the support from April to an earlier time. She is undertaking to keep in regular contact with myself and my officials to secure that objective. That would make a solid contribution towards the capacity to be able to continue with a steel industry in Scotland and indeed the UK. I thank the minister for his statement and for the swift creation of the task force. It is absolutely right that the critical phase of the situation that the task force is looking particularly at Clyde Bridge and DL. Will the minister confirm that the wider steel manufacturing sector in Scotland needs to be considered by the task force? In particular, the Valarec plant that Clyde Stales works at Mossend, which has undertaken two rounds of redundancy in the past year, has been adversely affected by the downturn in the North Sea oil sector. It is a plant that produces high-quality product and is the only heat treatment plant in the whole of the United Kingdom. It also requires to be considered in the wider picture so that it does not become a critical consideration in the future. I agree that that is relevant. It probably will not be the primary focus of the task force to answer his question directly, but it is certainly related and relevant. A large number of businesses are involved in the sector in Scotland and south of the border, and they are all anxious about the future of the industry in Britain. I and the Deputy First Minister know that from discussions that we have had directly with some of those companies, so he is absolutely correct to raise this issue, and that will form a part of our deliberations. I welcome the minister's confirmation that apprentices will be able to continue their qualifications. Will he advise whether the Scottish Government will look to put support in place at the end of those qualifications to support those apprentices into employment should they not be able to find employment directly in the steel industry? I am happy to provide that confirmation. That ends the ministerial statement. We now move on to the next item of business, which is a statement by Eileen McLeod on the Scottish Greenhouse Gas emissions annual target report 2013.