Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 24th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lisa Smart]

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. We have seen some press reports about civil servants who were doing their job and absolutely rightly questioning some of the expenses that were being put through, but they were overruled. That clearly is not good enough and not acceptable, and it is not what we should expect from our institutions and establishment. I completely agree about the importance of being clear about what we expect when somebody takes on a public role at cost to the taxpayer.

We should have very high standards. We should, as the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) said, talk about how we can ensure that those with power are held to account. She was entirely right in the points she made about what we do with this information, where we go with it and how we build from here.

My hon. Friend the Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) made a really strong speech in which he gave very constructive suggestions to the Minister of measures that we Liberal Democrats would support in bringing about change to the system.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

My hon. Friend will be aware that we are in the week of St David’s day, which is a terribly important day for all of us in Wales. In terms of accountability, she will be very aware of the long-standing stance that the Liberal Democrats have taken on the Crown Estate, which in Wales regrettably still has not been devolved. Its powers and funding have been devolved to Scotland, but not—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Can I just check whether the Member has been here for a while or just arrived? Members should not be intervening after traipsing in during a speech. I will allow Ms Smart to continue.

Postal Services: Rural Areas

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I commend the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing this debate, and on his excellent speech.

Last year, postal services became a source of real frustration, anxiety and, frankly, anger in Radnorshire. Across Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, and right across rural Wales, we saw serious problems in the run-up to Christmas. Parcels were marked as delivered but never arrived, items were left at farm gates, on main roads or in full view of passers-by, Christmas presents went missing, and essential items were delayed for days or even weeks, and then marked as lost. When things went wrong, people found it almost impossible to speak to a real human being to sort it out.

I want to be clear that, in my opinion, those problems stem from the corporate leadership of Evri. The problem is a systemic one within their business model, and rural areas are feeling the consequences first and hardest. Constituents of mine in the Teme valley tell me that their experience with Evri was awful. One constituent told me that they

“have never received a single Evri parcel on time, most never ever arrive, and those that do are weeks or months late.”

My constituents tell me that they often pay extra for faster shipping, but they then have to spend significant time processing refunds and working with credit card companies to recover some of the lost money.

A frustration for customers is that they often cannot choose their delivery company. It is chosen for them by the retailer they are buying from. When a parcel company performs badly, consumers are simply stuck with the consequences. Consumer bodies back that up, and companies like Evri consistently rank bottom for customer satisfaction, yet too often nothing seems to change. That is where regulation matters. There must be clear, enforceable service standards for parcel deliveries, including in rural areas, on safe delivery practices, accurate tracking and proper access to customer support when things go wrong.

Consumers who have no choice over their courier should not be left navigating automated systems or vague updates when a parcel is lost or delayed. If companies repeatedly fail customers, especially in rural and hard-to-serve areas, there must be consequences—not just guidance or warm words, but real accountability.

For many of my constituents, Evri’s failures have meant money lost, ruined Christmases, wasted time and a growing sense that rural communities are once again expected to put up with worse service. Rural Wales deserves reliability, respect and accountability, not excuses. I urge Ministers to take this issue seriously, and ensure that parcel delivery works for every part of the country, not just the easiest ones to serve.

Meat Exports to the EU

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered meat exports to the EU.

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I am grateful for the opportunity to open this debate on the export of meat to the European Union, and in particular on the ongoing difficulties faced by farmers and producers in constituencies like mine when exporting to markets such as Germany and the Netherlands.

This debate matters, because a system that worked well for Welsh agriculture has been replaced by one that is more expensive, more bureaucratic and far less reliable. It has become clear that, although progress has been made, a fully settled and implemented common sanitary and phytosanitary arrangement is not yet in place, and will not be in place in the immediate future. As a result, exporters remain subject to many of the same requirements introduced after Brexit, and those requirements are having real consequences on the ground.

Right now, there is only an intention to negotiate a framework for talks and announcements about what might happen in the future. But intentions do not move meat across borders, announcements do not pay veterinary bills, and frameworks do not stop lorries being delayed. That is what Welsh farmers are struggling with right now.

Before Brexit, exporting Welsh lamb to Europe was straightforward: there were no export health certificates, no mandatory veterinary sign-off and no routine border control checks. Welsh lamb moved freely into its natural markets, allowing farmers to plan, invest and grow with confidence. Since Brexit, that has changed completely. Today, a single consignment of lamb can require export health certificates, official veterinary approval, customs declarations and SPS checks at EU border posts. Every step adds cost, delay and risk, especially for a perishable, time-sensitive product.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: an SPS agreement would be an enormous opportunity for communities like his and mine that export to the European Union. But there are already significant divergences between the United Kingdom and the European Union, so does he agree that, if that SPS agreement is to be negotiated, then it is essential that the Cabinet Office does so much more than it is doing at the moment to consult and to bring British agriculture along with it; otherwise, the agreement will be full of unintended consequences?

[David Chadwick]

I agree with my right hon. Friend. The Government would do well to listen to his wisdom and knowledge, and indeed to that of the farmers, because they are the people experiencing these problems at first hand.

[Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[David Chadwick]

I am going to continue for a bit.

Welsh lamb is not a niche export; it is foundational to the rural economy. Welsh food and drink exports were worth £813 million in 2023, with around three quarters going to EU markets. The EU remains the destination for around a third of Welsh lamb exports, around 90% of Welsh beef exports and the vast majority of Welsh dairy exports. Markets such as Germany and the Netherlands matter because they are the natural entry points into the European food system, but lamb cannot sit at borders while paperwork is argued over. A delay of hours can strip value from a load; a rejected consignment can wipe out profit for a week. Farmers tell me it is now easier to export lamb thousands of miles away than to our nearest neighbours. That is not control; it is self-harm.

No doubt Ministers will point to headlines claiming that red tape has been slashed, but the reality for farmers tells a different story. Export health certificates are still required, veterinary sign-offs remain mandatory and checks are still taking place. Costs are still being borne by producers, and that eats into their profit margins. Because there is no settled SPS agreement, enforcement continues to vary from port to port and country to country.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. To add to the complexity of the matter—there is always more complexity —on 1 January, new rules for veterinary medicines took effect in Northern Ireland, meaning that 40% of veterinary medicine pack sizes available to NI farmers could be discontinued due to the requirement for separate authorisations from Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Does he not agree that the large part that Northern Ireland plays in the supply of lamb and meat—worth up to some £4 billion—must be considered as part of the UK’s discussion with the EU? We should not be taken as a third nation—that is no solution. I hope that the Minister will be able to answer that question.

[David Chadwick]

The economic impact of this issue is being felt across the United Kingdom, and that is because there is still no settled SPS agreement. That has resulted in uncertainty, and uncertainty is poison for trade. Many smaller producers have already been cut out of EU markets, unable to cope with the administrative burden and added cost.

There is also a clear imbalance in how trade is being managed. Under the border target operating model, checks are meant to be risk based, yet medium-risk products of animal origin imported from the EU into Great Britain face physical inspection rates of around 1%, while equivalent UK exports to the EU face inspection rates of between 15% and 30%. That is not a level playing field. It places heavier costs on UK farmers, while leaving them exposed to unfair competition from imports.

That imbalance is compounded by repeated delays to the UK’s own border controls. The transitional staging period for the border target operating model has been extended again, this time to January 2027—the sixth delay already. Farming unions have warned that, without effective border checks, the UK remains vulnerable to animal disease. Those concerns have been echoed by Parliament’s own Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.

None of this is accidental. These barriers exist because the UK chose to leave the single market. That choice was driven by a Conservative party that was willing to sacrifice British farming, and it was championed by Reform, who promised farmers frictionless trade while delivering friction at every stage of the export process. Welsh farmers were told that they would keep their markets, that nothing would change for them and that they were taking back control, but what they got was more paperwork, higher costs and fewer buyers. In Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, farming underpins entire communities. When lamb exports become uneconomic, investment stalls, confidence drains away and young farmers begin to question whether there is a future for them. Rural Wales is hollowing out through constant, grinding pressure on farming communities and the wider supply chains that they support.

Efforts to restore relations with our nearest trading partners and pursue an SPS agreement with the EU are welcome, but such an agreement must be developed in close collaboration with industry, and it must be delivered urgently. Farmers cannot wait indefinitely while negotiations drag on. Any agreement should be concluded as soon as is practical and no later than the end of this Parliament, in order to protect market access and prevent further damage to the sector.

Welsh farmers were promised certainty, continuity and opportunity. Instead, they got the Conservatives’ and Reform’s Brexit, and a deal that still does not exist. This debate is about facing that reality, owning the consequences and finally doing right by the people who feed this country and sustain our rural communities. Backing Welsh and British farming means more than slogans; it means restoring access to markets.

Coal Tip Safety and New Extraction Licences

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd October 2025 Westminster Hall

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I thank the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) for securing this important debate. Our constituencies meet around a former coalmine, so it is fitting that we are working on this issue together.

The legacy of the coal industry is still all around us in Wales. Coal built our modern nation, but it also left deep marks on our land and our communities. Yesterday marked 59 years since the Aberfan disaster, when 144 lives were lost, including those of 116 children. Aberfan reminds us of what happens when safety is overlooked. We owe it to Aberfan and to every mining community to ensure that such a tragedy is never repeated.

Yet almost 60 years on, the dangerous legacy of coal still hangs over Wales. There are more than 2,000 disused coal tips across Wales, and several of the highest-risk sites are in my constituency. They stand as a stark reminder that the danger has not disappeared; it has simply been neglected. What that means for local residents is that each spell of heavy rain brings renewed fear. Recent landslips in Cwmtillery show that this risk is real, and it is growing as wetter weather destabilises former pits.

No community should have to live in fear every time it rains. That is why the UK Government must commit the £600 million needed to make our former coal tips safe. This is a problem that predates devolution, and the cost should not fall on the Welsh Government alone. These communities in Wales powered Britain’s wealth, and the responsibility for their safety must be shared by Britain as a whole.

The legacy of coal is written across the open scars on our hills. Across south Wales, open-cast sites have been left in limbo after operators walked away, leaving vast holes in the landscape and leaving the taxpayer to foot the bill. In my constituency, the East Pit mine between Tairgwaith and Cwmllynfell is a clear example. It was never restored because no proper restoration bond was put in place, and it is now a deep chasm filled with millions of tonnes of water—a monument to failure and neglect. That must change. We need stronger legislation so that open-cast mines are properly regulated and fully restored, with enforceable bonds to ensure that no company can ever again abandon a community.

Despite such injustices, what matters now is investment and delivery. We must look forward. Communities across south Wales deserve real progress and not more broken promises. The proposals from Reform UK to issue new coal licences are not a credible plan for our future in south Wales; they are a retreat into the past. To suggest that the answer for the valleys lies in reopening mines is not only wrong; it is deeply patronising. I come from a Welsh mining family and I am very proud of my roots in Maesteg, but I certainly do not want to undertake the same work that my great-grandfathers had to do, because I remember how they ended up.

Our young people do not want to be sent back down the pits. They want secure, well-paid jobs in clean energy and modern industries. The communities of the valleys are resilient, proud and determined, but that resilience should not be taken for granted. Promises of investment, which too often have been made and too often broken, must finally be delivered for south Wales. The people of the south Wales valleys have given more than enough, and we are still waiting for our new south Wales to emerge. We deserve safety, fairness and a future built on renewal, not nostalgia. Let us honour our past by investing in the future.

Jaguar Land Rover Cyber-attack

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 9th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

Fundamentally, this is a question about resilience across British industry. These attacks are costing British industries millions of pounds a day. What are the Government doing to facilitate knowledge-sharing within industry to boost resilience and guard against operational technology attacks? I know from personal experience that people in the cyber industries like to share information together, but require a forum to do so.

[Chris Bryant]

The hon. Member is right. For that matter, I suspect that every single Member of the House will have had some kind of attempted cyber-attack, whether that is phishing or vishing or whatever it may be on their mobile phones, where something comes up that looks remarkably possible. Then you say to yourself, “Oh, no, HMRC probably wouldn’t ask me to do that.” I urge all Members, incidentally, to take their own personal cyber-security seriously, and the House provides facilities for that. One other thing that we can do is for all companies to follow the cyber governance code of practice and provide board training. The more that board members understand these issues, the better.

UK Modern Industrial Strategy

David Chadwick Excerpts

Monday 23rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds]

Further education has had a difficult time over the past few years and we are starting to see the kind of investment that will make a difference. We need more business input into skills’ policy, which I think is the kind of work that my hon. Friend was talking about. I am more than happy to come up the road from Stalybridge to Rochdale one Friday, and we can have that conversation in person. There will be many bids from Greater Manchester for the capital that we are putting forward, and I look forward to looking at the bid that he mentions.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

I commend the Government on reintroducing an industrial strategy, which is crucial for spreading out good jobs across the United Kingdom. In my constituency, the hospitality industry is crucial to our local economy as it boosts tourism, creates jobs and helps with rural regeneration, but it is struggling with sky-high energy costs. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that SMEs in all sectors of our economy, particularly pubs and restaurants, receive better support with their energy costs?

[Jonathan Reynolds]

This industrial strategy seeks to deliver more inward investment. For example, Universal is making an incredible investment in Bedfordshire, where is seeks to deliver the biggest theme park in Europe, creating 8,000 jobs in hospitality. People should recognise that there is a direct relationship between what we are doing here, what we are trying to get more of and the kind of benefits that the hon. Gentleman talks about. We have set a target of 50 million visitors by 2030, so such issues are represented in the strategy and, as I say, some of the issues that are not covered will be in the small business plan, which will come out imminently next month.

Groceries Code Adjudicator

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Westminster Hall

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) for securing this debate—he is right to describe the supermarkets as an “economic tyranny.” We Liberal Democrats are also concerned about concentrations of power, and there is currently no greater concentration of power in our food chain than that held by the supermarkets.

Welsh farmers face pressures on all fronts. Nineteen per cent of British sheep are in Powys. However, despite the current bout of food inflation, farm incomes are still falling. One of the biggest challenges is the simple fight for fair treatment within the agricultural supply chain. Farmers deserve to be treated fairly, which is why the Liberal Democrats championed, during the coalition years, the creation of the Groceries Code Adjudicator to tackle unacceptable practices by supermarkets that, time and again, used their size and power to squeeze local producers.

The GCA has helped to improve the situation since its launch in 2014, but farmers are still coming forward with stories of unfair treatment such as last-minute order changes, delayed payments and punitive delisting. These are David versus Goliath situations in which small producers are left shouldering huge losses, while the big retailers rack up billions in profits. Just last year, Tesco posted £2.3 billion in profit, while Asda brought in more than £1 billion, but many farmers, particularly in Wales, are barely breaking even. Studies back this up: nearly half of UK farms fear they could go out of business, and three quarters say that supermarket behaviour is a major concern.

The GCA needs more teeth. It must be able to launch its own investigations, rather than waiting for complaints. Too many farmers are scared to come forward, as they are worried about being blacklisted or dropped. The GCA’s scope also needs to be widened. Many food suppliers, such as processors and packagers, are not covered, despite playing significant roles in the supply chain. Retailers such as Amazon were added only recently, and Amazon scores extremely low on compliance. With an increasing market share of smaller, online and non-traditional grocery retailers, many of which do not come close to hitting the £1 billion a year turnover threshold to be covered by the GCA, major players are falling through the cracks.

Better funding, more staff, greater transparency and anonymous reporting tools would all make the GCA more effective. It has achieved real progress in the last decade, but if we want to protect our farmers, our food supply and the rural communities they support, the GCA must be given the power, the scope and the resources to help secure a fairer agricultural supply chain.

Carer’s Leave

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 14th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) not just for securing this debate but for her tireless advocacy for carers. Her landmark Carer’s Leave Act was a vital first step in recognising the contribution of unpaid carers, and showed just how committed the Liberal Democrats are to securing a fair deal for carers.

In Wales, the situation of carers is especially urgent. Over 310,000 people in Wales identify as unpaid carers—more than 10.5% of the population, which is a higher percentage than in any other UK nation. In some parts of my constituency, particularly in the Swansea valley, the figure is closer to 13%, which itself is likely to be an underestimate. Many carers do not realise that they qualify as such, so they go without vital support.

[Ann Davies]

The value of the 310,000 carers we have in Wales is £10 billion, so they are saving the Welsh economy—or the DWP here—£10 billion. Surely, we must have a system whereby carers, through the leave that they can receive, are empowered to apply for jobs that will give them the opportunity to work and care at the same time. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that having such a system is vital for the DWP’s money to be used wisely?

[David Chadwick]

I absolutely agree. We have already heard in this debate some of the personal stories of people involved in caring and the challenges that they are taking on. The hon. Lady was quite right to point to the financial figures and the impact that this situation is having on our economy. For example, Powys Teaching Health Board has a deficit of just over £16 million a year, and it is paying another £16 million a year to other health boards to provide social care in our area. That highlights the contribution that unpaid carers make: if the gap were not being plugged by unpaid carers, the cost would be even higher.

Wales struggles more with the issue of unpaid carers than other UK nations because we have an ageing population, poorer health outcomes and rising levels of complex care needs. Our carers are stepping up where our social care system is stretched, but they do so at great personal cost, as has already been highlighted. They are disproportionately affected by poverty—unpaid carers in Wales are nearly twice as likely as other people to live in poverty and one in five of them are among the most deprived people in our society. For many of them, taking unpaid leave to care for a loved one simply is not an option; it is a financial risk that they simply cannot afford to take.

That is why the Carer’s Leave Act matters, because it gives carers across the UK the legal right to five days of unpaid leave. However, that right is only meaningful if people can afford to use it and know about it. Recent data from Carers Wales shows that 55% of carers have not taken unpaid leave—not because they do not need it, but because they cannot afford to lose that income. A year on from the law taking effect, a third of carers in Wales still do not know their full rights.

This is not just about fairness—it is about economic reality. Both the UK and Welsh Governments have spoken about the importance of getting more people into work and driving economic growth. The work of unpaid carers saves the Welsh Government over £10 billion a year. Paid carer’s leave is not a luxury but a necessity. It is a matter of dignity, equality and basic economic justice. I urge the Government to build on the ambition shown by the Liberal Democrats and commit to introducing paid carer’s leave by the end of this Parliament. Carers should not be punished for their compassion. They should be supported, respected and recognised as the backbone of our caring system.

British Steel

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Jones]

My hon. Friend makes important points and that is exactly what we are looking at in the steel strategy. On dumping steel, having been requested to examine the issue by British Steel, the Trade Remedies Authority has agreed to look at steel safeguards and ensure that they are fit for purpose in the here and now. We are also looking at what happens beyond 2026, when the steel safeguards stop, to ensure that sufficient safeguards are in place. All the issues she mentions need to be looked at, including electricity prices and energy prices, which doubled under the last Conservative Government. As we have said before, 53% of global steel production comes from China. We need to look at that imbalance, at how we can ensure cheap steel does not come into this country and at how carbon leakage is working. We are working hard on all those issues.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

If the Government now believe that primary steelmaking capacity is critical for the security of the UK, do they also recognise that the skilled workers needed to produce that steel are equally as important? If so, why were they willing to let 2,800 of them be made unemployed last September in Port Talbot?

[Sarah Jones]

I hope the hon. Gentleman understands that the interventions that we made in this case were different for a number of reasons. When we were in Opposition, we worked with Tata to try to get it to change its plans, but we were unsuccessful. When we came into Government, we improved the deal that the previous Government had negotiated and we improved the redundancy offer. We got Tata to commit to invest in assets and free up land for other things, and we got it to provide a package of measures to improve that situation. The hon. Gentleman is right that that package meant the closure of the blast furnaces and the building of an electric arc furnace, with the closure happening before the electric arc furnace arrived, and because of the way that electric arc furnaces work, they are more efficient and need fewer people. We have been working really hard through the transformation board, led by the Secretary of State for Wales and the Welsh Government, to ensure that everybody has a significant package of support to try to ensure they transition to other jobs. That work is ongoing and progressing well, and we will continue to focus on it.

The two situations were fundamentally different. In Scunthorpe, British Steel was in the middle of a consultation on potential redundancies, and it failed to secure the materials to keep the blast furnaces going, which would have completely broken what British Steel should have been doing during that consultation. We could not allow that to happen, those blast furnaces to close and thousands of people to be suddenly made redundant, which is why we intervened in the way we did.

Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill

David Chadwick Excerpts

2nd reading
Saturday 12th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

Last year, the Government said they would introduce a new steel strategy that would create more well-paid jobs in the places where they are most needed. Following last year’s closures of the blast furnaces at Port Talbot, many of my constituents have lost their jobs or seen their incomes fall. That includes the thousands of workers who were laid off at the plant itself, but also those further down the supply chain, including haulage drivers and payroll clerks providing services to the 2,000 local businesses that have been impacted by that closure.

The closure of Port Talbot’s blast furnaces started an economic contraction in south Wales that is still under way. Many highly skilled workers, particularly welders, are leaving south Wales in search of opportunities elsewhere. It is rubbing salt in the wounds for the people of Port Talbot to hear the Government now acknowledge the importance of primary steel production as a strategic national asset. Where was this urgency when Welsh steel communities were crying out for support?

Last year, when Tata Steel announced over 2,800 job losses at Port Talbot—the largest steelworks in the country, a key strategic asset, and the manufacturing heart of south Wales—there was no recall of Parliament, no Saturday sitting, no emergency legislation and no rapid mobilisation of the Government to save the day, despite every warning sign being there. The unions raised the alarm and industry experts warned of the economic shock, but the warnings were ignored. Now, faced with similar risks in England, the Government suddenly rediscover their ability to act swiftly.

The simple fact is that the Government did not recall Parliament for Port Talbot, and they did not recall Parliament for Wales. If today’s decision is in the national interest, why did the Government not offer similar protections to Port Talbot, which had more capacity and greater output? Have the Government been fenced in by closing the blast furnaces at Port Talbot too early? How much of the steel supply chain will the Government now commit to protecting?

Employment at Port Talbot fell from over 18,000 employees at its height over the past few decades to around 4,000 before last year’s closure decision, and now there are just 2,000 steelworkers employed there. Those jobs are sorely missed. Welsh steel is all around us, and Port Talbot once produced the steel used in everyday products such as Heinz baked beans tins. It is absolutely right that we are now acknowledging the importance of domestically produced steel. Communities that once powered the UK’s growth, particularly the Swansea valley, the Neath valley, Port Talbot and Maesteg, now face an economic reckoning with far too little urgency from this Government in return.

This is personal for many of us from south Wales. My grandfather worked at the blast furnaces at the Port Talbot steelworks, and it gave him the opportunity, as it did many others, to set up his own business—in his case, a waste management company. That is what is really at risk now, and that is what is really withering away in south Wales. It is not just the jobs on the steelworks floor, but the entire network of small businesses, tradespeople and suppliers that rely on the steel industry’s presence in our communities. We know that for every steelworker made redundant, up to three or four local jobs are at risk of disappearing. The message from Westminster has been clear: when crisis hits in Wales, it is tolerated; when it hits elsewhere, it becomes a national emergency.

We cannot go on like this. Steel is strategic, it is critical to our national resilience, and it matters just as much in south Wales as anywhere else. This Government’s failure to act swiftly in Wales, to consult transparently with workers and to invest in a serious and just transition has undermined confidence and left people in Port Talbot, Llanwern, Shotton and many others across Wales feeling abandoned.

Some 2,800 jobs were lost at the blast furnaces alone, and many of those workers say they have simply been left behind. We have heard the Prime Minister say over the past few days that he wants to take control of steel. Why did he not say that when Welsh jobs were on the line? Why was Port Talbot not worth fighting for in the same way?

We need a proper UK-wide industrial strategy—one that recognises the vital role of Welsh steel in our national economy and, most importantly, one that treats workers in every part of the UK with the same respect, urgency and seriousness. The steelworking communities of Wales have not forgotten the silence that met their cries for help, and they will not accept a future in which their communities are left behind.