SHORTLY after 9.40am yesterday, the unthinkable happened. Without a firework or fanfare, steelmaker Corus finally began talking about the way forward for steel on Teesside.

Less than 12 months ago, such an event would have been surprising to the say the least, as the company remained silent during successive cutbacks and redundancy announcements.

It was a sign that things had changed - and a sign to those assembled in the lecture theatre of Corus' Steel House Teesside headquarters that things had changed for the better.

Colin Muncie, the new managing director of Teesside Cast Products (TCP), led the charge, flanked by senior figures from the organisation.

His message was clear: the recent business plan drawn up by management and unions had been independently proven to be viable and there was a market for the product, but stringent cost-cutting had to be pushed through.

"What we believe now is that we have a business plan that is deliverable going forward," he said.

A slideshow demonstrated how cost-cuts would make TCP more competitive and how the changing face of steelmaking was playing into the company's hands.

Despite the costs of raw materials being driven up by China's voracious appetite for steel, TCP's management is confident of tapping into the estimated £30bn worldwide steel supply market.

To prove that point, Mr Muncie told the audience that Teesside had exported 600,000 tonnes since 2000 - half of which was sold this year.

Fact-finding trips by Corus Long Products commercial director Homi Sethna, and TCP commercial manager Tony Raymond, have also found 2.7 million tonnes of potential demand in 2006.

Yesterday's event was open and unashamed, the company admitting it had been wrong to remain so reticent for so long, saying that it wanted workers and the wider community to understand it had a future. But people can be forgiven for seeking further reassurance.

Two important developments would do much to transform the public's perception.

One would be a long-term joint venture with a business partner.

Mr Muncie said yesterday that there was a great deal of interest from a number of companies.

Confidentiality agreements have been drawn up to allow the firms to examine TCP's business plan and cost base.

The company said such a deal was not essential for future success. But if a deal was struck, the message to the world would be both positive and conclusive.

One of the hardest things for steelmakers on Teesside to swallow is the fact that after 2006 they will no longer supply the Lackenby beam mill, despite the two sites being less than three miles apart.

That decision led observers to ask if the parent company lacked faith in its new offspring. Securing a business partner would assure doubters that TCP's ambitions are achievable.

Of equal significance symbolically, and perhaps of more immediate benefit, would be action by agencies such as One NorthEast to help find £16m to upgrade port and infrastructure facilities.

TCP would not be drawn on the subject, but the facts spell out how important the upgrade is.

The company plans to produce and sell 3.5 million tonnes of steel worldwide from 2006. At present, it can ship about 1.5 million tonnes and faces £5-a-tonne charges to transport it by other means. That could add up to £10m in costs a year.

Paul Lormor, director of Corus Long Products, parent division of TCP, yesterday said Corus did not have the money to pay for the developments.

He said that TCP needed the infrastructure to attract a business partner.

TCP has shown its books to the relevant agencies - another sign of openness. It is now up to the agencies to demonstrate their faith in the company by solving the infrastructure problem.

Such a move, like TCP finding a business partner, would show the entire region that those in the know believe the company has a future.