Economy, Trade, and Rural Affairs Committee

I ask Members to note the papers on the agenda, under point 2 of the agenda. Are Members happy to note those? Great. We don't need to go through all of that—that's the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

We'll go straight into questions now, we will. I'll ask the witnesses, if possible, please, from the right to the left, just to introduce themselves and their positions within their respective organisations for the record, and then we'll go straight to the questions. So, Richard, if I could start with you, please.

Good morning. Richard Ballantyne, chief executive of the British Ports Association.

Good morning, everyone. Ian Davies, Stena Line Ports, and head of Government affairs.

Good morning, everyone. Anna Malloy, communications and marketing director at the Port of Milford Haven.

Thank you. I'd like to open the proceedings if possible, please, about the actual closure itself and what actually caused the closure. I appreciate that there have been various suggestions about what happened and, in coming in today, I heard various things on the radio, especially from your good self—Ian, I think, was on the radio talking to this. Your paper does talk about collisions to the terminal jetty. What can you disclose to the committee about why exactly the terminal was shut down during 6 and 7 December, and continues to be shut down—certainly, terminal 3 continues to be shut down?

Okay. Yes. Good morning, everyone. There were two berthing incidents, one on the sixth and the following one on the seventh in Holyhead on terminal 5. There was contact on the first one, the T5 was then inspected and then, the following sailing, there was another contact damage. It was around the time that there was a storm due. On the second contact, pile D2.2 collapsed, and at that point the port was then closed. As per my briefing notes to the committee this morning, the berths in Holyhead are constructed on a series of steel piles—three piles. The left pile makes up T3, the right is T5, and the centre pile section is the axis, allowing mooring gangs to walk up and down between the respective berths. So, D2.2 is the pile closest to the linkspan. The linkspan is the ship-shore infrastructure that links the two, and that collapsed late at night after the second incident.

Is it the case that it was not necessarily the storm caused the damage, but the actual seamanship, because the ships hitting it were, obviously, managed coming into the port and looking to dock, and that's when the damage was caused? I note, in the evidence that you provided, you highlighted two other instances—one in 2023, and earlier in 2024. So, rather than focusing on the storm, it's maybe more a case that the seamanship that caused the damage.

All we can say at this time is there's, obviously, an ongoing investigation into the actual cause, and part of that is a claim going on. But I can confirm there were two berthing incidents, one on 6 December and one on 7 December, immediately prior to the collapse of D2.2.

But the earlier ones that you referenced, in 2023 and 2024, were they similar incidents to what happened on the weekend of the sixth and seventh, because your paper talks of earlier incidents in 2023 and earlier in 2024?

Sorry, I don't recall actually seeing those particular instances in my paper.

Certainly, the papers we've received highlight incidents of hitting the jetty in 2023 and 2024.

Okay. There are contacts all the time. So, in Holyhead port itself, there are eight berthings every day and eight departures every day. It's part of the onward going—. The berth is designed to take contact damage—or, sorry, to take contact—but it's very slow-speed contact. They're designed to certain berthing parameters. These contacts, maybe of a different magnitude, happen all the time, as the vessels come in.

But it would be fair to say—and I hear what you say about the insurance claim—that it's not necessarily the storm that's caused this problem, because the storm wasn't in full flow at the time. It's more a case of, obviously, the seamanship happening when the ships were docking and leaving the port that caused the damage.

Correct—well, correct in the sense that this happened before that storm. So, the red weather warning was at 3 o'clock in the morning until 11 o'clock, and these incidents happened prior to that.

That's helpful. The flow of information as well is important, and the control of that information, so that people know what's going on, is really important, especially from a haulier's point of view, who've got time-sensitive loads as well. In your paper, Ian, you highlight that there were some briefings that were unhelpful, and, obviously, information going into the public domain that maybe gave false information, and where you, as a company, as port operators, were able to assist in correcting that information, you did that. Are you able to tell us who was giving those briefings that were unhelpful at the time?

Without naming the persons, it wasn't in Wales. But there were speculations about how long the jetties would be closed for in other media outlets. Now, with some of those, the media outlets approached us, and we were able to correct that, but, unfortunately, some of them were published.

So, you're clearly saying that's on the Irish side of the equation here.

Correct, yes.

That's helpful to understand as well. Was it corrected relatively quickly, or did that disinformation create more confusion?

With some of them, we were given the opportunity. Sometimes, the media outlets would come to us and ask for us to comment on these things, and we were able to correct it before it was published. Some of them, unfortunately, didn't come to us for correction, and they were published.

Thank you. Hannah.

Thank you. I'm just going to turn to remediation and progress in reopening the port. I think the first question, really, from me is aimed at you, Ian, again. Can you outline the extent of the damage to the port infrastructure, the scale of the task involved in fully repairing that now, and the steps required to do so?

Yes, indeed. So, as per my briefing notes, the berths are a series of very large steel pile structures. They're roughly 2m in diameter and they're 50m in total length. These are driven into the sea bed. D2.2 has partially collapsed and it's fallen at an angle. As part of that, and the way that the structure is built, that structure is then connected to a pile, D1, which allows access, often, on the berths.

So, we faced two problems. There was gaining access onto the berths, so we put some intermediate steps in place, which involved chartering in some jacket barges and putting some walkways in, and that allowed us access onto the berth. So, that first pile is being repaired currently and the walkways will be reinstated in the next two weeks. That then allows the replacement of D2.2, which is the main pile. So that's been designed, it's been checked by engineers, the order has been placed for that pile and the associated fender gear, so we have a lead time on those piles. The pile itself is 50m long and it weighs roughly 55 tonnes, so it's all very heavy engineering. The reason, perhaps, I gave quite detailed descriptions in the notes of the construction of the berth—. The way this berth is built and maintained, there is no roadway across the top of it, so all work has to be done from the seaward side. That's the challenge with this berth.

So, the next step will be to lift the fallen pile, which weighs roughly 120 tonnes. It's a big structure. That will have to be taken out by a floating barge, and then we will have to put a new pile in. So, it was hoped that we could replace the pile in the same pile socket, like replacing a false tooth—you put it in the same hole. That's not possible, so we will drive a new pile next to D2.2 and then attach all the associated gear, then it will go through testing and so forth. And we're predicting we should get that finished by 1 July.

I was just going to pick up on the reporting that it won't reopen until 1 July. I think you've perhaps outlined already why it will take so long to repair and the complexity and the access as well, but what are the implications for service over the delay in being able to get it up and running again?

Okay. So, Holyhead has two roll-on, roll-off berths, T3 and T5. T3, as I say, is currently out of action, and T5 reopened, as we said, on 16 January. All services operated by Stena Line ferries and Irish Ferries have been accommodated on to the T5 berth, so the capacity is exactly the same currently in Holyhead as previous to the incident. The difference is really in the timetable. Previously, due to the competitive nature of that market, the two ferry operators operated a very similar timetable. Currently they have come to an agreement where they operate a sailing alternatively every three hours. So, we have the same number of vessels, same capacity, same number of sailings and departures in a day, and in April there is a fast ferry service that normally starts, and that has been accommodated as well. So, all ferry services and capacity remain the same as prior to the incident.

Thanks. The focus right now is on the immediate repair and getting things back up and running, but, when anything of this magnitude happens, there is always an opportunity to review and learn lessons from it, so I was just wondering what is Holyhead port doing in terms of review procedures following what happened, and how, in a way, has the workforce been included in that. I know we've heard concerns, perhaps, about some of the practices, but how are they going to be involved in making sure lessons are learnt from this?

Okay. So, when we had this alternative arrangement that we're currently operating on T5—. So, we designed it—full co-operation of the workforce staff involved—we drew up our safe systems of work, they were all happy with that, they were involved in that process all the way through. That was then promulgated to all the workforce. Once we were then happy we actually brought in a spare ferry to try those safe systems of work with the workforce before we reopened T5. So, every time we have something like this, the staff are fully involved in that process, because they do it on a day-to-day basis, and they will be involved in the onward-going process. So, there are reviews of the operational procedures on the marine side and on the berthing side, and they are ongoing. So, we have interim measures in place, which the staff are fully involved in, and they will be fully involved, and all those risk assessments are already available to the staff and to the unions.

I'm probably pre-empting that you're not going to want to really comment on this, but I think it's important that it's raised. Do you have any concerns, perhaps, around the impact of some of the working practices of some of the operators—because I know Irish Ferries doesn't have any permanent employees, it's on eight-week contracts—and the impact of working over those long hours for that period of time? Do you have any concerns about that? Are you going to work with the operators to look at actually how that might need to be looked at in the future?

The role of the port is we have to satisfy ourselves that the vessels’ masters are capable of handling the berths, and they are given what's called a PEC, a pilot exemption certificate, and there are certain criteria that they have to fulfil as part of that, which Irish Ferries have. Beyond that, it's not the remit of the port to understand the operation of the ferry itself. We have to make sure that the operation is safe from a maritime basis only.

Thank you, Hannah. Before I bring Luke in on this, just to clarify the point I made to you about previous collisions, it was the Marine Accident Investigation Branch's information, and it said that the berthing dolphins and their fenders had a collision, one in 2023 and the other in 2024. That is reported in their data. Did those collisions cause any damage to the berthing stations? Were all repairs required done at that point, or was there an assessment that needed to be done before this major collision on the weekend of 6 and 7 December?

No. No, the berths were all—. After those two incidents, the berths were checked and they were all fine.

Thank you. Luke.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. I suppose it's linked to your line of questioning there, Chair, and also Hannah's. Earlier you said that collisions happen fairly frequently in ports, so what was the difference this time around?

Sorry, I should—. Perhaps collisions isn't—. Contacts—contacts made. Obviously, a vessel—

So, it's contacts.

Yes, contact with a berth. That's part of the onward-going investigation—what was different this time to previously. Obviously, we have radar and we have all data on those so we're analysing that, and that's part of the onward-going investigation and forms part of the onward-going claim as well.

Yes, because I can imagine contacts happen and those ports are constructed to be able to deal with that, but it seems to me, at least, that perhaps there's a question then around what was wrong with the port before these sets of collisions happened. So, my question is: how frequently were checks being done on the ports prior to this collision? What was the frequency of those checks—underwater checks, for example—to examine the piles and so on?

Yes. So, all the port infrastructure is fully compliant. It's part of our due diligence. The linkspans themselves, they're part of the lift-on, lift-off equipment, so everything is registered. So, everything in the port was fully compliant. We have an onward-going maintenance programme called asset management, which falls under the technical services department of the port. So, everything like that is done. When we had the initial contact on 6 December, a visual inspection was done on D2.2 and nothing was evident at that particular time.

The question, though, was how frequent are these inspections of the infrastructure?

It will be in the planned maintenance systems. I don't have those to hand, sorry.

Okay.

Sam.

Thank you very much, Chair and good morning, panel. Obviously, following the closure of Holyhead, other ports in Wales picked up additional crossings; Fishguard, obviously, another port operated and owned by Stena Line. As a former employee, it was quite nice seeing the Stena Adventurer sailing into Fishguard and picking up additional sailings, and likewise the port of Pembroke, with additional sailings from Irish Ferries. I'm just wanting from each of you the role and the role that the British Ports Association played as well in co-ordinating the additional sailings from elsewhere within Wales to try and accommodate the closure of Holyhead and ensuring, in a pre-Christmas period, that the trade goods and individuals and passengers were able to continue to sail across the Irish Sea. Ian, given Stena Line own Holyhead and Fishguard, I'll start with you.

Yes. So, after the incident, the—. It's up to the ferry operators to decide how and where they want to move their tonnage. So, Stena Line Ports were approached by Stena Line Ferries and Irish Ferries at different, varying times requesting slot times. We then go through a process. As those come in, they're logged as requests. We do due diligence—the size of the berth, the depth of the berth and so forth. Then there is an autoCAD fit to make sure that the vessel will fit. Then we also have to look at the capacity available, the capacity that the port can handle. So, we were able to accommodate extra sailings: one Stena Line sailing to Dublin and then a later sailing with Irish Ferries to Dublin. But, the Irish Ferries vessel, we couldn't accommodate their freight, we could only accommodate their cars, because, by that time, with the Stena Adventurer sailings and the extra capacity, or the extra carryings on the existing Rosslare services, the port was operating at full freight capacity. So, there's a process that each one applies to, and we did similarly with Birkenhead; we were able to accommodate another sailing there as well.

Fab. Thank you. Anna, from the port of Milford Haven's and Pembroke port's perspective, obviously, the UK's largest energy port, obviously there's a reliance there on ensuring LNG continues to come in. How does the increased capacity from Irish Ferries, post Holyhead closure, impact?

So, obviously, as the UK's largest energy port, responsible for around 20 per cent of the inflow of energy into the UK, we had to be mindful that there was no disruption to that. We were very clear from the outset that that was our primary role, but obviously very supportive with our customer, who approached us to accommodate extra capacity at Pembroke port. So, the conversations, as Ian said, came from our customer, Irish Ferries, and we were really pleased that, within a matter of six days, we were able to accommodate a different ferry with extra capacity, which gave an extra 50 per cent capacity on that route.

Okay. Thank you. Richard, and then the role of the British Ports Association in all of this.

Yes. Thank you. I think, without repeating what colleagues have already said, I would note that, if you look on the west coast, it's actually quite remarkable how the ports were able to respond and you were able to move vessels infrastructure around. Whereas we have noted previously, during the pandemic, and even with the Brexit transition preparations, on the east coast, so, the south-east corridor particularly, it was far more difficult to move vessels, or appeared to be. So, I think there are some good lessons to come out of this, as well as the challenging points around comms. But, broadly, it's over to the vessel operators, the shipping companies, of course, that decide what they can do.

Thank you. And then—

Sorry, Sam—

No, no, please.

What are the lessons?

Well, effectively, that there is resilience on the west coast; you have choice. So, shippers and logistics companies can use different routes and arteries, and, at extreme times, there was the ability to move those vessels between ports.

Will there be difficulty in winning some of that trade back to Holyhead, because of the length of the closure? I mean, the one berth isn't reopening until July, so, obviously, traders have moved to other ports, and other ports have been showing growth. So, is there a danger that that trade is permanently dislodged, or will it move back, because that's the natural gateway that so many companies use into Wales and the European land link?

Yes, it's a pretty good point to make, and a good point, because, obviously, shipping companies need to look after their customers. But, ultimately, alongside that, the routes, the efficiency of those routes, the journey times, the availability of vessels, usually dictates where logistics supply chains go. So, the proximity of Holyhead to Dublin and the frequency of travel, where goods have to be transported to and from, dictates which routes they'll take. So, you would hope that, or you would expect that, once those services are fully operational, as they are now, that a lot of that supply chain activity returns to where it previously was.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Just the wider context, then, of additional stakeholders in this, because, obviously, with increased traffic at Fishguard and Pembroke port, that would have had logistical problems in traffic management and things like that. So, in discussions with local authorities, with Welsh Government, Irish Government, what was that communication package like internally—not external communications on problems, but the internal management of communications to overcome some of the challenges? What was that—? How did that feel like at the time? I'm not sure who wants to pick that up first.

I'm happy to go on a national level. I have to say we got quite a lot of commercial information. We did—. I'm not just saying this because I'm sitting with two of my members here, but we did see quite a lot of messaging coming out for the logistics industry, for importers and exporters and traders. Perhaps one of the lessons is we need more central Government collaboration, and getting the industry a bit better briefed, wider. Now, of course, there were one-to-one discussions between the likes of Stena and the Welsh Government, but there wasn't, as far as I saw, those wider stakeholder briefings that we might have had during the pandemic and other instances, where it has been quite useful—admittedly, at quite a high level.

Just to come back on the point, then, around this, are there any off-the-shelf contingency plans should something happen on the Irish sea around ferries? Or is it, 'We have a problem, therefore now we must be reactive to pick this up'?

Well, I'll let my colleagues talk through the local arrangements, but you have local resilience forum plans and, of course, you'll have commercial plans. So, there definitely is—. Under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and other legislation, there are requirements to set up these forums and look at what can go wrong, from everything from pandemics through to instances—weather instances, of course. So, it's definitely considered, but it's probably better for my colleagues to speak in more detail.

Just picking up on the Chairman's point about learning, one thing that we never really contemplated, and it worked and there was good co-operation, was setting up a new route isn't as easy as it used to be pre Brexit. Now, you have to set it up with the Border Force for the movement of goods, so you're creating a new route, which we never really encountered before, but we got very good co-operation, and we were able to achieve that fairly quickly once it was understood, the magnitude of the problem. The other thing, again, from a resources point of view, when we started moving these very large vessels, we were fortunate, we had a very co-operative workforce who were able to move. So, we needed that extra manpower, and we're very grateful for that. But also, from Border Force, they needed to reallocate staff to terminals, and again, it was that pre-Christmas build-up, but again, through good dialogue, they were able to reallocate. So, for example, Birkenhead, originally we couldn't operate a passenger service because Border Force didn't, but they adapted within a few days, and we were able to adapt those services. There are definitely some learnings going forward, but we had good contact as part of our contingency plans. We knew who to reach out to, so that worked well. As part of our day-to-day operation, we do move vessels around. That's part of our commercial thing. But setting up routes very quickly was probably a new one that we hadn't done, and there's a learning there for ourselves, for sure.

Particularly from a customs perspective, I'd imagine. That's where those new post-Brexit arrangements—. Yes, it's a good point to make.

And then discussions with the local authority on traffic management and things like that, what was dialogue like? Was it positive?

Yes, very positive. We didn't have many asks from them, but we feel they were very quick to approach us to offer any help that we wanted, especially things like—. We talked about Fishguard, there were ongoing roadworks to the north, how they could help us with that. Obviously, the sheer volume of freight coming through Fishguard went up fourfold. Luckily, there was some car parking space very close to the port, and they were able to help us with that. So, from a practical point of view, yes, we had very good co-operation with the local authorities.

Certainly, at the port of Milford Haven, internally we quickly declared a critical incident so that we could balance the request for additional capacity on the ferry route whilst not causing any disruption to energy. We had a lot of support from Pembrokeshire County Council, and the local resilience forum held multiple multi-agency meetings within days of 6 December. The local council helped us to set up additional parking facilities. As well as that, we opened up additional parking capacity within the port itself.

We know this is an inquiry around Holyhead, and I raised this point when we discussed this in the Senedd Chamber: we want Holyhead's capacity to return to the level that it was pre closure, but is this an opportunity for the ports in Pembrokeshire? As a Pembrokeshire boy, is there an opportunity here for us to sell that route more, to try and increase trade and passengers through the southern corridor from Pembrokeshire to Rosslare, given the success of the two ports following the closure of Holyhead?

If I just go back to the Chairman's point about the resilience of Holyhead, the numbers are virtually back to where it was previously. The bounce-back is very, very quick. As Richard said, Holyhead is part of this UK-Ireland well-established logistics network, and it switches back on very, very quickly. If you look at Holyhead over the last 30 years of growth, we've been through some economic headwinds through 2007 and 2008, the Celtic Tiger and so forth, but the onward trajectory is growth, and it continues to grow. The port now handles 1.8 million passengers. It's probably twice the capacity of Cardiff Airport, when you put it in that perspective: 400,000 lorries, 400,000 cars. It is a major hub, and it is resilient because of where it lies, in that very important east-west corridor.

I think what it has highlighted to some of the logistics firms is maybe they've kind of forgotten these other routes. So, we've seen some of them not transfer large volumes, but there are definitely new customers who are now using our ports. Not huge quantities, but definitely there are new customers who have, perhaps, been enlightened to the southern corridor, which they wouldn't have done before.

I would say that that's a very good point. There is definitely an opportunity here to increase the attractiveness of the Pembrokeshire ports, and it's something that we continuously work with Irish Ferries on, and are very supportive of that.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

You alluded to the response of local authorities and how good that was. What's your view on the Welsh Government's interaction? Because the Road Haulage Association highlights how the Scottish Government were on this from day one. They started round-table discussion on 12 December. The first time the Road Haulage Association were contacted by a Welsh civil servant, according to their evidence to us, was 24 December. So, there's a marked difference between the Governments' responses. I heard what you said about local authorities' response, but is there a view that the Welsh Government could have been more proactive? Because obviously they have control of port responsibilities. I don't know whether all of you would want to speak to that, or just one of you. Richard first.

I think that's a fair assessment and a fair comment. There's a very good onward and ongoing dialogue between the ports industry and the Welsh Government, but there have been concerns we've raised around resourcing of officials et cetera, to focus on perhaps more strategic matters. But I think it's a fair point to make that the Welsh Government should be assessing the way it communicates with the wider industry. I think, without getting involved in the detailed discussion, it appears as though there was quite good communication between the Welsh Government and operators like Stena, but I think there's that wider piece where maybe some quite generic briefing can help.

On a day-to-day basis, we had an open dialogue if we needed anything. They set up a forum where every other day I could speak to them and they could ask questions about train passengers and road congestion and bits and pieces. So, we were able to have that direct dialogue as and when required.

Certainly at the port of Milford Haven as well we have an ongoing relationship with the ports team within the Welsh Government, and those conversations continued regularly throughout the incident.

Thank you. Jenny.

Thank you. Good morning. I want to look at the wider implications of this, particularly in relation to climate resilience. First of all, to Mr Davies, how would you describe the condition of Holyhead port infrastructure and facilities overall?

Overall, in good working condition. The port is a big estate. It varies in age between 150 years old and more modern things, but yes, the asset is in good working condition, I would say.

In October 2023, the Welsh Government announced a £40 million package of loan and grant for the port of Holyhead. What was that for?

That is for the Holyhead breakwater. The Holyhead breakwater is circa 150 years old. It's the largest breakwater in the United Kingdom. It's 1.7 miles long. It has a design flaw in it, in that the breakwater has no rock armour on it, so the—

Has no—?

Rock armour. So, the breakwater was built—. I know the detail of this because I had my owner in Holyhead yesterday. The breakwater was built on a rubble mound, 140m wide. They built that, and then they built the bit that you see on top. Normally, the rubble mound is protected by large pieces of rock. Fishguard breakwater has large 30-tonne concrete blocks all the way around it. Holyhead port never had that protection, so over the 150 years, that rubble mound has slowly eroded away—on the seaward side, from weather; on the inward side, from tidal scour. That's been a known problem.

We were very fortunate that we were offered a £20 million loan from the Welsh Government and a £20 million grant from the UK Government—all managed through that. So, we are going through the process. We've got consulting engineers. We went through various design proposals in a 2D model then we 3D-modelled it in a tank, to come out with the best design. That design was this week put out on Sell2Wales. One day in March, we have potential contractors now coming in to bid for that work, so that work is ongoing. But it's a huge engineering project, and it will involve 11,600 45-tonne casted concrete blocks, so it's about a two-year engineering project. It's a very big engineering project, and we are going through it. We are hoping, subject to going through final board approvals, that that project will start in earnest, so to speak—will physically start—at the beginning of 2026.

As a lay person, I wonder why—. You're saying it's in good condition, but 18 months after this loan and grant were offered, we still haven't commenced the work and we're not going to start it until next year. So, there's a fundamental weakness there, is there not?

As I said, this design flaw has been known about for a long period of time, but the—

But it's taken 18 months to put it on Sell2Wales, the project.

The project is a huge engineering project, so you have to design it, wave model it, test it, then you have to go through the full procurement process for the rules. So, we're just going through that process. It takes quite a while. There were some issues. Originally, the project started in conjunction with Anglesey county council, because the breakwater protects the port, it also partially protects the town as well. So, the design was done in the name of Anglesey county council originally because there was a project that was going on. That design, then, had to be transferred over to Stena Line. There's a legal process for taking responsibility. So, there has been ongoing work on this behind the scenes, but it's a huge engineering project, it's not something—. The project will be circa £150 million. So, we are very grateful for the support of the Welsh Government and the UK Government, but it is a major investment for Stena Line as well of over £100 million of private funds.

Assuming you manage to get somebody to bid successfully for this, then they'll start in 2026. When will it be completed?

We believe that it's probably a two-year project.

Thank you. Could I just drill down a little bit deeper into the incident and how it relates to the previous incidents that were mentioned by the Chair? This D2.2 monopile, is that closer to Dublin or closer to Holyhead town, on the decking that is used by both D3 and—

D2.2 is closest to the port, so to speak.

The exit to the port. No, closest to the land.

Closest to the land, yes.

And these previous incidents in 2023 and 2024, which months did they occur in?

Sorry, I don't have those.

Okay. But, obviously, I'm interested to know if it was during the winter months when there's more wild weather.

If someone could give details, I could look into it and refer back to you. I don't have those to hand, sorry.

Okay. Fine. And do you recall which bit of the berthing it attacked at that point? No. Because I'm just obviously keen to understand whether there's a particular vulnerability. I suppose, as a lay person, I would have expected you to say that it was the one closest to the exit to the harbour that would have been damaged, but clearly there's a particular vulnerability around the one that's closest to land. I wonder if you could speak to us about why that is. Is there a particular complexity around entering and exiting a berth?

The piles, or the fenders that get used most, in that sense, are generally the first one and the last one. So, a ship may manoeuvre sometimes and, as it swings, it will rest on the first one and pivot on the first one and bring the stern back in onto the berth, but sometimes when it leaves, it will come forward, put its stern against a pile and use that pile, then, to push the bow off. So, generally, it's the first and last one that will take either the first or the last contact, but once the vessel is on the berth, all of the berthing line is used; the energy of the ship is taken by the whole berth itself.

You've told us about the challenges around the breakwater. What are the challenges in light of the changing climate around the construction of these berths? Clearly, the first one and the last one are the ones that are the most vulnerable. How are you going to strengthen the resilience of the berthing units in light of the extreme weather events that are going to occur more frequently?

Well, every vessel has berthing parameters, so irrespective of the bigger climate change, every vessel has a berthing parameter, so irrespective of if that happens once, twice or 10 times, the berthing parameters are the berthing parameters. So, we monitor the weather, so we talk about the red weather warning coming in. Just so you are aware, as a port, we have our own private weather forecasts, as do the shipping companies. We receive those twice a day, and they're broken down by the hour, wind speed, direction, gust wind speeds. On top of that, we also have our own live weather stations, which the port accesses and monitors and the ferries can access it live as well, 24/7. So, we are resilient. So, weather is part of our day-to-day operations.

Sure; that's managing stuff on the day. I'm talking about climate resilience plans: you know, to ensure that these berthing units are fit for purpose in a much more challenging environment.

Well, the berthing parameters will remain the same. So, if the frequency of storms increases, then the berthing parameters will change, unless we increase the strength, but a monopile berth is designed for a certain loading and if you want to increase that, then you have to either increase the number of monopiles, or so forth, and currently our modelling doesn't necessitate increasing the number of piles.

I think I'll add in, I'm a layperson, particularly. I think what we're looking at with climate change is all the operators will have risk assessments and they'll decide when they're going to operate vessels, when they're going to allow vessels to come in and out of their ports, and so, it could be that there is a higher frequency of times when they say, 'We shall not be allowing vessels to sail because of weather.' But the actual infrastructure will be designed to be resilient, so those breakwaters will take a hammering, and using stuff that Ian talked about around building up the resilience, hopefully, that will be better, but the infrastructure should withhold those storms. It's reducing the frequency of the risk of having vessels coming in and out of ports when there is extreme weather that we'll be looking at as a mitigation management measure.

Okay. But as these storms become more frequent, then obviously there's more wear and tear on the infrastructure, and I'm just trying to explore—I appreciate these are costly projects—whether Holyhead in particular is vulnerable because it sticks out on a promontory, and whether you don't just need to look at the breakwater, but that you need to look at your berthing arrangements.

Well, the berthing parameters will remain the same, you're referring to the frequency—

No, I understand, manoeuvring a vehicle, but it's the strength of the piles to be resilient to boats bashing against them.

The pile will take a lot more—. If there's no vessel on that berth, the pile will take a huge amount of energy. So, it's only when the ship is alongside, and if climate change increases the frequency in which those vessels may not operate on the berth, that's something slightly different, but the loadings on that berth will remain the same, because that's the limit of what that berth can take, so to speak.

I'm conscious that the time might be—

Oh, okay. I wondered if we could have a note about the detail on the 2023 and 2024 instances.

Sure, yes.

What did they hit?

I was going to say that, because I think the committee would be very interested to know were they similar incidents to the sixth and seventh incidents that shut the port, and was it the same part of the pier or jetty that was hit in those instances in 2023 and earlier in 2024, because that would be interesting to understand the design fault that might be the cause of this problem.

Chair, would it be possible just to find out from Anna what the resilience is of Milford Haven?

Yes. So, we conduct regular maintenance as part of our critical asset and infrastructure plans.

Are you using similar infrastructure, berthing?

I'm not able to answer that, sorry, but I can get you detail on the construction.

Okay. Fine.

Thank you, Anna.

Just one more point. One thing that does change is the predicted sea level, so when we design the infrastructure, we have to take that into account. So, not the extreme weather conditions, but the sea level. That is already part of our modelling when we do development.

Thank you.

Thank you. Luke.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. In terms of further information, I'd be interested in just getting further information on the frequency and the types of investigations or maintenance work that's been happening over the years, because what I'm really struggling to—. The reason why I asked for the frequency of those inspections was because what I'm really struggling to understand here is how there was no indication that this was going to happen before. This is going back to some of what you've said earlier about regular contacts happening, and ports being able to withstand some of that contact. Surely there should have been some indication, if there were frequent investigations happening into the structures of the port. Was there any evidence of corrosion on some of those piles, or anything at all, because I'm really finding it hard to understand that there was no indication that this was going to happen?

So, just to describe this, the steel pile that takes it, between the steel pile and the ship itself is a big fender panel, between the two is a large rubber cone, and that rubber cone is designed to take the energy. So, those exist all the way along the berth, so—

It's absorbtion.

It absorbs—. It's like a buffer between the two, so the energy doesn't directly go into the steel pile and then down; there is a buffer built in. You can't quite see it, so between the big wooden facing on the pile and the steel part, there are these rubber cones and chains that the whole thing sits on. So, the whole thing is buffeted, and it's designed to take the energy as the ferry berths. Some of these ferries are 45,000 gross tonnes, so they're designed within those berthing parameters.

And that sounds great, but, clearly, something failed. There surely was an indication that something wasn't right beforehand, if those frequent investigations were happening.

Well, after the sixth, we did a visual inspection, and there was nothing evident at that time.

What does a visual inspection entail?

From topside, going down, so you can look at the cone, because, generally, it's the cone that absorbs the energy, so you can look at the cone and you can look at the chains that the fender piles hang off.

Okay. So, there's no way of actually accessing the structures at all to check for stuff like corrosion or anything like that.

Well, coming back to my written submission, due to the nature of the construction of the berth, after the incident, you then need to do a full inspection. That's where the problem is, because it's a steel pile structure that sits in the sea, then you have to do it by diving. That's the only way, for a steel pile berth, you can inspect the underwater sections, and, unfortunately, at the time of the year, we had a storm, and after the storm settled—. We had divers available 24/7, but it's quite a slow process because you need the right weather conditions, but then you need the clarity of water to make sure those—. So, between the time that the incident took place and we could then get all the relevant information, we admit it was a long time, but it was, unfortunately, the time of the year and the safety of divers involved in those operations.

Okay. I think that's why it would be handy just to get some of that further information on the frequency of those inspections after this session has concluded.

But if I could turn to the Holyhead taskforce, can you summarise the progress that's happened to date on that taskforce, and are you happy with the parameters and the remit of that taskforce and the membership of that taskforce?

To date—

That falls into your lap, Ian, then.

Yes. To date, we are aware of the taskforce, but we haven't had the full remit and we haven't had an agenda yet for that taskforce.

So, nothing at all.

No.

Two months on, you haven't had any information about it.

Not the full remit of what this taskforce involves, no.

Okay. That does cause a few problems in terms of our lines of questioning around the taskforce, then, doesn't it? [Laughter.] Perhaps there are questions for us to pursue with the Government when they're in and the future panels that are coming later on, but I find that very odd that there's been absolutely nothing in the last two months. But we'll take that up with the Government.

It's not often witnesses throw committee members, but we've managed to do that on this occasion.

Well, I think the reason why committee members have raised an eyebrow is, given the urgency that people felt at that time when the port was shut, and one of the key responses of the Government was to set the taskforce up, Members not unreasonably assumed there would be a level of urgency in the terms of reference and membership to get it going. There's only just over 12 months of this entire Senedd parliamentary term left, there is, and the Government don't seem to have even pulled their finger out to get the basics right on this, they don't.

I think I find it particularly concerning when we've just heard, as well, that contact between the ports and Welsh Government is a regular thing, but we still haven't had any information on this taskforce from Welsh Government. So, something to pursue, I think, with other panels.

Hannah.

Thanks, Chair. I want to just go back, briefly, to the points around previous incidents that we talked about, prior to December 2024. Did they all involve the same operator?

Again, I can't—

Would you be able to—?

Yes, I could look at that. Sure.

Do you want me to pick up the last set of questions?

Yes.

You'll be pleased to know that this is the last lot of questions before we let you leave. We've touched on it a little bit in the previous questions in the discussion, but I just want to touch on it and get your reflections on any potential long-term impacts of the closure on the port, but also, by extension, on Ynys Môn as well. From your perspective, what actions do you think may be needed? Obviously, we've heard that the remit isn't there for the taskforce yet, and it obviously hasn't met, but what do you think is going to be needed to secure that long-term resilience and stability of the port?

Shall I start? Yes. Obviously, we're reviewing procedures and what happened and our own resilience. I think, when you look at the bigger picture of what's happened and the mention of a taskforce, we all recognise Holyhead's importance in this logistics chain, this very important logistics chain between the UK and Ireland, but we are but one part of that chain. There are a lot of other parts; there's the road, there's the rail, there are the bridges that connect either side, and so forth. So, I think, if we're looking at resilience, we've raised many times the fact that, across the Menai straits, there are two bridges that are 200 years old, which are single-lane roads, and winds of over 35 mph close those roads. I think there's not only Holyhead, there's the whole resilience of that logistics corridor that perhaps needs considering.

Richard or Anna, do you want to add anything to that?

Yes. I'd say it's a good point. Last-mile connections are a big priority for our sector, and the prevalence particularly of road infrastructure, but also rail, is important. And I think, really, there's a point for the Welsh Government here, where, 'Let's look strategically—.' There's a particular situation, obviously, that's arisen in Holyhead, which got a lot of attention, understandably, and you were right to scrutinise their response and our response as an industry, but let's try and be more strategic as well around planning and supporting and amplifying what the ports do, what opportunities they provide, both for the freight and logistics industry, but also the energy industry, with offshore energy and renewables coming, et cetera. So, let's have a strategy that enables us to flourish and grow.

I think the last-mile connection point that Ian makes around links to Anglesey is a good illustration there, because there are pinch points, in both north and south Wales, et cetera, where relatively modest sums of funding could support and improve links, et cetera. So, I think there's a role for Welsh Government to be a bit more strategic, I would say. And also to resource what they do in terms of consenting, planning, all those things, like marine licensing, harbour revision orders; they do take quite a lot of time to do things, and if you want to either respond to a situation or respond to an opportunity, then there's a role for Welsh Government to support what we do better. But, broadly, the industry will take care of what it does, and there is resilience, there's flexibility, there's choice.

Okay. Just before I ask you, maybe, if you want to comment on that, Anna, I think Jenny had a point on this particular issue.

Yes, I just wanted to ask about the possibility of shifting much more freight onto rail, rather than taking it by road, because of the pinch points getting off the island at the other end, onto the mainland of Wales.

Obviously, we can't direct how our customers—

No. No, you can't, but have you had any discussions at all with Government about how we improve the use of rail for freight, given, if there's congestion on the roads, let's look at ways in which we can get goods from X to Y more effectively?

No. Ourselves, no.

Okay. Because, obviously, UK Government would have to be involved in all that.

Could I just add there that, obviously, as an economy, as a country, we're looking at decarbonising freight as well as other operations? But ultimately it's a bit of the consequence of our geography of being an island and that flexibility that driver-accompanied freight offers means it quite often wins. And you still have to haul things on roads; about 70 per cent of the freight that comes into and out of UK ports is on road, and ultimately, as Ian said, it's a choice that those freight operators have to make. And one thing that this illustrates is perhaps, where you have unaccompanied freight, where the wagon is dropped and collected—. With driver-accompanied freight, when you do have situations like this, it gives you a bit more flexibility, so those hauliers will be able to redirect relatively quickly to other routes. So, if anything, it underlines the importance of the road network that we have.

Clearly, but if you have bullet trains, the freight would clearly get there quicker, wouldn't it?

Well, handling at both ends becomes complicated. So, absolutely, we want to see more, and there may be opportunities, particularly in the southern corridor, with things like offshore wind manufacturing and certain materials being brought in and removed, et cetera. But, broadly, there's probably a bigger role for passengers on rail, and let's look at, perhaps, north Wales to south Wales connections and others. Then, alongside that, freight can probably take advantage of some of the opportunities that may arise.

Okay. Thank you.

A large part of the freight in Holyhead is just-in-time logistics, and it's relatively short. So, it's from the midlands to Holyhead, and then from Dublin within two hours. So, when it comes to rail freight, it's actually probably too short, I should imagine, for a lot of the rail freight, by the time that you handle off and on.

But any investment in rail—. Usually, you import the materials through our ports, so we do support that infrastructure investment.

Anna, did you have anything to add on infrastructure and the conversation that's been going on?

Yes, thank you. I would just like to repeat what Richard said, really—that ports are key enablers of economic growth and regeneration. They are strategically important to trade, tourism and the vitality of coastal communities across Wales. So, anything that the Government can do to support the ports to be successful and to ensure the right connections to the ports would be welcome.

I think that we've covered a lot of it, Chair, but just one final question to Ian. Does Stena remain committed to the port of Holyhead?

Yes, absolutely. We have been in Holyhead for 30 years. We have redeveloped it. So, originally the port was in the inner harbour. We have redeveloped it over the years to Salt Island, to grow it now into the second largest ro-ro port in the UK. We are absolutely committed. It's a successful business. It's a partnership between the various ferry companies that use the port. They have invested a lot. So, it is a strong product and it will continue to grow. So, yes, we are absolutely committed.

Thank you. Sam had a supplementary.

Just off of Hannah's question there, Ian, it would be remiss of me not to ask about Stena's commitment to Fishguard.

Yes, absolutely. So, we are currently going through a consenting process to have an investment in Fishguard, to improve the infrastructure in Fishguard. That's one thing, perhaps, that we'd like to bring up with the taskforce. I think that Richard also brought it up as well. The consenting process, when it comes to environmental work and the consenting process, is something that we have brought up with the Welsh Government many, many times. It's slow. It needs more focus. And that's not just for Fishguard. That's, I think, a fair comment to make for all port projects.

Okay. That's helpful.

Just to add, there is an opportunity here for the Welsh Government and Welsh ports. It's a competition, you know. Welsh ports are competing not only within Wales, but also elsewhere. If you have slightly better consenting and more streamlined processes in the Republic, continental Europe, in England, et cetera, developers will go where it's easier to do things. So, I think there's an opportunity for the Welsh Government.

Can I just seek some clarification, Ian? In your earlier evidence, which might seem like a lifetime ago now, you said that it was terminal 5 rather than terminal 3 that was damaged. Your written evidence, obviously, says that it is terminal 3—

Terminal 3 is damaged. Terminal 5 is operational.

Great. Just to clarify that.

Yes. Sorry.

And the second point for clarification: you did say that the damage had occurred before the peak of the storm. Was the red warning in place when the damage occurred, or hadn't the red warning been issued?

The red warning had been issued, but it wasn't in place. So, the red warning was for 3 o'clock to 11 o'clock on the seventh, and these incidents occurred before 3 o'clock in the morning.

So, it had been issued, but it wasn't in effect—the red warning.

Correct.

Right. That's helpful, for clarification. Just one final point, if I may. The Ministers seem to claim joint responsibility for governance and responsibility in this area of ports in the Welsh Government, although the Welsh Government website clearly says that it sits with Rebecca Evans, the Cabinet Secretary for the economy. What is your view of where the responsibility lies? In another committee's evidence session, the Cabinet Secretary for transport said that he's responsible for it. So, this is a piece of information that we will be trying to secure at a later stage today, but I'm just trying to—. You interacted with them, especially Anna and Ian. Where would you say that responsibility lies?

I'm going to have to come back to you on that one, sorry.

It's a good question, yes.

Which Minister do you engage with mostly?

Well, both, actually, because there are transport-related bits of harbour governance, but there's also the economic element. It moves around as well, so we have been in planning previously and we have been in transport. So, yes, we'll come back to you on that.

But I think your inability to identify it maybe shows there's a bit of confusion there.

To be fair, we don't have a problem communicating with both Ministers and with their officials. Unlike in, say, England, where you have the Department for Transport and other Government departments, it is the Welsh Government, so you do have access to officials in a relatively non-siloed way. I don't think that's a bad thing, but, yes, we'll work that out as well.

That's helpful, thank you. And we will follow up on the maintenance log if possible, please, Ian, and also the previous incidents as well in 2023 and 2024.

Thank you, all three of you, for your evidence today. It's really helpful to the inquiry, in particular being here in person and making the effort to come down to Cardiff—that is really appreciated. The record will be sent to you so that you can have a look at it, and if you see any anomalies that you think are inaccurate, please liaise with the committee services and, obviously, adjustments will be made. Thank you once again.

Thank you.

Thanks very much.

Thank you.

We'll now move into private session while we set up for the next panel.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for this second stage of the inquiry that we're holding into the Holyhead port closure, and I welcome our guests from Ireland, and in the committee room itself, Professor Andrew Potter, and for the evidence that you'll be giving and the papers that you've all contributed to today's session.

I'll begin and I'll ask the first question, so everyone gets a bite at it. I'll ask Andrew to reply first, and then I'll go Liam, then Martin, then Eugene, and then we'll see how the questions flow from that, if everyone's comfortable with that. Obviously, we're aware that the port shut on the weekend of 6 December and 7 December. I'd be grateful for your reaction to the response that followed from the port closure, and the support, or not, as the case may be, that you as organisations and individuals think was put in place to facilitate and help until the port reopened its one berth in the middle of January. Andrew.

Okay. So, obviously, this was a big event and, to some extent, unexpected, and, therefore, from my perspective, perhaps more as an outsider not involved in the day-to-day processes, it seems to have gone reasonably well. Everyone's pulled together and got a solution. It takes a while for that capacity to come back on-stream, and the ferry companies rediverted their ferries to elsewhere, but, clearly, lots of organisations have worked together to make it happen. I'd say it was within about a week that new services were set up to rebuild some of that capacity, and I think, overall, therefore, the response from the port and the shipping sector is, 'Probably couldn't have done much more any quicker.'

There was, obviously, communication around the closure and things like the dot matrix sign saying the port was closed to try and stop people going to Holyhead. I believe some people may have ignored the dot matrix signs, but that's their choice. That's not the fault of the agencies that are putting them up. But, I think, overall, it did seem to go reasonably smoothly, given the context that this would have been a very unexpected event. Obviously, the first few days were challenging as well, because you've still got the aftermath of the storm, which impacts not just on the port, but the infrastructure running in as well—the roads, and all of the disruption, and people would have been spread across a lot of different things at the same time.

Just to take you up on the point that you expected it, Andrew, was it just on the law of probability you expected it, or were there safety issues and previous collisions with the jetty that led you to have that expectation that the port would shut?

I don't think anyone would have expected the port to actually close, because, like I say, it's a big event for one of the piles to collapse. There have been previous incidents reported to the Marine Accident Investigation Branch, but they were some time ago, and, presumably, they have been repaired and the port returned to proper working order. When you've got a big ship moving against a stationary object, there are going to be accidents that occasionally happen. It's just a case of—. Like I say, I think the repairs would have been done. I wouldn't necessarily have expected the port to have closed. Again, you might expect there might be an accident, because when there are higher winds, there's higher risk, but I would say the actual collapse of the pile was probably unforeseen.

You referenced the previous accidents. Just briefly, are you familiar with those accidents that happened, which were reported by the marine accidents authority, and are they similar in nature, but maybe not of the same magnitude—but similar in nature—to, obviously, the accident that occurred that closed the port?

There's only very limited information out there on those two incidents. I found them in the MAIB database. You've only got, effectively, one or two sentences of description as to what actually happened, but they talk about vessels hitting the fenders and the dolphin piles that form the berths. It talks a bit about some of the weather conditions. I'm not a mariner, so some of the technical detail behind the weather conditions I can't quite fully understand, but it talks that they were fairly windy conditions and, like I say, it talks about the damage to the vessels. So, there are some similarities, certainly. Like I say, they are the ones that were reported, but none of them were deemed significant enough to warrant a full investigation. Accidents happen, they get reported, but only the most serious ones then get investigated, and my understanding, from looking at the MAIB website, is that the incident in December also hasn't had a further investigation by them. So, they've noted it, but they're not doing a detailed investigation.

That's interesting. Thank you. Liam.

Thank you to you, and thank you for the opportunity to talk to you and your committee about this incident. It's obviously extremely important. Holyhead is vitally important from an Irish point of view. On the Holyhead route, we would carry in excess of 380,000 HGVs each year and over 1.3 million passengers. So, from that point of view alone, Holyhead is really important from an Irish point of view and is a substantial contributor to the trade that takes place between Ireland and the UK. The UK remains Ireland's No. 1 trading partner, and the obverse of that is important to note as well, that Ireland is No. 6 on the list of UK trading partners. So, keeping that route open is obviously vitally important.

I agree with Andrew's opening comments that the event that took place in December is unusual and somewhat unprecedented. In many respects, it was a perfect storm in that, when the event occurred, volumes were ramping up in the pre-Christmas period. Freight volumes are probably at their highest point at that time of the year. Alternative routes are pretty busy as well, so it makes it difficult to transfer traffic on to other routes. And then we had the very unlikely circumstance where both berths in Holyhead were affected by the accident. Again, that is quite unprecedented.

My background is in shipping and I worked for a long period of time with the Irish Continental Group, Irish Ferries. I was involved in some of the development stages of Holyhead as Holyhead transitioned into a port capable of handling much bigger ships. And I can say from that experience and more recent experience in my role with the Irish Maritime Development Office that—[Inaudible.]—performance in terms of its reliability as a port and the reliability of the vessels on service in and out of Holyhead is quite unprecedented. I remember when an Irish Ferries vessel, the Ulysses, was deployed in its first year, it achieved more than 99 per cent of its scheduled sailings, and that says a lot about the infrastructure in the port and the quality of the vessels that the shipping companies who operate there have deployed on the route. They are highly sophisticated vessels, in many instances adapted for the circumstances of the route, with very powerful bow thrusters and stern thrusters that allow vessels to get on and off berths even in very adverse weather conditions.

So, overall, Holyhead is an extremely reliable route and has a history of such, so this came as quite a surprise that we were down such a remarkable amount of capacity; essentially, 104 sailings a week were lost as a result of the closure of Holyhead, and traffic had to be redeployed to other routes. The routes that were most important in terms of that reallocation of traffic were services out of Dublin to Liverpool, and then ad hoc services that Stena Line and Irish Ferries put in place into southern Welsh ports—Fishguard and Pembroke. Those services out of Dublin absorbed about 45 per cent of the diverted traffic from Holyhead, including services in and out of Liverpool and Heysham. Northern Ireland routes also benefited significantly from diverted traffic, with about 30 per cent of the remainder moving through Northern Ireland routes, and Rosslare handled about 25 per cent. So, that's the split in terms of distribution.

It's really important that I emphasise the importance of Welsh ports generally in the context of Irish trade with the UK. It's the lifeblood of Irish trade with the UK. It makes a hugely significant contribution and if I could just, Chair, anticipate a question. You asked, Andrew, what more could have been done and were we properly prepared. I think that the ports and the shipping companies, first of all, would have been highly motivated to get things sorted out and get things back on track as quickly as possible. I think there are learnings from what took place in terms of the compatibility of certain vessels in ports. So, I think, if we had our time over again, we would have tried to have berthing trials completed well in advance. Shipping companies will accept this now, that ordinarily, when they have the opportunity to do berthing trials in alternative ports, they should do that so that they're ready to move if and when an emergency arises.

[Inaudible.]—questioning that Members will have. I'm conscious I would like to bring Martin in and then Eugene in. So, Martin, please.

Yes. Thank you, Chair, or convenor. Yes, it was a difficult time for the industry; there's no getting away from that. I'm sure colleagues from the IRHA there will be able to give more detail on the movements to the south of Ireland. But, for other hauliers in Northern Ireland, it created a great deal of difficulties, not just because of the issues around having to pick another port and trying to find slots there, but, for us, the biggest problem was the issues that involved drivers' hours. For the committee's sake, HGV drivers operate to two clocks—you've got the working time directive that everybody operates to, but they also have to operate under the auspices of the EU drivers' hours legislation, which means that, at the end of a week, depending on the cycle that you're on, you either have to take a 24-hour break or a 45-hour break. The additional driving that was required to move from the planned Holyhead to—. Regardless of whether we were going south through Pembroke or Fishguard, or going over the top to Cairnryan, that meant that a lot of drivers who should be taking their weekly rest at home or at the yard were now stuck on the mainland. And then the case for those who were taking a 45-hour break, that meant that they were two days away from where they should be, and that meant their vehicle was two days away from where it should be, their trailer was two days away from where it should be, and both of those are required the very next day, as Liam said, in the run-up to Christmas, which is obviously the busiest time of year. So, that created an enormous amount of problems.

As far as the communication goes, we as an organisation did not get very much, if anything, from the Welsh side. It was mainly from the Scottish Government that we were contacted. So, because of the nature of the stacking that was required at Castle Kennedy before Cairnryan, there was an additional volume of traffic—25 to 30 per cent—and a large amount of vehicles were stacked at Castle Kennedy. So, I was in regular meetings with them, with the Scottish Government, with Stena, P&O, Police Scotland, various other agencies that were involved in that, and we had pretty much daily meetings while the stacking was going on. But, as for communications, we did not receive anything from the Welsh side.

Okay. Thank you, Martin. We'll perhaps explore that as we go into questions. Eugene.

Good morning, Chair. Just to say we're delighted to be invited as well, because I agree with everything that Martin said there—the connectivity in communications, as well as the other connectivity during that period, was less than what we could have done with, and we should have been in the line of communication with the Scottish, and whatever communication there was with yourselves, during it.

I'd like to just mark the day of the summit. It is the day of the summit between Keir Starmer and the Taoiseach Micheál Martin in Liverpool, with high delegations—and we're going to have such every year—and I would hope some of the inputs we put here, and the lessons we learn and the results we're going to see from it, should make its way to that platform and to the people around that type of platform. Because I think we need both the Irish Government strongly involved in the way forward, and also Westminster to agree. Having said that, the other striking notes are two. One is that both our island status is very visible in this, and the need that we should have a common platform is very visible from this, and to note that the Irish hauliers still, not quite to the same degree as before, use England as the land bridge going on to the continent—it's very valuable trade—and that the Isle of Anglesey and the western side of the UK are not too different from where I come from on the western side of Ireland, and any trade and any businesses are so invaluable to those rural areas—they shouldn't be forgotten in all of this, the communities. I wouldn't really agree with your first speaker there about the efficiencies and the timeline of how quickly those remedial works started on this. It was a perfect storm, politically, for something to go wrong, I suppose, as well, because we were just after the general election here, so to get the momentum up onto this platform took a little while, I acknowledge, and the Welsh Government had never faced this before, and to get momentum up from that side was a little slower. And you can see from the proposals put in by the different groups here that we're still looking at it at our individual pace. You, from your side, are happy that the trade is now continuing into Anglesey. We're so happy to have the service. But we must get the platform of the efficiencies that are needed on either side to maintain that and to keep it, and to learn lessons from this programme.

The communication at the advent of this storm was dire. They may have thought they were giving good communication, but the communication and the indications were, 'We'll be up and running tomorrow; we'll be up and running tomorrow,' which led to delay and obfuscation and people not shipping in time and holding back because, 'The berth will be up and running.' And the delay was at the highest time, as Liam Lacey has said, of the year for us here on this side. There was a backlog, a very big backlog, at the busiest time in the run-up to Christmas, and a lot of angst by customers and by all bodies involved, and particularly now, because a lot of shopping is done online, there were a lot of gifts that were held up and people were getting very worried on this side. There was a build-up of over 1,000 trailers in the Holyhead area, and they kept pouring in, because we weren't told to stop, that it wouldn't be happening. And of course, we learn now of the absence of alternative routes. And to get the different bodies to come together, to allow us to go in through Milford Haven and into Fishguard and into Pembroke was slow. All of it went on for about a week. They went in chunks of dates from—. The accident happened on the fifth and sixth, and we only knew that it wouldn't be reopening by the eleventh. That's a week before we knew it wouldn't be reopening. And it was nearly another week before we got into these other ports. So, that was a really bad time delay.

The original structure we must look to, because, although I see from other suppositions from engineers and detailed engineering as to what went into it and how it has been fastened to the sea bed and all of that, it was plain it wasn't good enough. It was plain to anyone who saw the accident. We get about 12 storms a year, four or five of them average enough, and four or five of them very strong, and then the chances of two of them being enormous—. And that was not an enormous one. The one that came after was far bigger, though the sea came from a different angle and we didn't have the problem. But, on the original accident, it was a story of what I would call, from the Atlantic ocean side, an average wave, but it was the swell of the sea, and it just turned the bow—the front of the boat—in and it hit that concrete structure and it collapsed. But that finger-like structure into the sea, to just the common eye, I always thought it was looking flimsy for the weight of the ships that were coming in against it—and a laden vessel and the weight of that is quite a substantial weight—and the power of nature behind it. I always wondered why they put the two berths side by side, so that, if you have difficulty with one, then both go down. I always wondered why, in any accidents, the need for them to be so close was such that it was prone to a second accident. I always wondered why it hadn't stronger supports, like the old sea walls. The old sea walls in Holyhead—even though this has gone more out to sea now—were very strong structures, and this looks flimsy in comparison. And the nature of the repair, and the nature of the state of the existing pillars that weren't damaged—we haven't got full information on that yet, and where we're at.

If I had a bell, I'd ring it. Eugene, thank you for your opening remarks. You've strayed into some of the territory that committee members will be touching on in their questions as well, which is helpful, because it gives us an insight into your thinking. I'm keen to move the questioning on, because we've only got an hour for the session. So, I'll ask Hannah to come in. I think you wanted a supplementary on this, didn't you, Hannah? You're on the sheet. No, you're looking at me as if 'No'.

No. No, I'm going to let you do it.

Sam, please.

Thank you very much. I'm going to focus on our Irish witnesses for this first little section. I just wanted to get your views, really, on the effectiveness of the response from government at all levels—so, the Irish Government taking the point on board that it was just post an election with you; the Welsh Government; local authorities as well—in conveying what was happening during that time but also contingency plans and contingency planning. So, I'm happy to start with you, Liam.

You're muted, Liam.

[Inaudible.]—and I think that if there was time lost it was at the very beginning. So, I would take some of those points on board. However, when the necessary people were brought together, the level of co-operation and commitment to getting the problem sorted out was quite remarkable. We had very good engagement with officials on the Welsh side, led by the Minister for transport, Ken Skates, who engaged thoroughly in the process. We had two Ministers in attendance for most of the meetings—Minister Ryan and Minister Lawless on the Irish side, supported by officials from the department. We had extensive engagement with ports and shipping companies at that stage and representative bodies. So, I think that, when we got up and running, we responded well. We could have been quicker into action, I think, but a lot of that rests with the communication at the early stages and the anticipation that Holyhead would reopen sooner rather than later, that these problems could be overcome within a matter of days. If there was clear visibility of that problem right at the very beginning, as I said in my remarks, it would have helped us a great deal.

So, when we were in session and dealing with the problems, I don't think that there was much more we could have done. We quickly moved to looking at the practicalities of identifying ports that could take the vessels that could be redeployed from Holyhead, and then getting those vessels that were available for redeployment into action as soon as we possibly could. I mentioned the issue of interoperability when I was speaking earlier on. We should do our level best now to understand where vessels can operate in times of emergency, what ports are open to them and that the vessels fit correctly. Ordinarily, when vessels have some downtime or when they're on their way to dry dock and such, they would call into ports and just fit on the berth and work those things out so that we have plans and contingency plans ready in the event of an emergency, and we should be doing a little bit more of that.

In the remarks that Prime Minister Starmer made last night in relation to Irish-UK relations, he made the point that there's scope for—there's potential, still, left in that relationship. I believe that that's the case in relation to transport and maritime transport. I think that we should be looking at opportunities to work more closely together. I'll give you an example of what's possible. Right now, on the route between Dublin and Holyhead, we have the port of Dublin, Stena ports in Holyhead, Stena Line, Irish Ferries and an academic institution collaborating on the establishment of a green shipping corridor between those two ports. That's exactly what we need to see across the network of shipping services between Ireland and Wales, to include the ports in southern Wales, so that we maximise the level of collaboration that takes place within that network, and by doing so, we protect them by the vital trade that moves between our respective ports. I think there's a lot more that could be done about that.

Martin, anything additional to add to that?

Apologies, I thought you said you wanted to speak to the Irish guys—

Sorry, forgive me.

Martin is from the Road Haulage Association.

And then Eugene.

Okay, thank you. I'd agree with what Liam said about the momentum gained literally on both sides reasonably quickly when we got going, and as a result this organisation here at the Irish Road Haulage Association really pushed heavily with that. We have good communications with the Governments here, especially through Brexit and through COVID. I think we’ve had a lot of communication.

On the potential around trying to get momentum moving and support from the Welsh Government and Irish Government, that was good, but it was hard to see that momentum transferred into the actual work at sea. Now, I know it’s constrained; I’m well aware of the sea and all around it, but, you know, we were at 11 December, and we really didn’t see action until after Christmas, and I saw one crane shipped. It was brought in, and it was about two weeks later, maybe a little bit more. It only came from Liverpool. It spent about a day or two in Holyhead, then it went away again. Why wasn’t it down there on 8 December? It was obvious that some of the structures were—[Inaudible.]—and even if it wasn’t needed, that it would be on its way or on standby. So, a little bit more momentum to the repairs would have been good.

And for the lessons to the future, as Liam was saying, for sure, we need to look at all the aspects of that, but we have called for a committee, which all the bodies, or representatives of some of the bodies would be on, both on the Welsh side and the Irish side, with an input from Welsh Government, the English Government and the Irish Government, because we’ve never looked at—[Inaudible.]—since. These routes have come by tradition, they're just the same routes over the centuries, and there’s no need to change them. But we have not looked at how we do it, the timings, the efficiency of the line, how it suits the needs of either country.

And one of the big ones that have come out of this is the need, and I’ll go into it later, for a new timescale, and I would like to come back to that later. But on the point that you raised: yes, the momentum came in due course; yes, the bodies looked into it, but the actual physical and the repair and the knowledge from that could have been a little bit better and we still don’t know the knowledge of it. We don’t know how bad it is under that sea, how good the repair was, and the possibility of it happening again. We have no idea.

Thank you. I'm going to broaden it out now just in terms of wider contingency planning, and bring in Martin and Andrew. Andrew, to start with you: contingency planning for issues like this—they're unprecedented, but are there off-the-shelf contingency plans to support this?

You'd hope that any business that was operating would have such contingency plans, and I think in the previous session, Stena talked about that they have plans in place for various things, so they will have back-up plans. I think we need to think more about whether they are right or complete and whether there are other things we can do. And to me, what this has highlighted in particular is that, obviously, Holyhead is a key network to Ireland, and we're very much focusing on the seaside implications, but there are also single points of failure on the land side as well, and I think, to some extent, when we're thinking about contingency planning for somewhere like Holyhead, we need to broaden it out to look, not just at the berths and the ports and the ship-port interface, but also within the port itself, and potentially landward as well. I'm thinking, for instance, of the Menai crossings. If they were to go down, it's the same implication as if the port's shut, in effect. So, I think with somewhere like that, we need to look a bit broader than just the port itself, but look at that broader system.

Thank you. Martin, anything to add to that?

Yes. I think it links to one of the proposed questions that we might be going to be covering as well, and that would be around the facilities, the rest and stop facilities, that are available in the event that there are unforeseen circumstances, because there are huge volumes of vehicles that are going in and out of ports, but Holyhead is just one of a number of ports where it's really poorly served in terms of rest facilities, hygiene facilities et cetera, should there be requirements for stacking or anything like that. The Welsh Government took over the existing truck stop in order to create the border facility there. Although there is a privately owned small concern that is available, you're only looking at between 30 and 50 spaces there, and in terms of facilities, it's a portaloo and a burger van. So, when these things do break down, then, right across all the ports, right across these communities, it's vitally important that there's infrastructure there that can support, along the lines of what Castle Kennedy has done for Cairnryan. It's still not ideal, but at least it is somewhere that we can stack.

But for me, the takeout from all of this is around the fragility of the supply chain. The ports are an integral part of island life, and not just for Ireland, but the various communities that operate on all the islands. And when there's a fracture in the supply chain, then it takes a long while to get ourselves back into an equilibrium, because there are so many just-in-time movements, so many difficult conversations that have to be had with clients who won't necessarily see your point of view, particularly in this case, in the run-up to Christmas, where all the clients were concerned about their shelves being fully stacked for Christmas, because it's their most important part of the year as well. So, the fragility of the supply chain is the takeout and the thing that I would highlight the gravity of today.

Thank you very much. Just a final question, then, from me for everyone. Obviously, one berth is open and crossings are back up to capacity, but the full reopening isn't until 1 July. I'm just wondering how things are from your perspectives on this. We'll start with you, Martin. Is everything going through Holyhead as it should presently?

'No' is the simple answer, because it's obviously reduced capacity. But, again, the knock-on effect was not necessarily for the movements that were going through Holyhead, it's about the issues that the displacement of those services causes and the knock-on effect on other ports. We've had a lot of situations with hauliers from Ireland who would normally do drop-off trailers—that service has been withdrawn, and so they need to put a driver there, which is, obviously, adding cost and also having a knock-on effect on the rest of the business as well, because if the driver is there, then they're not somewhere else. We're seeing that right across the board. So, the displacement is the biggest issue around that and how it's affected the other ports and the other movements, not just from Ireland but right across the western side of the UK.

Thank you. Eugene, I'm conscious of time, so a succinct answer would be really helpful.

Okay. I will give simple, but direct answers, have no fear there. I agree with Martin—[Inaudible.]—capacity and some labour issues in the port. We are seeing a good throughput there now, and we'll be very keen to keep the new timelines, for many reasons. One is what Martin was talking about, that you don't need the back-up service as much, if you haven't as much intensity of two ships leaving at the one time. You have less carbon coming into the port of Holyhead and the Anglesey area at the one time if you have only one ship, and you have a better streamline of timelines both for the car passenger and for the freight lines that we have a ship virtually every three hours to the UK now. I think that is a glorious opportunity for Wales to up its tourism from Ireland, as you'd have daylight savings and a spreading of all this logjam of traffic.

And, of course, the big one is that should anything ever happen again, you don't have all those trucks for two ferries arriving at the one time. You have time to take the alternatives; there would be only one ship and the trucks for one ship really held up. In these big storms that are coming now, we often see that ships sail to the southern ports when you can't make the Northern Ireland ports and vice versa. But, equally, when we had the staggered times, we probably had one ship that was held up in Dublin and one in Holyhead, but once the ships get moving again, to free up the logjam and to get back on schedule will be a lot easier. So, the retention of the timelines—they're good, they're working well, except for the drop trailers.

If we do get a committee going, to look to see whether there can be any easement, but with a bilateral on customs, simple things at customs that, now that we're well into them and we've identified—. And I was very involved with this in Brexit, and the EU were not forgiving on their restrictions and on the bible of the EU and all these customs duties. But now that we're into it, and some of the simpler things, perhaps we could have a streamlining or an easement of the minor ones or of the—[Inaudible.] Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

Hannah.

Thank you, Chair. I was going to ask about whether witnesses were content with the pace and progress so far of the taskforce. But as we heard in the previous session from witnesses, they were yet to learn about the remit and function of that taskforce. So, perhaps I can ask instead, Martin first then Eugene, if you've had any contact with Welsh Government regarding the establishment of that taskforce, and what would you want to see from it, as priorities.

I have had an e-mail telling me that the taskforce is going to be set up, but that's as far as it's gone. I think that it is required and there is a greater need for joined-up thinking. As I said, what we've seen when systems like this fall down is that the knock-on effect is huge. As well as the displacement and the discomfort and inconvenience, there are also huge amounts of costs and those costs very rarely can get passed on to the client. In most cases, they will have to be absorbed by the haulier, through penalty clauses and things like that, for late deliveries. But we have one of our members who was quite happy to supply some numbers for us. Basically, in the run-up to Christmas, for the amount of time that he spent or he paid for his drivers to sit idle at the dock waiting to move, in the run-up to Christmas, it totalled more than £50,000. Now, when you're a low-margin industry, a low-margin business—the average is about a 2 per cent margin—those costs are incredibly unwelcome, and in a lot of cases, they can't be found—you know, it's difficult. So, a joined-up approach most definitely between the four respective countries, housed in Wales, around the movements around the Welsh ports, would be very, very welcome.

Thanks, Martin. Before I go to Eugene, I might as well come in with my second question to you while we have you on the screen here, and that's the point you made about the join-up with Irish and UK Government plans. We're still waiting on a Welsh ports and maritime strategy and a freight strategy from the Welsh Government, which was promised by last year. How important do you think those strategies are? Also, how do you think they should all link up, because there are a lot of strategies going on there; there are a lot of different stakeholders involved with them?

Is this still for me?

Yes, back to you, Martin.

Yes. I think that's a key point. There are so many pieces of work that are being undertaken, there's a danger that they'll operate in silos and the big picture will be missed. So, yes, one point of contact is always helpful. As I said, when we managed to get the relaxation of drivers' hours, it became difficult because there was not one point of entry, so we went through the Scottish Government on to the Department for Transport, et cetera, et cetera. So, we need to have one port—if you pardon the pun—one port of call for when things like this happen, and within that, there has to be the knowledge and also the authority to act very quickly to respond.

Okay.

Just before we bring Eugene in, Andrew, do you have a view on the delayed strategy that we haven't seen yet, but was promised last year?

Yes. From a personal perspective, I think it's quite disappointing that we haven't got a freight strategy. I've sat in front of this committee a couple of times, over many years, saying that we should have one, and we keep hearing Ministers committing to developing one and, as you say, even in the Chamber in July last year, the current Cabinet Secretary said that there would be a strategy by the end of the year, but there is no further progress on that. And given that the last one was in 2008, that seems to be quite remiss.

There's a lot going on behind the scenes with Welsh Government officials and I think it's a question as to whether it's capacity in Welsh Government to deliver the strategy or broader ministerial priorities versus other elements of the whole. Obviously, with responsibility for transport as a whole, is it freight that's important or is it getting a better railway? My view would be that, to some extent, passenger-facing stuff tends to get the priority, because it is the passengers that vote. If we could get trucks to vote, we might get a different outcome.

Thank you, Andrew. Back to you, Hannah. You wanted Eugene to come in on this.

Yes. If we pick up on that, Eugene, if you've had any contact regarding the taskforce and any reflections in terms of what the priorities should be for the Welsh Government.

Well, we certainly have a view on the priorities. No, our contact is with the Irish Government, and we are pushing harder than we should have, the committee in talking about it. If the Welsh Government is to lead on it, no problems there. But whatever is going on between the civil servants, both Martin and I, or at least our organisations, should be at the table. The one elephant in the room that is missing is the shipping companies, and the need to gather or to meet singularly with you.

We are at the coalface of the problems, and with respect to both the Irish and the Welsh Governments, I speak directly—. I don't mean this in any way as an insult or any condemnation, but because we are at the coalface of it, we know the day-to-day problems. We know what would improve or what is disimproving. Also, civil servants and committees can move from department to department, and with the advent of more airline passengers, very, very few people in Government, over the totality of the population, travel by ferry, and particularly by ferry to Ireland, north or south, compared to those who fly. So, the reality is, though they know of it, and we bring home the problems to different committees, the reality of how it works and how it happens is not realised and won't be realised unless we are at the table.

On the cost to our industry, which Martin referred to, on this side, we have put in submissions to the Irish Government, and we are going through the process now of safeguarding to see how much. But the initial submission for the delay and the cost to the Irish haulier, just for the loads that move—the proven loads that move—is at £60 million. It was a massive problem, and if they only get half of it, it's still a very big amount of money for the period of time that was involved. But, that is the reality.

I go back to the point, just as I happened to be talking to the Welsh Government, that tourism has never developed into Wales much out of Ireland. I never hear of people, as a group, taking a coach to soccer matches. They like to fly individually. But say that groups are together—supporters of one team—I don't see them going for the ferries. And now, if you had one every three hours, I think that it would be more appealing.

Likewise, I hear very few people from my part of the world, which is the west of Ireland, ever considering Wales. You are talking to a man who would have you see the scene in Llandudno, and starting my journey towards Cheltenham, it's like an Indian going to the Hajj. I'm on my way, in time. But very few people know that unless you are travelling, and I think the opportunities—. You may not want this, but parties and stag parties and hen parties, they will go west, and they will go to Spain. Very few people go to Wales, and I think that there's a lot of opportunity there, also if the timing is staggered and people can travel daily. Meeting a Welsh and Irish boat at night time isn't very pleasant for a car journey.

Thank you, Eugene. I think that Martin wanted to come in on this point.

Yes, I just wanted to add something for a bit of context, which was that the first contact that I had with the Welsh civil service throughout this whole process was that I got an e-mail on Christmas Eve, giving me an update on the port. By that time, not only had the issue been live for nearly two weeks, but we had also secured the relaxation of drivers' hours, and that had run out by the time that I was first notified by the Welsh Government.

So, this is where it is really important that the communications side of things is there, and bodies such as ourselves, which are represented on this call, are able to disseminate the information on behalf of the Government, or at least signpost our members or any of the ancillary bodies that are around us to your one point of contact, where the information is there. That was not the case in this particular episode.

Thank you, Martin, for that clarification.

Can I come back on this, just on one point? On the derogation on the drivers' hours, we learned one thing. It was acknowledged, and we got it on both sides of the border and in the UK, that relaxation of drivers' hours. But even with the relaxation of drivers' hours, we learned that now, since the UK left the EU, the drivers' hours relaxation didn't apply to the rest of Europe, which is something that we must address now, because we could still be fined or sanctioned if we were travelling to Europe the following week because we had the leniency because of the disaster here. It didn't continue through to Europe. So, that could have proved very difficult and costly to us.

That's a good point, Eugene. Thank you. Jenny.

Thank you. I want to talk about the condition and the resilience of the port infrastructure, and I'll start with Professor Potter. How would you describe the condition of the Holyhead port infrastructure and facilities overall, particularly now it's been declared a free port?

I've not been to Holyhead recently, so I can't comment directly on what they look like themselves, but—

I'm mainly interested in the expensive kit, i.e. the infrastructure and the ability of it to be resilient to climate change, and that sort of thing.

As you say, with climate change, the likely implications to ports are going to be more frequent storms and, potentially, worse storms as well, and that's why things like the investment in the breakwater become very important, because that'll help protect the port, to an extent, from that.

What about these three-legged super structures, one of which snapped?

The dolphins. I think I call them dolphins in my evidence, because that's perhaps a more common term for them. Like I say, they will be designed to a particular tolerance for berthing the ship, and they'll have parameters against which they can work with the fenders and the rubber cushions between them. So, to certain extents, as long as everything operates within those parameters, the port should be able to continue. It's useful to look at—. Hopefully, from this incident, the investigation will give us an idea as to what were the forces on those fenders, and I imagine that some modelling might be able to be done to work that out, to see whether it was the more intense storm that pushed beyond the parameters, or whether there were other issues. I think the learning then comes from that as to whether more investment needs to be made, whether that be through bigger fenders, more fenders, or a different type of construction.

The dolphin-type approach is used in ports around the world; it's not something that's just unique to Holyhead. Even Milford Haven has them. I think the concept of the design is fine, it's just making sure that it's engineered to the right parameters, and that there is some buffer in there to increasingly cope with these stronger storms.

Okay. If we're going to become a free port, which presumably means having more traffic, how good is the infrastructure to get the goods out of Holyhead and going on its way? We talked a lot about road infrastructure, but what about rail going onto freight?

I think there's a big opportunity for rail freight with the free port. The Anglesey Aluminium site was previously rail connected, and whilst it hasn't seen rail freight services for many years, I believe the connection still exists, so re-establishing it as a rail freight facility is there. I think it has the opportunity, because you can move larger volumes in one go. So, for instance, if the port was to close, you only need one train to move 30, 40 containers out of the way, versus 30, 40 trucks, so you've got a bit more resilience there. There's obviously the environmental side as well that rail, generally, is more environmentally friendly. So, you've got benefits across the whole north Wales corridor there, with fewer trucks passing through. So, for me, I think developing and building a rail connection to support the free port, both the free port activities and potentially to support inbound consumer goods from Ireland, those flows, and even land-bridge services through the channel tunnel to Europe, there's a real scope for doing that. I know there has been previous work done by Welsh Government, scoping up what that might look like, and I think the free port gives an opportunity to go back to that and see whether those plans can be pushed forward.

Thank you for that. Mr Lacey, I wondered if I could just ask you to comment on this, because, obviously, you are looking at the adequacy of port infrastructures in light of climate resilience. You previously described these boats that have powerful bow and stern thrusters. Obviously, that puts a lot of strain on what Professor Potter calls these dolphin berthing arrangements. What is the Irish ports' view on how we adapt to climate change?

Climate change is on the agenda of all ports internationally. Sea conditions are changing, weather conditions are changing, additional forces through stronger storms are going to be exerted on port infrastructures, and so on, and all of that has to be taken into account. I think, as Andrew was saying earlier on, in the initial design of the port infrastructure that's there at present, all of those parameters would have been factored in: known sea conditions or forecast of sea conditions, the size of vessels, the power that these vessels generate when moving laterally onto a berth. All of those considerations would have been taken into account. If that has changed in any significant way, it would cause the suitability of that infrastructure to have to be reassessed to see if it's still adequate for current circumstances. That's something that naturally falls to the ports themselves, and they do that in the risk assessment that they are all required to carry out, certainly on the Irish side, and there is pretty tight governance over that aspect of port performance in terms of the analysis of risk and then the mitigation and management of those risks. Without a doubt, some of those risks are being exacerbated by changes in climatic conditions.

I would be less worried about the changes in ship size and so on, because those variables should have been factored into the initial engineering assessments. However, all of this stuff is best handled by the experts who are in position in ports, and the very extensive reliance that ports make on consultancy engineering companies to talk about these things and to design the infrastructure in ports adequately.

There is one point I would make, however, in relation to the oversight of this infrastructure. If we've learned anything from the Holyhead experience, it is that this infrastructure is of critical national importance, so there should be very extensive oversight in relation to the condition and the maintenance of this infrastructure, and something that perhaps the departments responsible for transport on either side of the Irish sea might take a deeper interest in, and have ports report as part of the normal performance metrics that they do report on—have them report on the condition and maintenance programmes that are in place for the infrastructure in question. That's terribly important, particularly in the context of changed circumstances, increased frequency of storms, and so on.

If I could just quickly go back to a point that Andrew made, and it was a question from the previous questioner, which was can we rely on the single berth in Holyhead, well, we are, but it's not ideal. The reopening date for the second berth is 1 July. That cannot come quickly enough. Essentially, there is a single point of failure there in the berth that's in operation at the moment, and that's not a comfortable position to be in. So I would exhort all involved to use all speed to get the second berth back up and operational.

And that point is absolutely well made. Clearly, there are risks involved in that. But, just on the slightly wider points in terms of futureproofing Holyhead as the main bridge between Ireland and Wales and the rest of the UK, what discussions, if any, might you have had with the UK Government or, indeed, the Welsh Government about shifting increasing volumes of freight onto rail, given that we've just heard the rail infrastructure is still there, but, clearly, there's a lot of investment required to make that north Wales main line fit for purpose?

I think rail freight gets a lot of attention right across Europe, and there are strategies for modal shift from road to rail across Europe that have had varying degrees of success. The main drivers of rail freight are distance—distance and the type of commodities that move. Rail freight is ideally suited to handling commodities rather than time-sensitive consumer goods, and it works much better over longer distances. So, on routes from Holyhead down into the south-east or maybe through the channel tunnel, you could see a role for rail there. It's less attractive over shorter distances and, in the end, you still need there to be a road connection. So, I think the market sorts that out. It chooses between road and rail, and if rail services can be made attractive, competitive, frequent enough to meet the demands of the market—. That competitiveness is very much a function of the distance involved; it's much, much harder to make rail services viable over shorter distances. So, I see that as a combination. There is a solution there that would combine both, depending on the circumstances of the traffic that's being moved.

In terms of the engagement that has taken place between Ireland and the UK on these matters, 'not enough' is the answer. We have in Ireland port master plans for the development of our main commercial ports, but, clearly, there is no point in developing capacity in a particular port if that capacity is not being matched at the port on the UK side. So, we need to have those conversations. There are forecasts for increases in volumes through Dublin port—it's part of Dublin port's master plan. Forty per cent of the increase in ro-ro traffic through the port of Dublin is going to end up in Holyhead. This is based on predicted population growth, and so on, and the industrial density around the Dublin area, and the same is true for other ports—they will have their growth patterns figured out in their master plans. That needs to be matched with ports on the other side of the Irish sea, and that's where more dialogue is required.

I mentioned the experience of green shipping corridors. There is a model there, a template there that we could use for the development of adequate port capacity on either side of the Irish sea by matching relevant ports together, and developing them in tandem. I hope that answers your question.

Thank you. That's very useful.

Time has beaten us. Eugene, I know you wanted to come in, but time is really going to beat us, unfortunately. I'm going to ask Luke to ask his line of questioning, and if you want to cover it when you come in on Luke's questioning, please add a point that you were looking to indicate in that block of questions, if possible, please. Luke.

I'll try and focus in on some particular questions, and I was going to direct them towards Professor Potter, if that's okay. So, back in October 2023, when you appeared before the committee, you mentioned that you were hopeful of signs of recovery in Holyhead post Brexit. Has the closure affected that at all? Has that changed your view?

I don't think it has particularly changed my view. Like I say, when I was here previously, we'd got one data point that had showed a step change in the amount going through Holyhead. What has happened since then is that, effectively, demand has levelled off again. So, whereas before that point it was about a 20 per cent drop, since then it's been about a 13 per cent drop. So, there has been some shift of traffic to Holyhead but it's not then continued to grow and to close the gap with pre-Brexit, pre-COVID levels. In that respect, it's been a stable market. Will this disruption stop or hinder growth, or set that back? I don't think it will because, yes, it's been a month of complete closure, but logistics networks use Holyhead for a particular reason because of the short transit time, and it works well, and the traffic will come back quickly because that's the best route. It's not a longer term, more permanent shift where you might see people looking at other routes. It may be there are a few customers here or there that drift or the odd load that might go, say, through the southern corridor instead of back through Holyhead, but I think, if you look at the route as a whole, I don't foresee that the closure will do anything other than a very short, sharp shock. I would imagine if it's not back by now, I would certainly think that, within three to four months, traffic levels will be back to where they were certainly during 2024.

Okay, so you don't see any significant impact on future trends.

Not as a one-off incident. I think if there were repeated incidents of an extended closure, then that would shake confidence in it as a facility, but, as a one-off—. Users of the route will be familiar with it closing anyway for a day or two, simply because of the weather in the Irish sea. All shippers using the Irish sea know that there are going to be disruptions when bad weather comes through, so they will have that factored in. But I think, longer term, it should be back to where it was fairly soon.

Okay. One final question, then, just because of time. Are you aware of any comparable international examples we could use of port closures of this nature?

Thankfully, full port closures are fairly uncommon. I had a bit of a search around for the evidence that I've put in, and there are a couple of examples I mention in there—Houston, Durban and Baltimore. Obviously, we're probably most familiar with Baltimore where the Dali crashed into the bridge and closed the port for 70 days. The other two closures were only a matter of days, and that traffic came back fairly quickly—within a couple of months, it was back. With Baltimore, traffic hasn't returned yet, but that's, obviously, a three-month closure rather than just a one-month closure. And also, as to the traffic there, it's far more of a port of import from global supply chains, so, to some extent, some of that traffic might have been rerouted long before the port was even thinking about reopening. So, those are the examples I could find. None of them are directly mappable to the situation in Holyhead, but, like I say, it's a relatively short closure, the traffic is fairly well contained to those ports anyway, and is, to some extent, captive to Holyhead, so I think we're probably looking more like the Houston and Durban examples than Baltimore, where it is taking longer for traffic to come back. But Baltimore is growing. They had a good second half of last year when they reopened, and, certainly, the messaging coming out from them is that that growth has continued into 2025. So, traffic will come back if a port is competitive.

Great. Diolch.

Thank you, Luke. Thank you, witnesses, for your evidence. Thank you to our Irish colleagues and to our friend from Scotland as well, and also to Andrew here in the committee room. A transcript of the record will be sent to all four witnesses, so that you can read it and be confident that it accurately reflects your statements today. If there is any additional evidence you'd like to submit to the inquiry, because I appreciate we did a bit of a tour de force in the hour or so that was available to us, if you have additional evidence that you think would be helpful to the committee's conclusions, please feel free to submit that to the committee and, obviously, the committee will consider it in its final report. But, once again, I thank you all very much for taking the time to assist us in this inquiry this morning. Thank you. We'll now move into private session while we change for the third set of witnesses.

We're now back into public session for our third evidence session of the morning in relation to the closure of Holyhead. Welcome to our new set of witnesses. I'll invite you to put your names and positions and companies or organisations you represent on the record. I'll invite Christian, who's in the room, to speak first, then I'll go to Sarah, then Howard, and then we'll go straight into questions. Just for the benefit of witnesses, all committee members have a series of questions they'd like to put to you, so don't feel in your opening remarks that you need to cover everything you want to say, because I'm sure as we go through the process, which will be roughly an hour, those answers will be forthcoming within the lines of questioning that colleagues will be asking you. So, Christian.

Bore da. I'm Christian Branch. I'm Isle of Anglesey County Council's head of service for regulation and economic development.

Thank you. Sarah. Sadly you've frozen, Sarah.

Oh, there we go. I'm Sarah Bailey, chief executive officer for the West Cheshire and North Wales Chamber of Commerce.

Howard Browes, chair of Cybi Business Forum and a local business owner in Holyhead.

Could I invite all three of you to give what your initial reaction was to (a) the closure of the Holyhead port, and (b) the competency of the way that the response was handled in those first couple of days, to get the information out to port users and those who depend for their livelihoods on the port itself? I'll invite Christian to speak first, and we'll go through the order that I introduced you in, going to Sarah and then Howard.

I think it's important to note the importance of the port of Holyhead for the local and Welsh economy. It's of vital importance, and from a council perspective we have a good relationship with Stena ports, and that's extended back over nearly 30 years now. We were made aware of the issues based on the usual emergency planning arrangements. There was effective communication and engagement through those early days, and we were able to support Stena in the decisions that they were having to take. So, I think we were comfortable in the way that information was shared and we were able to support with that proactive response.

Sorry, I was just coming off mute. Probably a mixed reaction from our businesses, to say the least. We've had some businesses that have said that there was a very quick response and that the communication has been excellent, and we've also had some businesses that have said that they didn't receive any communications and weren't aware of the situation that was going on.

Just to reiterate Christian's comments there about the importance of Holyhead for the local market and then across north Wales and into the Cheshire region, it's vitally important for the businesses to have that access. But, yes, I think our response when we've gone out to gather this evidence has been a little bit mixed.

In terms of our own experience as a chamber of commerce, we weren't communicated with, so that would have been quite important for us to be able to get that message out as well and work alongside those areas. But as I said, it's mixed. We've got some very positive comments and some not-so-positive comments.

You're on the screen, Howard, so feel free to start.

Sorry, I was on mute. In terms of business in Holyhead, obviously we're close to the port and we knew something was happening. In terms of communication, I think that we could understand some of the difficulties. Obviously, being in a port town, we're used to temporary closures of the port, and I think what was uncertain for the businesses was how serious this was and how long it was going to last. Obviously, a lot of locals work in the port, so you do get a lot of speculation and rumour, a lot of fiction, and it's difficult to often find out what the fact is. I think, in fairness to Stena, from their point of view, they didn't know what the true extent of the damage was, and so they were, to a certain extent, working with the unknown, and also there were difficult weather conditions at the time, after the storm, which made the identification of the main issues very difficult. It's like anything, with the benefit of hindsight, communication could always be improved. The council are good on the island at keeping businesses informed, but it's just whether you always have the right pipeline into that true information.

For our remote witnesses, there's no need to keep unmuting yourself and muting yourself, the sound team will do that automatically. So, that might prevent that delay that we're seeing at this end when you come on to speak. Hopefully that's helpful.

As the closure carried on, do you think that the response in the longevity of the closure was effective and that the support got better as it went on? Because obviously, initially it was going to be shut for a couple of days, then the couple of days have turned into a couple of weeks, and now we know that the final part of the reopening won't be until July. So, how effective do you think the response has been as the consequences of the longevity of the closure have come to full effect? Christian.

Clearly, it was a live and evolving situation. It was a significant weather incident. I don't think that we should underestimate the complex marine environment and the prolonged poor weather conditions and how that delayed the investigations that had to be taking place. I think it's important to note Stena's eagerness and commitment to open the port as soon as possible, and that was readily communicated to us, the Welsh Government, the UK Government, and I think that that communication and engagement has continued throughout the period of the closure and since. Stena clearly have been taking active intervention and there is work being undertaken, so I think that it sends a strong message to port users and to the local community that they want to get the port open and back as soon as possible.

I absolutely agree with those comments. Again, the feedback and timely communication has been good from that, the timely manner in which the problems have been identified, the steps taken were very quick and decisive to get things moving and things back up and running again, which has been greatly appreciated by the businesses. And, again, I think that some of the comments that have come back are that we could see that issues could have been prevented previously, which I'm sure we'll talk about later, but actually the getting things open again has been positive and the speed of response was extremely good.

I'd just reiterate what's just been said. In terms of support moving forward, yes the port has reopened, but I think we have to recognise that it's still running with just the one terminal open and a considerably changed schedule to what we'd normally have in terms of traffic through the port. It's working at the moment, but—and we'll probably cover this later—footfall is still significantly down in the town, whether that's down to the port closure or not, and the reopening and the uncertainty about what's happening moving forward. We still are seeing decreased footfall in the town.

Very briefly, as we heard in the earlier session from the logistics firms, they weren't sure that the greatest priority was attached to maybe the seriousness of the situation that was being faced due to the closure of the port. Would you say that it was given sufficient priority by the various partner organisations with responsibility?

I think it's fair to say that there is a question as to whether the significance of the port is recognised by all Governments and stakeholders. You don't miss anything till it's gone, really, do you? I think that was certainly proven in this case. I think there is more work to be done to understand the scale and value and importance of the port. I think the closure demonstrated the fragility of the resilience, and that's not just a port question, but I think there are wider issues in terms of the connectivity to the island.

I absolutely agree with those comments. I think, again, for us, the continuity plan probably wasn't there, so if this was to happen again, have we got a continuity plan that could be impacted and brought in extremely quickly to reduce those costs, those losses that we did see. I think that would be one of the improvements that has come through loud and clear, essentially.

Likewise. As Christian says, I think it was an evolving picture. To a certain extent, the fragility of the port has been recognised, and yes, perhaps we do need to be looking for greater resilience. I think we've all learned from it in terms of the alternate ferry routes that were put on quite quickly and how to do that. I know it's been suggested there needs to be more scenario planning moving forward about how, when something like this happens, we can learn from it and be better prepared in the future.

Thank you. Sam.

Thank you very much, Chair. Obviously, we know the importance of the port of Holyhead to Ireland and the trade that goes to Ireland. But in terms of Ynys Môn more broadly, just how important is the port? We'll start with you, Christian.

The port is of significant socioeconomic value. Its operation is linked intrinsically to the socioeconomic and community well-being, and Holyhead without a doubt is a port town. Clearly, the port is the second largest roll-on, roll-off ferry port in the UK. It's the principal port and the fastest route across the Irish sea. It's a key employer. There are many direct and indirect benefits for businesses that benefit from the port. So, yes, it's of critical importance that that port operates effectively, because it does sustain not only the island's economy, but that of north Wales and Wales, and the Irish economy as well.

We'll move across to Sarah.

To be perfectly honest, I agree with all Christian's comments there. The importance from an economic position both locally and then across that kind of north Wales corridor is extremely valid and important to the economy, to the people, to the well-being, essentially everything. I'd just reiterate what Christian has said.

Lovely. Howard, do you have anything additional?

It's important when we talk about the port to understand, yes, it is a port, but the different types or segments that actually move through the port. Obviously, there is significant freight, but there's also significant passenger numbers as well, which is subject to seasonality. In terms of passenger numbers, this is what the local businesses depend on, because obviously, the footfall through the town and the spend through the town is what keeps businesses going. Whilst we recognise there is some seasonality to it, if you think about when the port closed, it closed in December. It's not the peak tourism season, but certainly in terms of Christmas and travel to and from Ireland, it is a peak time, and this is what severely impacted on the hospitality businesses in the town.

That's really helpful. Can I come back to you, Christian? In the paper that you submitted, you said the closure of the port demonstrates the lack of current and meaningful economic data available. I'm just wondering if you can elaborate on that and how this has made addressing the impact more difficult.

The Welsh Government commissioned an economic impact assessment in 2021. That assessment is old. It doesn't reflect the impact of COVID or Brexit, so I think the conditions and the context are different. The lack of up-to-date information made it difficult for us to initially assess the impact of the closure. So, I think what we feel as an authority is that we need a new impact assessment that provides informed, timely and appropriate information to underpin decision making, and we think that's a potential shared activity for the taskforce to consider.

Okay. That's really interesting. So, does it make it difficult then—I grew up in a port town in south-west Wales—to understand the local benefit to a community of direct jobs at the port, and those tourists and visitors who stay and spend money locally? Is it difficult to draw a distinction as to what the benefits are or where that benefit is in a port town like Holyhead?

I think people understand the importance. I think it's very difficult to measure, and it's that degree of certainty. That's what an impact assessment would provide us. I think it's a wider point, not just in terms of Holyhead, but probably Welsh ports as well. Is there a true appreciation of the value and the significance of what that critical national infrastructure provides?

Thank you. Sarah, Howard, anything to add on that?

For me, I would probably say that the biggest or the easiest way to assess it is that financial impact. Just to give you a couple of examples here, a hotel operator lost over £15,000 across that period of Christmas because of cancelled bookings, and a couple on Market Street—again, the smaller end of that SME market—their sales are down by 25 per cent in town, because they're not having those passengers that are coming off the ferries and that side of things as well, and that doesn't include, then, obviously, the larger businesses that are doing the import and export and the logistical side of things. One example is they've increased their time for delivery on fresh food, which is now three days instead of 24 hours. It was an extra 500 miles they were putting on the loads to get them to cross to Liverpool and that side of things, which is a service impact. It's then a cost impact, it's a delivery impact, it's all that side of things as well. But it just gives you a few examples there of the range of impact it's had across the area.

Thank you. Howard.

Just to support Christian's suggestion of a newer economic impact assessment, I think we have to remember, at the end of the day, things are dynamic. We are still, to a certain extent, in post-COVID recovery mode, and even the high street is reshaping itself. So, any information, any data must be useful in terms of showing the benefit of the island's economy to local businesses and further afield

Okay. Thank you. Now one berth has reopened and sailings have commenced, I'm just wondering if the town, the community has felt some of that trade come back following that reopening. Christian.

Yes. Clearly, there is an adjusted timetable now, but the same number of ferries are operating as previous to the closure. Howard will probably add to this point. I think that the recovery of the high street has still not happened yet because the number of foot passengers and those movements haven't synced back to what they were previously. So, I think a return to those previous timetabled departures would help. But it's still early days. I think the town centre is resilient to a point, but a return to normality would be appreciated and I think that would give that certainty and confidence back to the local businesses.

Fab. Thanks, Christian. He mentioned you there, Howard, so I'll come to you next, on recovery since the partial reopening.

We have been doing some work, the business forum, with Smart Towns Wales, and we've just remodelled a lot of the data collection in the town. The latest information we've got is footfall is still 22 per cent down on what it was at a comparable time in 2024. Again, you've got to understand the different segments that come through the port. It's still very early in the tourist season at the moment. The guesthouses are just reopening. From the island's economy, the caravan sites are just reopening, so we're starting to get going. In terms of the retail sector, yes, it is back similar to what it was before the port closure. For hospitality, it's a bit early to say at the moment. In fairness, I think what we're seeing is that, even in terms of forward bookings, it is in a similar position to last year. One of the concerns was that the port closure might have some impact on bookings moving forward, with certain international guests choosing different routes, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Thank you. Sarah.

Yes, very similar. So, again, from a transport and logistics angle, we've been told that, yes, it's pretty much back to normal. They've had to make adjustments for those schedules and that side of things, but it's there or thereabouts where it was. And then, very similar to what Howard said, it's a little bit early for people to tell us in that tourism and hospitality sector as it's not quite there yet. It's in that Easter-onwards environment, at the moment, that we'll start to see whether we're still under the impact of that or whether it actually is returning to normal, as well. But very similar comments on that side of things.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, panel.

Just one brief thing, Christian, could I just ask you about the survey you did? I think you said that you had 62 responses to that survey of the impact. How many potential responses could you have had? What sort of quantity of businesses were potentially asked to respond?

There are approximately 200 businesses in Holyhead, Holy Island, and we got 62 responses, so it was a relatively high response rate.

And you'd be confident that that would be a good response rate.

Yes.

Thank you. Luke.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I wanted to look at the impact on businesses and get a better understanding of what particular sectors of the local economy have been hardest hit. So, just listening to some of the answers that have already been given, I've picked up tourism and hospitality and retail. Are there any others that we should be aware of?

Yes. The local economy is dominated by transport, storage, retail and accommodation. I think that corresponds to the feedback that we had through the business survey. There were a number of businesses that we anticipated—your mechanics, your garages—and then some that we didn't quite anticipate, and I think we had quite a high number of responses from beauty salons and hairdressers, and I think that that reflects the number of lorry drivers cutting their hair before returning home to their wives and partners. So, it's a kind of mixed response, but in terms of what we received and the evidence that has been submitted, it does reflect the economy of Holy Island.

So, just touching on that survey, then, and then I'll come to the other panellists, do you feel that the survey is reflective of all those sectors that have been affected in terms of the responses you've had? Are there any sectors that you would've liked to have seen more responses from, or were expecting more responses from?

No. It reflected our understanding of the local economy, and those businesses that responded were those that we anticipated.

Okay. Did anyone else want to come in on this particular point?

I just—

So, I—. Sorry, Howard, you go on.

No, you go first. Ladies first.

I was going to say that we opened ours a little bit broader, as well. So, we did come down the north Wales corridor and, for us, as well, manufacturing was affected and we did have some recruitment businesses that were affected. But, predominantly, those kinds of hospitality and logistics sectors were the key ones, but it did broaden out to manufacturing, as I say, and some other areas—a smaller, obviously, impact there, but there was impact across all those different areas.

Along that north Wales corridor then, Sarah, how far-reaching was the impact?

To be honest, right the way up to Deeside, actually, where businesses use that corridor on quite a regular basis. One of the biggest evidence packs that we had in was from a logistics business in Deeside, so it takes it right up to the border, essentially, and probably beyond. We did our research around that north Wales piece, but it probably does expand a little bit further than that, but 'all the way', essentially, is the answer.

Yes. Howard.

I think the only thing to add, when we talk about the broad segments, is you've got to understand all the different businesses within the segments and also differences between the chain operations and the smaller independents. A chain operation has probably got bigger reserves and better cash flow to survive things like this than the smaller independents, certainly if they've only just recently started.

I mean, the knock-on effect is on takeaways, restaurants and, obviously, cafes. As soon as you see any decrease in footfall, you see a decrease in spend across the town. And I think the other thing is that Holyhead noticed it also because a lot of people in the town work in the port and they were having to work elsewhere, in Birkenhead or down in Fishguard. That, again, takes spend away from the town. So, it's just as wide an understanding as you can get of the impact that it has on the businesses and the different types of businesses.

So, looking at how the Welsh Government has responded to this closure, then, in terms of support for businesses, where do you think the Welsh Government has slotted in, or could slot in? If I could start with Howard, because he's on the screen.

Is that question for me?

Yes, I'll start with you. It's open to all of the panel, but you are on the screen at the moment, Howard, so I'll go to you.

When we talk about support, I don't know what support is being talked about at the moment. Obviously, the port has reopened. If you are talking in terms of financial support, no financial support has been offered, or no criteria that could be offered to businesses to determine whether financial support is warranted. In terms of support, yes, some businesses might be looking for financial support. I think that other businesses, moving forward, are looking for, perhaps, some ideas as to how to support, moving forward. If they have had cash flow problems, what support is possibly there to support them until the busier season kicks in?

If I could just stick with you then, Howard, on that support, going forward, in your mind, does that include, perhaps, infrastructure investments in the port area, or in the town, to make things a bit easier and to attract more people to the town?

Well, in fairness, there's a lot going on in Holyhead at the moment anyway. There has been considerable investment in the town. There are a lot of projects going on. There is talk about the free port. We have just started to talk about a placemaking plan for the town. There is a lot going on. I think that, at times, it needs to be more interconnected, when you think about these different things.

In terms of support for businesses, it's difficult to say what they would want. Retail, in fairness, say that they are back to normal, but in terms of other support, I don't really know. I think that it's just some consideration about the dynamics of the town.

Okay. Sarah, the same line of questioning to you.

Yes, absolutely, I agree. Again, talking to businesses, obviously, businesses always want financial support. If there's money available, they want it from that side of things, and I think that would help. But, probably, that investment—. So, again, the feedback and what we had was around the maintenance of the port, actually just seeing that that's on an ongoing basis and that it's regular. So, it's almost about trying to avoid this happening again, or, if it does happen again, how we can minimise the impact, essentially, so it's not as substantial as it has been. A continuity plan—we've talked about it a little bit already, but, again, it's that kind of, 'What happens if—?' So, actually, do we get a little bit of a priority at Liverpool, or what is the cost impact, or can the Government step in and help with reduced fees? So, things along those lines, I think, are the future rather than just that cash injection into businesses. I think that they would be more comfortable if, actually, there's a futureproofed plan there on how we can protect this not having the same level of impact as it has had this time around.

Okay. So, more investment in more longer term ambitions, and so on. So, I suppose, coming to Christian, where do you see Cyngor Sir Ynys Môn stepping in, in this field?

We have commenced discussions with the Welsh Government in terms of support for businesses. We have shared the business study, we have shared the hard data, and dialogue is ongoing. We have asked for additional financial support and practical measures to be introduced to mitigate the impacts. The request includes direct financial aid, business rate relief, marketing campaigns and also support for local events. So, we feel that those are important, immediate interventions to get some confidence back into business and the high street.

We are also looking to maximise the 53 planned cruise visits to the port this summer. So, there is an opportunity, and the request that we have made is similar to the one that we made when the Menai suspension bridge was closed in 2022, and the Welsh Government provided additional support then. So, we feel that the principle has been established. As I say, dialogue is ongoing, and we are coming to that point where we just need to agree on what measures will be put in place.

So, it's a matter of, actually, the Welsh Government following through now with some action, is it?

Yes. Discussions are ongoing with the regional team, and we are trying to come up with a range of practical measures and who will be doing what.

Okay, and how much has been provided so far by the council itself?

Direct financial support?

Yes, support.

Nothing to local businesses. The focus has been on collating the evidence and then presenting that to Welsh Government.

Okay, great. Diolch.

Before I ask Hannah to ask her questions, could I just make this point to you? We had our Irish guests in before, giving evidence, and they were making the point that the Irish Government has a port strategy to improve ports in Ireland, but the point that they made was there’s little point in improving the ports in Ireland if the receiving port doesn’t have a similar sort of national strategy to help uplift the port facilities there. Now, we’ve heard also that the logistics and freight strategy that the Government promised in 2024 is still to materialise. Would you agree that there is an urgent need to have a national strategy to see this national infrastructure? Because that’s what we’re talking about: we’re talking about national infrastructure here when we’re talking about Holyhead, and that would have a direct economic benefit. I’ll start with you, Christian, and just ask for a quick response before I ask Hannah to come in.

I think that's a fair comment, given the relationship between Wales and Ireland. I think it has to be an integrated approach. I think that’s what we’re looking for in terms of the proposed taskforce, that there is representation from both Wales and Ireland to ensure that that engagement and integration is there. I think that’s something that we would readily support, and I think that would be integral to the success of the taskforce and whatever interventions it delivers.

Thank you, Christian. Sarah.

'Yes', is the simple answer, essentially, from that angle. I think it would be very receptive to businesses that are using it, but also that attractiveness, as you’ve just said, for those external parties as well. It’s great if you’ve got a fabulous port in Ireland, but then if you're coming out here and it’s a bit outdated and there are problems and things like that then it does make that kind of relationship a little bit more strained. So, yes, I think it would be vitally important, essentially, to have that strategy across the national piece.

Howard.

I suppose just to ask for more clarity about the Holyhead gateway project. It has been talked about in terms of further development of the port, certainly by Stena, and some land infill and increased capacity. It’s whether that’s going to be considered, moving forward, obviously, because that would strengthen the resilience of the port.

Thank you. Hannah.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. We’ve talked about, obviously, and touched on, the financial impact on businesses and the ongoing decreased footfall in the town centre and the impact that has had, but I just want to turn, perhaps, to how that translates into the impact on the workforce themselves. Christian, if I may, I’ll come to you first, because, in the survey that has been referred to that you undertook, I think 54 per cent of respondents reported that jobs were at risk due to the port’s closure. Have we seen that translate into job losses? If so, are there any particular sectors that have been affected?

So, we haven’t seen those job losses that were anticipated. We haven’t followed up on the responses to the surveys. I think, from our perspective, it would be the Department for Work and Pensions that would be best placed to provide the evidence in terms of any individuals that have come into their system.

Have you had any kind of evidence from the contacts you have in the community there that, whilst, fortunately, it looks like it hasn’t translated into job losses, there has been an impact on people having to work fewer hours as a consequence as well?

Yes, some of the evidence that was provided did demonstrate a reduction in shift work and a reduction in certain roles. Clearly, Stena workers were directly impacted as well, weren’t they? They were relocated to Birkenhead or down to Fishguard. They’re the nature of the direct impacts, but we haven’t been given any other further evidence in terms of more detail.

Okay. Where would you need that evidence from, the DWP, or—?

Yes, I think DWP would be the best-placed organisation in terms of their understanding of the local labour market.

I don't know whether, Howard, you have any reflections on that.

Similar to Christian, it’s only anecdotal. You tend to find, certainly in terms of hospitality and retail, that hours decrease and increase according to seasonality and demand. Certainly, some of the hospitality businesses did cut staff hours, because obviously they had to close for the Christmas period, so there was a reduction in income for the people employed over that period.

And Sarah, I don't know whether there was anything you picked up with the surveys you've done.

Yes, similar responses, essentially, that kind of, probably, rather than job losses, that flex—so, that reduction in hours or shift patterns. We've had a couple of businesses that have had challenges, or have had to put contracts back, because they would have brought workers in from Ireland, or that side of things—again, that passenger footfall that they would normally have used for contracts have been pushed back a little bit. So, probably not job losses per se, but, actually, just, as I say, that flex, in either moving things back into the year, or reduction in hours.

Would I perhaps be right in thinking—we've talked previously in this session about the need for continuity and contingency planning—for this to be brought into that as well, in terms of what would happen in the future if we were in a situation where this was needed, what happens to the people that might need that support, because of their reduced hours and the impact that has on them as well?

Yes, I think, from a council perspective, we have been faced with the closure of significant businesses on the island previously, most recently the 2 Sisters poultry factory in Llangefni. So, I think the public sector and the voluntary sector have demonstrated an ability to come together and provide adequate support. It's not something that we look forward to doing, but we have the ability to do it. It comes back to having that information and the intelligence to make informed decision making, and then making sure that everyone is prepared to collaborate and respond accordingly. But I don't think the anticipated job losses have happened, and I think the fact that the port reopened as quickly as it did obviously helped to mitigate the impact of that. But, no, as a public sector, and as a county council, then that's something that we're always willing and prepared to do.

Jenny.

Thank you very much. I just wanted to look at the wider planning for the future. Obviously, we don't yet know exactly what the taskforce is going to do. It's been announced, but we don't yet know what the terms or reference are, or the membership, but, presumably, you're all stakeholders who are going to be involved. So, I wonder if you could just tell us briefly what actions are needed to secure the long-term resilience and stability of the port, and how we could mitigate the results of the failure of 7 December.

Okay. From a council perspective, we welcomed the announcement of the taskforce. As you say, there's no clarity on the scope and the purpose of the taskforce, and that's something that the council leader has written to the Cabinet Secretary on for that to be confirmed. But we are eager to support and we're eager to see what tangible interventions will come forward.

Okay. So, strategically, what do you want to see coming out of it, though?

So, from a council perspective, I think we are, first of all, eager to note Stena's competence as a harbour authority and their commitment to invest in the future of the port, and that's not been questioned. From our perspective, I think there are a number of key infrastructure requests or requirements, and I think reopening the berth, so that terminal 3 and terminal 5 are operational, is the short-term priority, but I think there are issues then in terms of the refurbishment of the breakwater, the access and egress to the port and the congestion issues that exist currently.

So, on that specifically, the egress, what about any proposals to shift a lot of freight, where suitable, onto rail, rather than road, because that would relieve congestion elsewhere on the roads?

I think Stena have considered that in terms of what is practical and what is viable, but I think it is a road haulage dominated sector currently.

Okay, but, with a climate emergency, we obviously perhaps need to revisit the way we use to shift freight.

Yes, and that's something that has been considered in the wider free port proposal as well in terms of the land that Stena have now purchased, and what opportunities there are. But I think it does come back to the current infrastructure in terms of those constraints, the lack of HGV parking and the risk of stacking of lorries on the A55 when a similar incident occurs. And then you've got the issues of the Menai strait crossing as well and the lack of resilience and the relationship between the operation of the port and the operation of the bridge, and, if one fails, then it does have those wider community impacts.

Okay, thank you for that. Sarah Bailey.

Yes, kind of similar. So, again, it's welcome that the taskforce is there, and I think that strategic plan is the important thing for us. So, as Christian said, it's that commitment from Stena, it's the commitment from Welsh Government about where the priority of this sits and lies and what the plan is going to be, essentially. I think that's what businesses want to know, and locally want to know—what's the plan for refurbishment, but then that longer term plan of maintenance and continuity and that side of things as well. I think that they're the key things that I would like to see, and the businesses that we talk to would like to see, out of that taskforce.

Thank you very much. Howard Browes.

Yes, similar to a certain extent. As Christian said, I think an economic impact assessment would be useful, but also to try and think about all these different projects in the round as well. Because you have got the gateway project, the port expansion, you've got the free port that has been identified. Travel routes into the town, from a local perspective, are very congested, and, if you think about the volume of traffic that goes over black bridge, any sort of disruption to that just stacks traffic up right through the town. I don't think you can detach from that, as Christian said, the travel on and off the island, because basically it's two bridges, and one of them is going to be subject to some repair works, which means it's down to one lane from March til December this year. So, if there are any critical weather events and Britannia bridge has got restrictions on it, again, it makes the flow of trade and passengers et cetera very difficult on and off the island. So, everything needs to be thought of in the round, and not just as isolated parts.

I think—

Sorry, just to add—. I was just going to say that that rail piece as well, it just opens up that wider discussion around that as well, because that is a challenge in north Wales. So, Growth Track 360 is obviously looking at that and focused on that. It's an ideal situation, but it's also got its challenges around the rail network in north Wales and how that's working as well. So, I think that's that balance there; there could be a challenge in that, looking at that wider piece.

Okay, well we certainly need to put that on the agenda. So, Howard, back to you. Sorry, it's very difficult to have a conversation when we're all in different rooms. Could you just pick up on the point that Sarah made about how we use different modes of transport? So, that must include rail, surely. There's an excellent rail link, and it still exists, to the ports. What thought has been given by your members to refurbishing that and making better use of that, particularly to avoid all the congestion you describe around the town centre?

In fairness, it has not been talked about before, but I think it's quite a valid suggestion in terms of, obviously, the environment. One thing I noted, when I was looking at all the information, is that Holyhead seems to have evolved as a port, but it has evolved in bits and adapted through time without any overall plan for how it works in terms of modern transport infrastructure. And in terms of the railway station, yes, it is there, but it's probably underutilised. It probably could be used for freight, and it would certainly avoid some of the congestion on the A55. But, again, I think it needs to be looked at. I think it's a very valid suggestion.

Thank you for that.

Okay, Jenny?

Yes. I haven't got any further questions.

Could I just ask all three of you: are you a little surprised that so little information is out there around the taskforce, given that it was one of the early announcements the Government made? I think it was the first week back for this institution—8 January seems to stick in my mind. And from a series of witnesses this morning, there seems to be little or no information flowing out about its purpose and when it's going to convene and what lines of work it's going to undertake. So, I'd invite all three of you to give an opinion over where we're at with the taskforce. Christian.

Yes. As I said previously, we welcome the announcement of the taskforce. We just want that clarity, and making sure that the relevant stakeholders are around the table and are able to contribute. So, anything that can be announced in the short term would help us, but I think what is good to see is that there's that willingness to contribute and collaborate, and that the need for a taskforce is a positive thing.

Given the urgency of the situation, and you're a senior council officer, are you surprised that so little progress has been made to get the taskforce up and running?

I think the priority has been to reopen the port and I think that's the right step. There are existing conversations and relationships amongst all the relevant partners anyway, so I think there is common agreement in terms of what needs to happen to the port and what potential investment is required. I think that is where the focus needs to be, but I'm sure that information will come through eventually.

'Yes', I think, is the answer to your question. The lack of information is quite surprising. I think the communication, again, probably needs to be looked at about regular updates, what's going on, what's happening. Like you said, we're two months in now. Yes, the priority has been to update and open the port and I completely agree with Christian on that, but actually, where we've moved and what has been the focus over the last couple of months to progress this forward I think would be really powerful and something that probably needs to be reviewed and looked at as well.

There's some brilliant sunshine shining in through your window, Sarah.

It's gorgeous in north Wales.

And Howard, the final word to you.

In terms of the task group, obviously, it was mentioned at the time in response to what was happening at the time. We've had very little in terms of information about it, and I think the problem is the further you move away from the event, probably the importance of it doesn't seem as significant. I do think it would be key to learn from the mistakes and make sure that the resilience and the scenario planning is there if it happens again.

Thank you to all three of you for giving evidence this morning. I think that concludes the questioning from Members. A transcript will be sent to all three of you so you can see what you've said on the record and make any corrections that you think would more accurately reflect the point that you were making. You can liaise with the committee staff for that. But once again, I thank you for contributing to the inquiry. Your evidence is very helpful in us reaching our conclusions. Thank you all very much. We'll now move back into private session and break for lunch.

Good afternoon and welcome back to the inquiry that the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee is undertaking into the closure of Holyhead port late in 2024. I welcome Mike Hedges to the committee, who's deputising for Hefin David. I would like to extend a welcome to the two Cabinet Secretaries, Ken Skates and Rebecca Evans, and her officials. Ken, have you got officials with you as well?

I do, Chair. I have Stephen Rowan.

Right. I'll ask you to introduce yourselves and the officials that you've got with you for the record, if I may. I'll start with Ken, and then I'll go to Rebecca, and then we'll go straight into questions. Ken, do you want to introduce for the record yourself and the official that you have with you?

Thank you, Chair. I'm Ken Skates. I'm the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales, and I'm joined today by my official, Stephen Rowan.

Prynhawn da. Good afternoon. I'm Stephen Rowan, deputy director for national and international connectivity in the Welsh Government, with responsibility for a range of things in transport, including ports policy. Diolch.

I'm Rebecca Evans, Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning. I will ask officials to introduce themselves.

Prynhawn da. Duncan Hamer, director of economy in the Cabinet Secretary's department.

Good afternoon. Steven McGregor, deputy director, north Wales.

Thank you, all. I'll begin the questioning. There's an issue around understanding who has responsibilities for ports and the policy connected to ports. On the Government website, it states that it sits with Rebecca's portfolio, but, Ken, you're on record, at another previous Senedd committee, as saying you have responsibility. Could one of you confirm who ultimately has the Cabinet responsibility when it comes to policy around ports?

I've got responsibility in relation to the contribution that ports and aviation make in relation to economic growth and stability, and then Ken has responsibilities in relation to the transport matters more generally. Of course, there's close engagement between ourselves and our officials on this.

And that's your understanding as well, Ken. I'm assuming it is. You are nodding.

It is indeed, Chair. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you for clarifying that. We now know that the port of Holyhead did have a complete closure after the storm on 6 and 7 December, but in evidence we received this morning it was indicated it wasn't the storm itself that caused the problems. What is your initial assessment of the impact that the closure has had, and in particular the initial reaction to the potential closure, as the news was evolving and the Welsh Government activated measures to support businesses and the port itself? I'll begin with Rebecca and then I'll ask Ken to pick up after Rebecca, please.

In the aftermath of the incident, I think that it's fair to say that the Welsh Government really did respond immediately and we responded collectively. It was very much a team effort, pulling in teams from right across Government, but then also working more widely with our other partners. We worked very closely indeed with the Irish Government, for example, and very closely with the ferry companies and the local authority, and in time, then, with representatives of business and so forth. In terms of a collective, effective response, I think it was really a good example of that partnership working that we've been able to develop. I think it is the partnership working that has developed over a long period of time in the area that allowed us to respond so effectively and so immediately in the first instance.

Just to add to what Rebecca has already outlined, my assessment is that we've rarely seen such an enormous breadth of involvement by Welsh Government teams. We had teams from trade, we had teams from ports policy, obviously, we had the Dublin office, we had the regional teams, we had the economic team, the strategic road network, TfW were involved as well, communications and press—this was a huge cross-Government endeavour.

Obviously, when the incident happened, the port itself wished to reopen as soon as possible—immediately. Then, as events unfolded, it became obvious, due to the severity of the damage, that that wasn't going to happen. So, on 17 December, we met with the port, and whilst we were meeting with the port, the press notice was issued, saying that it would be closed until at least 16 January. That's when we initiated those contingency plans, looking at every single option to move people and goods from other ports, and to make sure that traffic flows within Wales and, indeed, by working with others across Great Britain, were as seamless as possible at what was an incredibly busy time of the year.

Interestingly, in the evidence we received this morning from the Road Haulage Association, they contrasted the way that the Scottish Government reacted to the closure very early on, by having daily meetings with hauliers, and it wasn't until 24 December that the Road Haulage Association was approached and contacted. You've touched on, both of you, in your response to us, that there was a good team effort and people were asked what help they required. Why was it so long in the time frame from when the port closed to the officials in your respective departments reaching out to one of the major trade bodies that is responsible for freight, i.e. the Road Haulage Association, and in particular the way you did it differently to the way Scotland did it, in activating daily meetings?

Well, I'll bring in Stephen, if I may, just to talk about the engagement that took place formally with organisations, but we were also holding very regular meetings not just internally, but with stakeholders. I was speaking almost on a daily basis with my counterpart in the Irish Government, so engagement was incredibly effective. Indeed, I think that's what avoided a crisis from taking place. And insofar as some of the further engagement that took place is concerned, Parc Cybi, for example, is operated by the north Wales trunk road association, so there would have been a good degree of co-ordination and communication between hauliers, the freight sector itself, and Parc Cybi. But I'll bring in Stephen, if I may, with regard to the engagement directly by Welsh civil servants and the RHA.

Thanks, Cabinet Secretary. We generally have very good relationships with the Road Haulage Association, Logistics UK and other freight bodies. In the immediate aftermath of the incident, our focus was very much on communications to HGV drivers who were approaching the port, or at the port, to make sure that traffic flows were managed appropriately and to make sure that drivers out there on the roads were getting accurate information on when the port might reopen and where else to go, working with other stakeholders.

In terms of the Scottish Government's model and earlier engagement with trade bodies, that's certainly something that we would look into, perhaps under the auspices of the Holyhead taskforce in terms of how we would respond to any future incidents of this nature, to see if there's anything that we can do to improve our communications and information flow with key bodies. Thank you.

Was it a mistake not to have reached out to the Road Haulage Association sooner?

I think it would have been beneficial to have engaged at an earlier opportunity, but that's not to say that we weren't engaging directly with those people who were struggling to get their goods back to Ireland. The direct communication with hauliers, I think, was excellent. Insofar as actually engaging with the body itself, then we can learn lessons for sure, and I'm sure that will come out of the taskforce.

And my final point to you is about the Dublin office, which you raised. Listening to the evidence given this morning by the Irish logistics association and the representatives from the Irish ports association, I think the evidence pointed to that there was minimal, if no, interaction with the Dublin office of the Welsh Government. Why would that be the case, because surely they should be on point, liaising with the logistics operators in Ireland and conveying the messages that the situation in Holyhead was deteriorating very rapidly?

I would say that that wasn't the case. The Dublin office was actually a focal point for co-ordination between the Welsh Government, the UK Government and the Irish Government, and actually it was able to get updates from border authorities on both sides of the Irish sea to assess the impact and the success of the new routes also in satisfying the demand between the two countries. The Dublin office was very much part of the key virtual team that was assembled very early on, and they were very instrumental in gathering evidence, but also meeting with key stakeholders in Ireland, and then they were able to provide on-the-ground information; they were gathering tv, radio and newspaper coverage, and that did help us then to respond and react appropriately. They also lead on liaising with the Irish Government officials and Irish Exporters Association, and actually being in the place at the right time, they were able to use the contacts that they have and provide some really valuable context for what was happening. So, I would respectfully disagree with that view that the Dublin office didn't play a key role. I think, actually, they were very instrumental.

If I may, Cabinet Secretary, just to confirm that position. So, throughout the process, we were in daily contact with the Irish office, so the key information that they brought through was that obviously the Irish Government is responsible for the Irish business side, so that feed, but also some of the more—[Inaudible.]—for Irish citizens wanting to return over Christmas, and really bringing that sort of urgency of what was being seen in the Irish media was really key for us to be able to take the actions that were needed throughout, and indeed right through to now as well. So, in preparation for today, for example, we were able to access the latest position from the Irish side in this discussion.

Thank you. Mike.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Reports suggest the port won’t fully reopen until 1 July. 'Is that true?', I think, is the first question I've got for you. The second one is: what is your understanding of the cause of such a significant delay?

Well, I think it's for the port authority itself to disclose the cause of the incident, and I believe that they have done that today, and the reason for any delay in reopening. But I would have thought, actually, that it's in their best interests that they open as soon as they possibly can. We've been told 1 July. I have no reason to disbelieve the port authority, and I'm hopeful that that date will remain.

How would you describe the condition of Holyhead port facilities and infrastructure, and, in your view, has it received the level of investment required to maintain this key asset, especially as we now have substantial climate change?

I think that's a really, really fair and strong question to ask, actually. It's what we're going to be examining within the taskforce. We're going to be looking more generally at sea connectivity between Wales and Ireland, indeed the west coast of Great Britian and Ireland, and assessing what sort of change needs to take place in light of the increasing frequency of dramatic weather events.

I can't comment at this stage on the infrastructure itself. That's something that, really, I think, the port authority should be quizzed on, because it's worth remembering that this is a privately owned and privately operated port. But we stand ready to assist, and indeed we've already made available funding for the breakwater, to ensure that the port has a strong and resilient future ahead of it.

Just before you go on, Rebecca, do you want to say anything on this particular point, or are you content as the answer stands?

No, I would agree with that, and also point to the investment that we're making through the breakwater funding as well. I think that's really important.

You can disagree with Ken every now and again if you want to. Luke, you did have a supplementary on the point that Mike was talking about.

It's more to do with some of the evidence that we received this morning in questioning the ports. I was asking the ports around the frequency of their maintenance schedule, whether or not they would have picked something up as part of that schedule. Have Welsh Government been asking the same questions?

Yes, we were asking those questions from the start. It was, in part, why we were saying, when this challenge was unfolding, that it was unhelpful to speculate over the cause. The fact of the matter is, as we now know from this morning’s evidence, there was damage caused to the steel structure. That damage was caused by ships that impacted on it. It would be for the port authority itself to answer questions as to whether any prior examinations could have determined that this would take place. But this was as the storm was building up. I'm no expert on the port itself, on the infrastructure, on the composition of the berths. I think it's best that those sorts of questions are focused on the port authority itself.

The Government did ask questions as to whether or not prior inspections had happened.

Yes, and prior inspections are very much something that the port authority are required to do. There are regulations in place that require ports to operate safely. So, I'm sure that they would have been adhering to all of the requirements that are in place.

So, just one final question from me on this subject, Chair. So, could I just get an understanding then of what checks and balances are in place on the Government's side, to ensure that these sorts of maintenance schedules are adhered to, that the investigations are adhered to? And do you think, actually, that those checks and balances are right, or should we be, potentially, looking at more?

I'll bring in Stephen, if I may, to answer this.

Thanks, Cabinet Secretary. So, some aspects of the regulations around ports are not devolved, so they sit with other bodies in the UK Government. So, there's an expectation, as the Cabinet Secretary said, that the port would be maintaining the necessary standards. It's not something we routinely look at within the ports policy team in Welsh Government, but, again, this might be something we could look at through the auspices of the taskforce, in terms of making sure we’ve just got that good information picture about the state of infrastructure in our ports in Wales. But as the Cabinet Secretary said, these are private businesses and they have their own responsibilities to maintain their infrastructure.

Just before I ask you to conclude, Mike, Hannah wanted to come in on this.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I’m just picking up on the point Luke’s making around regulation, on the basis of the evidence we’ve been hearing this morning. And it's something that I’m not sure about and I don’t have that clarity on. I don’t know whether somebody, either the Cabinet Secretary or any of the officials, can provide that clarity to the committee, around who awards contracts to the shipping companies to operate out of a certain port. Who gives permission? Because I assume they just can’t turn up, so they have to have that permission. Who would be responsible for awarding that?

Stephen, do you want to run through the process? This is all commercial, so it would be for the ports and ferry operators and freight operators themselves. But, Stephen, do you want to just talk through the process by which contracts would be negotiated and awarded?

Yes, that’s fundamentally the correct point, Cabinet Secretary. These are commercial businesses. They would look to make commercial arrangements with ferry operators to run services out of their ports. So, again, that’s not something that the Government would get involved with; they’re very much commercial matters. And how those commercial negotiations are conducted will be a matter for each port individually.

It’s very much like airports as well. So, Liverpool John Lennon Airport, for example, negotiates directly with airlines to secure new routes, to secure new services. The Government doesn’t get involved in those negotiations or the contracts that are then signed. It’s very, very similar to the space that we find airports in.

But the airport and the airline have to have a licence, do they not, obviously, to operate? And, so—

That's a different matter, yes.

—I'm assuming it's the same with the ships, or the ferries, that there has to be a licensing system. It’s not just some bloke who goes and buys a second-hand boat and sails up and chucks a load of people on it.

Yes, that’s right. Stephen, would you like to come back in?

Yes, so, the shipping operating in and out of each port would have to adhere to all the necessary regulations, and if they weren’t doing so, then I would imagine UK Government authorities would intervene, certainly on the safety side, if there were any problems there. So, yes, there are regimes in place to address those issues.

Jenny.

Specifically then, one of our witnesses mentioned instances that had occurred previously in 2023 and 2024. Stena are going to write to us with more details on them, but I think it does raise questions around who’s actually examining whether the ports are fit for purpose. You’re just simply saying that it’s down to the UK and nothing to do with us, are you?

A lot of it—

I think Ken Skates should probably answer that one.

So, this is a matter for UK Government. The same you might ask of Cardiff international airport, or Liverpool international airport, Birmingham international airport, or any other port around the UK. When somebody is responsible for an asset, in terms of it being privately owned, ultimately they have to answer to the Government that is responsible for the regulatory regime. In this case, it is the UK Government, but, Stephen, do you want to come in with any further detail?

If it would be helpful, we could provide, in writing, a more detailed explanation of the regulatory regimes that are in place. So, we could provide that information to the committee after this session, and we can give an outline of how the different regulatory regimes in the UK Government operate.

That would be very helpful. Thank you very much. If you could do that, that would be appreciated by Members. Mike.

I believe, and I’ve been told, that extreme weather was a major factor in the incident. Stop me if that’s not true. In your view, are we in a position where we can make sure that things happen so that it doesn’t happen again? We know that we’ve got climate change. We know climate change is causing more and more serious events. In a conversation I had with somebody in this room, privately, earlier, one in a 100-year events have now become one in 10-year events, and, sometimes, one in five-year events. What is the Welsh Government’s role, if it has any, to ensure that the port of Holyhead stays open? If it closes for six months a year on a regular basis, there won’t be a port of Holyhead.

You're absolutely right, Mike, and that's why the taskforce is very important in this regard, in identifying what needs to be done to ensure that the port can remain open in more severe weather events. We know that, in the past, we used to average—what was it—one heat wave a year, just 10 years ago, and now it's three heat waves a year. We're getting far more rain. We're getting far stronger winds, more storm events, and so the taskforce will be examining not just Holyhead port, but learning from other ports where evidence is available about what needs to be incorporated into the management of ports and into the infrastructure of ports to withstand more severe weather patterns.

I would like to see them, that we're having more rain. What I see is we're having roughly the same amount of rain; it just comes in bursts. So, we go weeks and weeks and weeks without any rain at all, then we have as storm, and then we go weeks and weeks without any rain. I was brought up in a time when we had steady drizzle for most of the year, but we don't have that anymore. We either have heavy rain or nothing. So, where did you get the figures from that we're having more rain?

It was actually from a briefing from Welsh Government officials recently in regard to our drive towards net zero. Perhaps, again, we could provide a note on the science behind this. Effectively, what we're getting is more rain, but you're absolutely right, Mike, that it's more severe rain events that are causing that.

Just for the record, the evidence that we took this morning indicated that the damage to the pier happened outside the window of the enforcement of the red weather alert, and actually we were pointed to more the seamanship that obviously was involved in the docking situation, rather than the ferocious storm that was about to brew and hit Holyhead. I think I'm correct in saying that, from the evidence that we took this morning. I see a head shaking. Jenny, I think you're next.

Okay. Ken Skates, you made a statement on 7 January in the Senedd, setting up a Holyhead port taskforce. None of the 10 stakeholders we've taken evidence from earlier today had received any information about the terms of reference or the membership of the taskforce, and I just wondered if you can tell us when we're going to hear about that.

As soon as I've met with Irish Ministers over this weekend, hopefully we'll have agreement on the terms of reference and also the membership of the taskforce. Immediately after that, we'll be publishing the details, but I really need to have this approved by Irish Ministers, given that this is a joint endeavour, and there has been a huge amount of change, as I know Members are aware of, within the Irish Government in the past couple of months. So, it's settled now at an Irish level. Hopefully, we'll get that agreement over the weekend on the terms of reference when I meet with Irish Ministers.

I appreciate you've got to get a joint agreement, but this was 7 January and we're now nearly 7 March, so how come this has taken two months to do this?

Sure, there are capacity challenges within Government, but primarily we have had significant change at an Irish Government level, and I need the Irish Government Minister responsible for this policy area to sign off the terms of reference before they are published. I'll be meeting with the Irish Minister over this weekend. There has been a huge amount of political change there, but now that it's settled, I'm confident we will have the agreement that's necessary for us to publish the terms of reference.

Okay. I just want to broaden my question, then, to say—

Just before you broaden your question, could I invite Hannah to take a supplementary at that point?

Yes. It's just a quick question on membership of the taskforce. Has that been determined and have all potential members been approached?

I'll bring in Steve on the approach to members. Again, I wish to have this agreed by Irish Ministers, though, so there may be slight changes, dependent on the views of Ministers over the weekend. Steven.

Is that me or Steve McGregor, Cabinet Secretary?

Sorry. Steve McGregor.

Thank you, Cab Sec. So, in terms of the membership, clearly this is going to be subject to discussion with Irish counterparts tomorrow and over the weekend, but I think our emerging thinking is that there will be a core membership involving those actors who are very closely involved in terms of the future and the resilience of the Irish sea routes, and then I think our thinking is that we can potentially move to a thematic basis in terms of membership, bringing in stakeholders as and when necessary, depending on the themes of the sessions, but clearly this is all dependent on the agreement of the terms of reference. Diolch.

Okay, Hannah. Jenny.

Okay. So, in terms of—. Once this taskforce gets set up—. I want to understand how this is going to look at the depth of the challenges ahead in light of the climate challenges that we face and the strategy that you're going to use to ensure that the port is going to be fit for purpose for future resilience, particularly in light of the fact that it has now been designated a free port, which seems to indicate even bigger amounts of traffic. Is that for you, Ken, or is it for Rebecca?

Chair, I believe that that's for me. The taskforce is going to consider the resilience of all of our Welsh ports, but primarily it's going to be focused, obviously, on Holyhead. It's a privately owned, privately operated port. We can provide support where appropriate and where necessary, but we want to work with our partners in the private sector who are operating the ports to ensure that they are all aware of the challenges that we face in terms of climate change, in terms of the need for appropriate, proper, robust contingency plans. That's why we're setting up the taskforce, that's why we need it to complete its work as soon as possible, but also to not be exclusive in the way that Steve McGregor has just outlined. We want to make sure that, as the work of the taskforce continues, we are able to bring in additional expertise, additional organisations, depending on where examinations lead us.

Okay, but this isn't just about how to make this a more resilient port for next winter, it's got to be how is it going to be fit for purpose in the future. The port doesn't control the rail lines, yet it's really clear in the transport strategy published in 2021 that there's going to be support for interventions that shift freight from road to rail. So, are Transport for Wales going to be included in this taskforce, and how are you going to push forward on ensuring that the way that we shift freight in future is going to be sustainable for future purposes?

I think you make a really, really important point, Jenny, in that TfW are vitally important in this, so, too, are Network Rail, given the direct need for better rail links to Holyhead to drive more freight onto the railways, and subsequently to the ships. Now, we're going to be working to a freight strategy, and the work of the taskforce will be contributing to it. I met with other Ministers from the devolved administrations yesterday as part of the inter-ministerial group on transport. We've agreed that our future work programme will include freight as well and co-ordination. So, I don't want to go through the entire proposed list of members of the taskforce, but I would assume that TfW will remain on the list after the discussions that take place over the weekend.

And that would also include Network Rail, because clearly they control the main line across north Wales, as I'm sure you are aware.

Yes.

In line with the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act 2023, I'm assuming it'll also include union representatives—the relevant union representatives.

Yes. Yes, we're looking at how we can ensure that it does meet the requirements of social partnership, how trade unions can be represented on the taskforce, the specific individuals who may be members of the taskforce. But we are absolutely committed to working with trade unions as part of this piece of work.

[Inaudible.]—the people who represent those who operate the ships but also the rail workers, yes?

And the rail workers as well, yes. Yes.

That's great. I think I'd like to, really, ask Rebecca this point, really: how is this incident going to focus our minds on the wider ports strategy, because we heard from Liam Lacey from the Irish Maritime Development Office, who made the point that they're really expanding on their strategic programme for climate resilient transport networks, but he said that it's pointless doing this unless those with whom they trade are also doing the same thing? So, I just wondered how far advanced is the Government's strategy for its ports, as part of the wider resilience that we face in terms of food and other goods that we're trading.

In terms of sequencing this work, the work of the taskforce is coming first to identify any resilience measures that we might want to put in place ahead of the autumn, when the weather starts to turn again. So, that's our immediate focus and priority, but we do of course have that commitment to provide a ports and maritime strategy, and that would be much wider than the remit just of the taskforce. And then it will give a single document that will emphasise the needs of all of our ports here in Wales, right across from north to south.

The response to the Holyhead incident has meant that our resources have had to be deployed to that particular area to meet that particular need at the time, so it has meant, I think, something of a delay in our focus on the ports and maritime strategy, just because we were essentially dealing with an urgent emergency matter that has been ongoing for some time. So, as I say, the immediate focus now is on that taskforce, but we do have an ongoing commitment to the ports and maritime strategy, which will be a much wider, more comprehensive piece of work.

Given the slippage that's already occurred on the ports on the Holyhead taskforce, how likely are we to see this wider strategy any time soon, and definitely before the end of this Senedd?

I'm not entirely sure that I would agree with the characterisation of the taskforce group timeline having slipped, because of things that Welsh Government have not been able to put in place. Actually, as Ken, I think, has set out a couple of times, there have been real changes in the Government in Ireland, which has meant that it is taking a bit more time to have those agreements. But the fact that this really does need to be a collective piece of work, working in partnership with our colleagues in Ireland, I think does allow us to take that extra bit of time to make sure that we do have that co-operation with the Irish Government. And I know that Ken is hoping to make some real progress on this over the weekend, and then we'll be able to provide that greater level of detail that I know everybody wants in terms of membership and the terms of reference and so on.

Okay.

I think Duncan wants to come in as well.

If I may add, briefly—. So, in addition, while the taskforce's forward-looking strategic piece is, as the Cabinet Secretary is saying, taking the right time to get to the right place, all the other actions in play are continuing, so the Cabinet Secretaries have mentioned the offer being made around a breakwater, but also the work we're doing with the Isle of Anglesey County Council on economic development. I think one of the Members mentioned the free port as well and the growth deal. There is very extensive investment going on in the port of Holyhead more broadly, and part of that is also about resilience, so part of the free port programme of work includes smart logistics and activity around food resilience. So, there are a number of actions in play, all of which are going in parallel and alongside, and we'll be able to adapt the outcomes of the taskforce once complete.

So, when are we likely to see this wider ports strategy, then?

Our commitment is to deliver it before the end of this Senedd term.

Thank you.

Sam.

Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you, Cabinet Secretaries and teams for joining us. I'm going to focus around trade and the impact of trade. What were the immediate impacts and how were you as a Government monitoring those impacts?

The data for regional trade for the period affected hasn't yet been published. The data for up to December 2024 will be published on the twentieth of this month, so we'll have a much clearer picture at that point. So, in terms of the immediate effect on Welsh trade, we don't actually know the impact due to the lag in the data. More widely, we don't publish data on overseas trade, but according to His Majesty's Revenue and Customs's overseas trading goods statistics, during the month of December 2024, the value of trade going through Holyhead was £432.2 million. In December the previous year, the value was £922.6 million, so there's obviously a lot to do in terms of unpicking those figures, understanding what else might have been going on in terms of the goods that were being traded. But I think that does paint at least a high-level picture of the difference.

Can I come in there and ask why you don't as a Government monitor overseas aid? Is that because HMRC do it for you, so you're content with those figures, or is that an option of somewhere where you could start monitoring in the future?

So, I don't see the need to duplicate the work that HMRC is already doing. So, they do collect those data in relation to trade going through Holyhead. We've got no reason to suspect the data from HMRC isn't reliable. So, if HMRC is providing robust data, I think that we should use it and not seek to duplicate.

That's helpful. I understand that. So, more broadly, then, one of the issues and concerns was the displacement, or the continued displacement, of trade through the port, and we've heard evidence today saying why Holyhead continues to be one of the key ports, and the second busiest ro-ro port, is that its proximity to Dublin makes it incredibly attractive. But are you monitoring or are you looking at monitoring how trade has been displaced to other ports, not just in Wales, but working with counterparts in the UK Government to see displacement elsewhere?

So, again, we won't have a full picture on that until more data does become available. Ultimately, individual companies will be making commercial decisions on whether to continue to use alternative ports as a result of the closure, or whether to return to Holyhead. That information will become clearer in due course. But, more widely as well, it's not really possible to disentangle the impact of the port's closure from other events that have impacted on trade. I know, recently, we talked with committee about the impact of Brexit, for example, on trade. So, there are a range of things that I think are coming into play together. But, once we do have that data, I think we'll be in a much better position to provide a bit more detailed analysis of what the impact was.

Okay, thank you very much. Given that full reopening is due in July, the beginning of July, it would be remiss of me not to advocate for the ports in Pembrokeshire, as a Pembrokeshire boy. Not wanting to displace trade from Holyhead, but is there an option, and you've talked about the ports project—forgive me, it's not the correct terminology, but the work around that more broadly—is there an opportunity of looking, given the response that the ports of Pembroke and Fishguard had in responding to this, is there an opportunity of the Welsh Government looking at how it can further develop ports and the ports strategy going forward?

Yes, I really want to join you, I think, in paying tribute to the ports of Pembroke and Fishguard for the way in which they were very keen to work closely with Welsh Government in terms of addressing the challenges around the closure of Holyhead. So, their work was really valued in this space as well.

I think that one of the important things, really, when we look towards that port and maritime strategy will be about it being a strategy for the whole of Wales to ensure that we can support all of our ports to be successful. It will involve, of course, all parts of Wales as well, and that's what makes it different, I think, to the taskforce that Ken is looking at particularly in relation to Holyhead; it does take that much wider look to support all of our ports.

Okay, thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you, Chair.

As we're on trade at this particular juncture, and Ken, in reply to Jenny, highlighted that the Government would be working to a logistics strategy—I think he used that term—we've had evidence this morning that points to that the logistics and freight strategy that was due in 2024 is nowhere to be found and not on the horizon. Have you an update as to the status of that strategy, so that we can understand when the Government will actually have something to work to, which you've directed the committee in your evidence this afternoon to, saying will be a principal bit of evidence that you will require?

Yes, absolutely. So, initial work has been conducted on the freight and logistics strategy. We're working with other UK Governments to ensure that we have as best a consistent approach to our freight and logistics strategy as possible. The work of the taskforce is going to be crucially important, I think, in helping to shape the freight and logistics strategy, so that will follow after we've completed the work of the taskforce. But we are committed to publishing that new strategy before the next election.

It was meant to have been published in 2024, Minister—Cabinet Secretary—and you're now saying that a taskforce that didn't exist will now play an important role in making that document a reality.

I take your point, Chair. The preliminary work was done, but the event took place and we took the view that the work of the taskforce could be very, very valuable indeed in helping to shape that strategy.

Thank you. Luke.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Could I focus, just briefly, on the Cabinet Secretary for the economy? Would you agree that the impact on local businesses of the closure of the port is similar to, if not on par with, the closure of the Menai suspension bridge back in 2022?

I'd have to look at the data that was collected back in 2022, because we have been very fortunate in terms of the work that the local authority has been undertaking to understand the impact of the closure of the Holyhead port. It did undertake a survey between 2 January and 31 January of this year, and that was gathering evidence on both the local and regional economic impacts of the port closure. They specifically looked at businesses and workers and actually had 60 different responses, so they were able to get quite a full and varied picture of the impact. Welsh Government has now received a copy of that and we're interrogating that to understand the experiences of those businesses in a bit more detail. Alongside that, we've also had a case study, which was funded by the Welsh Government's Smart Towns programme—it's called the Trefi Smart Towns Cymru case study—and that, again, measured the impact of the port closure on Holyhead's high street between 6 December and 15 January. So, I think it's really important that we are able to have that quite vivid picture, really, of the impact.

In terms of what the results of those surveys are telling us, it's very much the case that there was an impact of the closure reported on some sectors that were directly servicing the operation of the port, for example, port-related businesses such as truck facilities. However, at the moment, the data that we're getting in relation to the Smart Towns programme, whilst it does demonstrate a drop in the footfall on the high street, it's unclear at the moment if that was a direct impact of the closure of the port. So, there needs to be some more work done, I think, to compare the footfall in Holyhead high street as compared to others at the same time to understand whether it was specifically and directly related to the closure of the port, or if it was something that was a feature of high streets more generally at the time. So, I think the fact that we do have those two pieces of work is really, really helpful now, in terms of helping us to understand the impact of the closure, and to understand what we can specifically attribute to the closure or what might be attributable to what's happening in the economy more widely.

Okay. So, basically, to summarise that answer then, you can't tell me right now whether the impact on local businesses is similar to that of the closure of the suspension bridge in 2022.

As the Cabinet Secretary said, the data is not directly equivalent, but what has been really useful is, obviously, through the closure of the suspension bridge, we have a really well established working relationship with the Isle of Anglesey County Council, so we've been able to bring the one-public-service approach straightaway to deploy against the closure at Holyhead. So, there are some similarities. The footfall impact and some of the practices we used in Menai bridge, for example, in that question, we're considering how we reuse those in services, for example, confidence around the high street, with the joined-up services of both the Welsh Government and local government to deploy. So, there are certainly lessons and parallels, but, as the Cabinet Secretary said, the data is not immediately directly comparable. But, certainly, the experiences we deploy now in Holyhead as we did in Menai bridge—I'm trying to think—I think it was two years ago. So, you're correct to draw a parallel, but different circumstances.

I suppose the reason why I think that parallel is quite useful is that, back in 2022, financial support was provided to businesses. I think what we are finding, in terms of what's been said to us, is that local businesses in the town of Holyhead are looking for some reassurance from Government that, if the support is needed, it will be there. So, how long can we reasonably expect to wait until we understand how the Welsh Government is going to proceed with potential support?

We've recently had that information from the local authority in relation to the survey that it undertook, so we're exploring the information in a bit more detail at the moment. As I say, we have to be able to demonstrate that the impacts on businesses were specifically in relation to the closure of the port. So, there's some more work for us to be doing in that particular space, but I do want to reassure you that this is something that our officials are in really constant contact with the local authority on in order to be able to come to a resolution on that particular question.

Okay. So, what are the timelines here, then?

So, we’re live in discussion. I will actually come back to the committee, because I don’t actually recall the direct financial support to the Menai bridge companies impacted. We did it through advisory and capacity building and non-domestic rates, which are the same toolkit we’re using in the context of Holyhead. And as the Cabinet Secretary said, there are certain considerations. In fact, we’ve seen Isle of Anglesey today talking exactly through those measures. They're short-term actions. We’ve already started the advisory and capacity work, but we do need to consider—and we have to quite carefully consider—if a direct intervention is justified, mindful of setting a precedent for the future, but I’d be happy to compare and contrast those two examples for Members, so that you can see that we have learnt lessons and are applying them now in parallel with Holyhead.

No, I take the point. It was perhaps a slip of the tongue and the wrong words were used there, but, again, it’s the timelines, I think, businesses and the local authority want to see. Words like ‘exploring’, ‘discussions under way’, don’t provide that reassurance. What people want to see is timelines.

As I say, the discussions are ongoing at the moment. I'm not sure if I can really expand much more on the comments as described, sorry.

Okay.

Okay, Luke. Hannah.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Turning from impacts on businesses to, more broadly, impacts of the events on the workforce, can I start by asking what assessment has the Welsh Government made of the impacts of the port closure, and the fact it’s not going to open fully until the start of July, on both the port’s direct workforce, but also, obviously, those workers that are affected that are employed by local businesses as well? I'm guessing that's to the Cabinet Secretary for economy in the first instance.

So, we've worked closely with the unions to understand better the picture and, again, this is part of the work that we will be doing through the taskforce. But I think perhaps Ken might be best placed to answer this, and perhaps officials.

Yes, sure. As I've said on a number of occasions, we've engaged very, very much on a direct basis with the port authority itself, with haulage operators, with the Isle of Anglesey council, to ascertain the impact on individuals and businesses. Obviously, we're working with Rebecca and her officials in terms of examining what support might be required in the future. But this, at the moment, is an endeavour in ensuring that we get accurate information on the impact of the events on individuals and businesses before decisions are made.

Okay. The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers wrote to Stena Line regarding port workers being required to work when a red weather warning was in place on 7 December. What discussions have you—? And that's regarding the assessment of risk and working practices during that red weather warning, obviously, which is a danger to life. What discussions have you had with partners and stakeholders around this? And what reassurance have you had that the issues raised are being resolved, but, importantly, are things that can be learnt from and are not replicated in the future?

I think this is a really, really important question. I think the question needs to be raised within the taskforce as to when you do ensure that people are protected in severe storms, when you decide not to deploy people. During the red warnings, we took the decision not to allow road maintenance operatives to go out on the trunk road network; it was simply too dangerous. Likewise, Transport for Wales made the decision not to allow their staff to go and remove fallen trees and so forth from railway lines and instead to wait until the storm had died down. It's obviously for the port itself to outline what had happened during the course of storm Darragh, but we are engaging directly with the unions as well. They've written to us—the RMT—about that specific case. So, we are engaged with them and, for sure, we'll be learning lessons through the taskforce about how we can best protect workers when severe weather events take place.

That's reassuring to hear. Just to pick up there, I think, one of the things we've had said a few times this morning—the evidence we've heard—was that the damage wasn't caused by a storm, it pre-dated that, and it was, we understand, caused by one of the ships berthing in the port.

Two.

Two, yes. So, I know that the landscape is incredibly complex—I was going to say I’ve been on a crash course myself to learn more about it, but that’s probably not the right turn of phrase—in terms of the application of regulation and legislation in the maritime sector, because you’ve got international maritime law, you’ve got things around the 12 nautical mile limit when it comes to the application of the national minimum wage. So, I’m just wondering, does the Welsh Government have any concerns or has it raised any concerns regarding potential working practices and the impact they might have, because we do know that Irish Ferries in particular only operate a temporary workforce? They work for eight weeks and they work almost around the clock for that period. So, I was wondering if you do have any concerns and if there’s a mechanism for the Welsh Government to be able to raise those concerns.

If I may bring in Rebecca, perhaps, on this particular point with regard to employees and employment.

I’d say there’s a wider point to be made there, isn’t there, in terms of our commitment to fair work. I think one of the really important things that we were able to negotiate with the UK Government of the time, when we were discussing the free ports, was that free ports in Wales would maintain our commitments to fair work and also, of course, to our environmental standards. I think that those points are well made in relation to fair work, and it should apply consistently in terms of the businesses that operate in Wales. I know that there are particular issues that you were describing in terms of how things operate at sea, and so on, which are beyond the areas that we can influence, but where we can have an impact, I think, is through our commitment to fair work through the free port model.

Thanks for that, Cabinet Secretary. I know there are calls for greater regulations around seafarers and for the seafarers' charter to be incorporated into the UK Government’s Employment Rights Bill. I was just wondering what conversations you have had around that, or you will have, and if the Welsh Government has met with the RMT.

Jack Sargeant leads on the issues in relation to fair work, and I know that he’s in close contact with the UK Government and meets regularly with a whole range of unions and social partners. Perhaps I will ask him to provide a note to the committee on this specific issue following today’s session.

Thank you very much. Then, for the Cabinet Secretary for transport, obviously, I was contacted during this, as the increase of trade and freight to different ports brought into question the standard of driver facilities. This committee has previously done work and an inquiry into that, and it’s disappointing somewhat that, having done that inquiry, we’re still having to raise driver facilities in this way. Can you just give us an update on the committee’s report that it did some years ago—you are, firstly, aware of it; I know it’s been raised in the Senedd Chamber—and what work actively is the Welsh Government doing to ensure better facilities for drivers across the trunk road network?

A really important point, Chair, that’s been raised. I met recently with the RHA and we discussed the provision of truck stops and the cost of truck stops—those privately operated ones that can be incredibly expensive—and also the number of truck stops that we have. I’m sure that the work of the taskforce is going to look at facilities, but we’ve examined what we can offer and have been offering, particularly on the A55 and at Holyhead. It’s something that I’m going to be raising over the weekend when I meet with hauliers over in Ireland, and, when I return and visit Holyhead on Sunday, I’ll hopefully get to speak with hauliers then as well. So, we’ll have a better picture of the view of hauliers once those discussions have taken place, but it’s going to feature in the work of the taskforce, and it’ll also feature in the freight and logistics strategy as well.

Thank you. I’m pleased that you mentioned the freight and logistics strategy, because the taskforce, as we’ve discussed, only focuses around Holyhead. We’ve got other ports that have freight and HGV drivers going through them, so ensuring that the whole road network in Wales is equally and equitably serviced by truck stops is an important point. Thank you, Chair.

Just before I ask Jenny to ask her supplementary, I would draw the Cabinet Secretary's attention to the fact that the report this committee did on night stops and welfare facilities was as far back as 2022, and the Government accepted the recommendation in March 2022, and here we are hearing from your good self, Cabinet Secretary, that you're going to have more conversations and the taskforce is going to deal with this as well. It would have been nice to have heard some tangible improvements that you could have pointed to, as Cabinet Secretary for transport, in the intervening three years that it's been since that report was laid.

If I may, Chair, could I provide a note on the work that's being done, because this is a question that's been asked on numerous occasions today—the progress that was made on freight and logistics? So, I'd really like to provide a more comprehensive assessment of what's been done over the past three to four years.

I appreciate it. Jenny.

Just finally from me, we've heard about—this is to do with the climate resilience of Holyhead—the £150-million investment in making the breakwater more resilient, which, hopefully, is going to be commissioned in the near future and then get started next year. We've also heard some slightly concerning issues around the strength and resilience of the module that collapsed, which some people are calling 'dolphins'. Now, we took evidence from a transport and logistics expert. I just wondered what sort of engineering expertise the Welsh Government is able to call on to work out whether or not these landing stages are still fit for purpose, given the sea levels rising and the increasing turbulence in the weather.

Could I bring in Stephen Rowan for this, please, Chair?

Thank you, Cabinet Secertary. As the taskforce is doing its work, we'll be able to call upon any expertise we need to inform the work of the taskforce, and the same with the ports strategy for Wales. So, we will be looking to make sure that we draw upon the right engineering and academic expertise to look at these kinds of issues in terms of the resilience of physical infrastructure.

Okay. Thank you. A record will be sent to you of the evidence that you've given this afternoon, as is the usual format in these sessions. Please feel free to come back to us if you find anything misleading or wrong in that record, because that will be the official record of the evidence that you have submitted to the committee. Once again, thank you, Cabinet Secretaries—plural—and also your officials. Your evidence will greatly enhance the committee's ability to reach a conclusion and recommendations in our report on this matter. I thank you all very much.

Thank you.

We will now move into private session, if I can have a proposer and a seconder. We'll then move into private session to discuss the evidence—[Interruption.] What do we need to do?

We need to be private for the first few items of the next meeting as well.

Are we all right to be in private for the first few items of the next meeting, next Wednesday?

Yes.

Seconder. Yes. Right, we're now in private.