Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

A warm welcome to this Senedd Plenary session. Before we begin, I want to make a few points. A Plenary meeting held by video-conference in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Welsh Parliament constitutes Senedd proceedings for the purposes of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Some of the provisions of Standing Order 34 will apply for today’s Plenary meeting and these are noted on the agenda, which Members will have received.

The first item of business this afternoon is the business statement and announcement and I call on the First Minister to make that statement.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. There are several changes to today's agenda. Statements by the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales and myself have been shortened. The statement from the Minister for Housing and Local Government has been withdrawn, and later this afternoon, a motion will be moved to suspend Standing Orders to enable the Senedd to debate unlocking our society and economy—continuing the conversation.

Draft business for the next three sitting weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

I thank the First Minister. The next item is a statement by the First Minister on coronavirus.

Thank you, Llywydd. In responding to the coronavirus crisis, the Welsh Government has had to act more swiftly and more expansively than ever before. As this is the last Senedd Plenary before Whitsun I will provide a summary of our actions across all Government departments.

We have acted to slow the spread of the virus in order to support public services and to assist individuals and businesses facing very difficult times. In the time available, I’m only able to provide a summary, but in looking back, it’s striking just how much has happened in a period of just two months. We must continue to work equally as hard over the coming weeks as we prepare for the next steps.

Llywydd, I will begin with the impact of the virus on our finances. In just over a few months since the Welsh Government’s budget for 2020-21 was passed in the Senedd, the budget has increased by more than 10 per cent. We have moved rapidly to allocate those funds, together with repurposing existing budgets and realigning European funding. We have provided £40 million—I beg your pardon—. We have realigned European funding to meet the urgent purposes we face.

In the supplementary budget, to be published next week, we will allocate more than £2.4 billion in support of our COVID-19 efforts. And that will include: nearly £0.5 billion extra to the health and social care budget to ensure that it has the funding it needs to protect the health of the people of Wales; an additional £1.3 billion to the budget for economy and transport, providing a wholly unprecedented level of support for the economy and a package of measures more substantial than anywhere else in the United Kingdom. This includes the £500 million economic resilience fund, which itself includes £400 million in revenue and £100 million in repurposed capital funding. Less than eight weeks from the launch, the fund has already provided loans from the development bank worth more than £87 million to more than 1,300 businesses and grants worth more than £100 million to more than 6,000 businesses.

The budget has also seen £0.5 billion extra provided to the housing and local government budget, with local authorities delivering key elements of the COVID-19 response, such as continued free school meal provision, increased support for care homes and for recruiting and managing volunteers. Llywydd, this funding also includes our support for businesses in the hospitality, retail and leisure sectors, in the form of business rate relief, and the £10,000 and £25,000 grants that follow. Thanks to the enormous efforts of our local authorities, nearly 51,000 grants have already been paid out, at a cost of £621 million, and this support is a vital lifeline for all eligible businesses across Wales. Wherever possible, we have focused this support on businesses headquartered in Wales, and we have made it clear that businesses based in tax havens will not be eligible for COVID-19 financial support from the Welsh Government.

Llywydd, the impact of our investments has been felt across Wales, and especially amongst the most vulnerable. We have provided £40 million for free school meals, reaching an estimated 60,000 children in Wales. We have provided £24 million to support the third sector and volunteering. Over 17,500 new volunteers have been recruited in Wales during this crisis, more than double the previous number, and because we have an existing national system for volunteers, we have been able to make rapid use of that huge willingness to help. And, so far, 7,000 volunteers have been deployed to help directly in the coronavirus effort.

One of the purposes for which these volunteers have been deployed has been in helping to get food and medicines to people in the shielded group. There are now 130,000 people on the shielding list, with nearly 13,000 added by GPs since the system began. Fifteen million pounds has been provided to make food boxes available to people in the shielded category and thousands of boxes have been delivered to those individuals, and 77,000 priority home delivery slots have been made available for that group to be booked with supermarkets.

Llywydd, thousands of people work in our social care system in Wales; they have been at the forefront of the national effort to save lives. We have set aside £32 million to provide a £500 payment to the 64,000 people delivering personal care in residential and domiciliary care services.

For the very poorest in our society, the discretionary assistance fund has provided help of last resort here in Wales, ever since the social fund was abandoned by the UK Government. During the coronavirus crisis, the fund has become an ever more important lifeline for many families. To date, 13,679 payments have been made at a cost of more than £850,000, and so that we can continue to offer this vital assistance, the fund has been increased by £11 million in recent weeks.

Llywydd, the past eight weeks have seen a transformation in the capacity of our health service: an additional 368 beds have been created through field hospitals, with a further 4,666 available if required; as of 18 May, 220 extra critical care beds were available through the huge efforts of our staff; testing capacity has increased to over 5,300 a day, and 11,000 tests are being carried out every week—capacity will increase further in the weeks ahead; and 98.4 million items of PPE have been issued since 9 March, of which, just under 30 million have gone to staff in care homes and in domiciliary care. 

That scale of provision has only been possible because of our relationships abroad and our ability to make things at home. To mention just one example, manufacturing company Hardshell is creating a new factory in Cardiff to produce up to a million fluid resistant face masks every day for front-line workers in Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom. And it is because of this enormous effort, right across Wales by our public services and our people, that we have protected our NHS and saved lives.

The death toll, with all its human heartbreak, continues to rise, but the number of deaths reported in yesterday’s weekly Office for National Statistics publication showed that figure falling in each of the previous three weeks. And, as we move into the world in which lockdown is cautiously and gradually lifted here in Wales, so we will need to adapt our approach. This week, the Minister for Health and Social Services announced changes to testing in care homes and in the wider community. We are moving to a wider system of surveillance of the circulation of the virus, beyond key workers and key settings, through the 'Test Trace Protect' strategy published last week.

Llywydd, I have illustrated the breadth and depth of the Welsh Government’s activity in response to the pandemic. Our approach has been distinctive in building on our social partnership model, and in assisting those in greatest need. We will continue to work with the UK Government on measures that require a common approach, and will shortly make regulations dealing with border controls. Although borders are not a devolved matter, public health regulations covering the operation of these measures in Wales are a matter for Welsh Ministers. We are currently considering the right arrangements for implementation here, within the UK-wide system.

And, Llywydd, I will end by mentioning the impact of the virus on children and young people in Wales. Last week, we launched a new survey asking people between the ages of seven and 18 for their views during the coronavirus pandemic. 'Coronavirus and Me' asks about their health, education, the impact on social aspects of their lives, and the needs of specific groups. Understanding the experience of young people will be vital to our work on moving out of lockdown, and on planning for the future of our economy and society in a post-COVID Wales. All our futures have been at stake in this crisis, but for our children and young people, that has been most acute. We will continue to report to the Senedd on all the actions we are taking to support them and wider society here in Wales. Diolch yn fawr.

Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price.

First Minister, on 20 March, the Royal College of Surgeons recommended that anosmia, the loss of a sense of smell, should be added to the list of COVID-19 symptoms, and that was discussed by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies on 24 March. A paper for SAGE on 16 April confirmed that the loss of smell and taste was a strong predictor of infection. Why did it take until Monday of this week for you to change the guidance to the public? And do you accept that people who should have been self-isolating haven't been doing so because of this delay?

Llywydd, I don't necessarily accept that last point. Mr Price outlined a process that went on from March onwards. We changed the policy in Wales, along with all other nations of the United Kingdom, following a statement from the four UK chief medical officers. That was the culmination of the process that began with the Royal College of Surgeons's statement at the end of March. It was right that the four chief medical officers came together, made that determination, and all four Governments moved together once that decision had been made.

I think it's important to place on the record that clinicians have criticised that length of delay—two months since the Royal College of Surgeons made the case in the first instance.

Speed of decision making will no doubt be one of the key questions that a retrospective inquiry will want to look at, as the health Minister has already alluded to this week. You previously said you don't want to get into this now, though I note that Una O'Brien, the former permanent secretary of the department of health in England, has said that you need to begin now setting up an inquiry because it can take as much as six months. Could you make some general commitments today to the principle of setting up an independent public inquiry in due course, to ensuring in the meantime that all relevant documentation, minutes, e-mails, even Zoom recordings, First Minister, are being safely kept, and, lastly, that the inquiry will at least begin to receive evidence before the end of the year so that interim findings can be published, at the latest, by the spring of next year?

Well, Llywydd, I've no doubt that an independent inquiry will be required at the right point in that process and the documents that are kept by the Welsh Government are kept meticulously and I'm sure that they will be available for that inquiry when the time for it comes. I'm not able to anticipate when that will be, but the principle that Mr Price has outlined—I'm very happy to confirm my support for that principle.

Leader of the opposition, Paul Davies. 

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, last week, you published the Welsh Government's road map to lifting Wales out of the lockdown. As well as outlining your Government's plans, you had an opportunity to offer the people of Wales hope—hope that the current crisis will end. Unfortunately, your road map offered no timescales and no milestones in order to track its progress, including much-needed milestones around testing capacity and the virus transmission rate. The road map also offers no financial allocations to support delivery of the Welsh Government strategy and offers very little to businesses and individuals to get through the pandemic, and, crucially, it offered no real leadership to the people of Wales. First Minister, is this road map the best hope that the Welsh Government can actually offer the people of Wales and when can we expect to see some timescales alongside your exit strategy?

Well, Llywydd, there's a whole debate on the road map later this afternoon, when, no doubt, these points can be rehearsed again. I completely reject the Member's suggestion that there is no leadership on this matter; the road map was very widely welcomed in Wales, and beyond Wales, indeed, as a clear statement of the direction of travel that the Welsh Government has set out for people in our country.

On timescales, let me say, as I've said before when I've been asked, there's a genuine debate to be had as to whether timescales are a helpful way of setting out the future. In the end, we thought that it was more of a distraction than a concentration on the matters that really deserve our attention. We're doing the same as many other countries across the globe, from New Zealand to Northern Ireland. Timescales are no guarantee, are they, as Mr Davies will well know. Look how the 1 June timetable for opening schools in England is falling apart in the hands of the Government of England; how Downing Street last night had to say that 1 June was an aspiration, not a deadline, not a timescale after all. So, I'm not sure that timescales are an answer to everything.

Financial allocations will be set out in detail in the supplementary budget, which will be available to Members next week, and I have already set out, Llywydd, this afternoon, the most generous set of support for businesses anywhere in the United Kingdom, and that detail is available to businesses in Wales and has been very widely welcomed by them.

Well, I put it to you, First Minister, that it is important in any plan that people are given hope when the restrictions start being lifted, and giving an indication of timescales I don't believe is unreasonable.

Now let me turn instead to areas where you have, thankfully, changed your policy. I welcome the news, of course, that the Welsh Government has finally reversed its decision and will be taking part in a UK-wide portal scheme. This means key workers in Wales will be on a level playing field with their counterparts in other parts of the UK in the fight against COVID-19. It's also good to hear that the Welsh Government has changed its policy on testing in care homes, and now testing will be extended to all care home residents and staff in Wales. And I'm pleased that you've listened to my party's calls, and I hope that you'll publish the specific clinical and scientific evidence that has led to this change in policy, so the people of Wales can have confidence in the Welsh Government's decisions.

Now, moving forward, the Welsh Government has made it clear that its 'Test Trace Protect' programme must become operational by the end of the month in order for lockdown restrictions to start being lifted. First Minister, given that the Government would need to increase its testing capacity for those in hospital, care homes and key workers to about 20,000 by the end of the month—and, let's be clear, you've not met a testing target you've set so far—how confident are you that you'll actually reach this one?

Llywydd, let me begin by explaining again why we are now able to be part of the UK-wide portal—and we're very glad to be part of that UK-wide portal. We're able to do it because a problem with the portal has now been put right. Because the portal as it was originally constructed meant that tests carried out on Welsh residents could not be reported into the Welsh NHS or to those patients' records. And, in that sense, the tests that were being carried out were of limited value, because we didn't know the results of them. That has been put right; we're now confident that tests carried out through that UK-wide portal will be reported back into the patients' records and into the Welsh NHS, and I'm very glad that we've been able to be part of that.

Our testing in care homes policy follows the advice we are provided with by SAGE. On Thursday of last week, SAGE changed its advice. On Friday, the UK Government changed its policy. On Saturday, we announced that we would be changing our policy in line with that advice, and, on Monday, the Northern Ireland Executive announced that it was changing its policy, again in line with the advice. When the advice changes, the policy changes here in Wales, and I know Paul Davies will be glad that, on 15 May, our own technical advisory group published a paper, 'Testing for COVID-19 in care homes', which the health Minister has made available to all Members, setting out the evidence that underpinned that change in advice.

We continue to make all the arrangements for the TTP arrangements to be put in place. We are working with others, including with the UK Government. Vaughan Gething took part last night in a meeting with Matt Hancock and with the health Ministers of Northern Ireland and of Scotland to share information on how, across the United Kingdom, those new surveillance arrangements can be put in place, and we continue to work on all the different elements that that new approach will need and to do it in close collaboration with others.

Leader of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless.

First Minister, last week I asked you about your Government revising the coronavirus regulations to remove the requirement that restrictions be necessary. You responded as if I'd suggested the restrictions needn't be proportionate. The record shows that I criticised you for removing the requirement that restrictions be necessary. I concluded by stating that the Westminster requirement for any restrictions to be reasonable and proportionate still held, and that you should be held to account against that. Of course, you and I will have different views about whether restrictions are reasonable and proportionate, and, ultimately, only a judicial review would be determinative. However, why should people in Wales be subject to the most extraordinary, intrusive and prescriptive restrictions on their freedom if they are not necessary? Many who had not before understood the scope of devolved powers don't now like the answer: it's because of devolution, because they live in Wales, and because the Welsh Government, and, presumably, later today the Senedd, make those laws. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom may consider your restrictions unnecessary. He may completely disagree with your continuity Corbyn equality tests for lifting them. But, as many people are now learning, his writ as British Prime Minister on this, as so many matters, extends to England only. In Wales, the UK Government has been stripped of those powers.

The BBC has run into some trouble in Scotland for suggesting the First Minister there enjoyed exercising the powers, and the correspondent has rightly apologised. However much I disagree with your decisions as First Minister to continue imposing restrictions in Wales that have been lifted in England, I accept you do so from motives of sincere public service. However, do you think one consequence of the crisis for us in Wales will be people understanding devolution better, and how far powers have been shifted from the UK Government and Parliament to your Government and the Senedd? Do you agree that a significant number of people in Wales are only now recognising the extent of this, and how do you respond to the many who would prefer the British Prime Minister to take key decisions rather than you? 

Well, Llywydd, let me begin by agreeing with something that Mr Reckless said, that the powers that we exercising are extraordinary, that they represent a level of intrusion into people's lives that is unprecedented, and everything we do has to be tested and tested again to make sure that it is something required to protect the health of people here in Wales. That's where the bar is for me, and we think very carefully indeed about any of the restrictions that we put in place, and we've had this debate on the floor of the Senedd in relation, for example, to second homes—whether more draconian steps should be taken to prevent people from occupying property that they own, and that a couple of months ago we wouldn't have dreamt of thinking about whether they should be prevented from doing so, and I've so far come to the conclusion that it isn't proportionate to do that. So, I just want to give him that assurance that we police this line absolutely consciously. We may come to different views on where the line should be drawn, but we are not doing it in any arbitrary or unthinking way.

I agree with what Mr Reckless has said about devolution being brought home to people in this crisis in a way that it hasn't been over the last 20 years. I doubt that it is true that in Wales people aren't aware of devolution. It is certainly true that people outside Wales and in London appear to have woken up from a 20-year sleep on the devolution agenda. I think people's views in Wales are really clear. People in Wales support the careful, cautious way in which we are exercising the lift out of lockdown. They would rather be here with a Government that puts their health, their well-being, at the very front of what we are doing, and they do not look enviously on the way in which these things are being conducted across our border.

First Minister, Boris Johnson, in Prime Minister's questions today, says that he believes it is right to charge low-paid, front-line healthcare workers, coming from abroad to work in the NHS, the immigration health surcharge, amounting to hundreds of pounds or more a year. Now, Keir Starmer, the Labour leader and the leader of the opposition in Parliament, quoted a letter from doctors and medical organisations, which said:

'At a time when we are mourning colleagues your steadfast refusal to reconsider the deeply unfair immigration health surcharge is a gross insult to all...this country at its time of greatest need.'

Now, he indicated that there will be a proposed amendment from the opposition to abolish that. I wonder if you agree, First Minister, that this surcharge is an insult to many front-line healthcare workers. 

Well, Llywydd, I didn't have the opportunity myself to hear Prime Minister's questions today, though Mick Antoniw has very powerfully given an account of the debate there. Could I put his points in the wider context? This week, we have been seeing again immigration proposals from the UK Government that seek to distinguish between high-skilled and low-skilled people coming into our country, and to have arbitrary salary caps that prevent some people from being recruited to do vital work. Just to say again that, just as in the instance that Mick Antoniw has reported, so in that general case as well, the Welsh Government rejects that view of the world. If you have a skill that is necessary to be a care worker, you are the person still to do that job. To regard you as low skilled and therefore not worthy of being recruited into our public services, I think, is an anathema. The issue that Mick Antoniw has referred to, and was, as he said, debated earlier today elsewhere, is part of a wider pattern in which the UK Government declines to recognise the value of those people who carry out these vitally important front-line services, and that is, clearly, not a view that is at all shared here in Wales.

First Minister, this crisis has proved the value of devolution, but has also highlighted a number of structural problems in the political landscape in Wales, and one of those is the weakness of the press. Last week, papers sold in Wales had a front-page advertisement, paid for by the UK Government, with the message, 'Stay alert', which wasn't applicable to Wales. The London newspapers are full of stories that are not relevant to Wales and this isn’t being explained and is causing confusion.

The same situation does not exist in Scotland, where there are Scottish versions of English newspapers and many Scottish-based newspapers. A YouGov survey recently reflected this, finding that 40 per cent of the people of Wales didn’t know enough about you to give a view on your performance. The corresponding figure for Sturgeon in Scotland was 6 per cent.

First Minister, what plans does the Welsh Government have to transform this situation, now that it’s a matter of safeguarding public health? Can you tell me whether the past few weeks have convinced you that we need to devolve broadcasting?

Well, Llywydd, I agree that the current situation has strengthened devolution and has strengthened devolution in the thinking of the people of Wales. We had worked hard with the UK Government and, just to be fair, they have withdrawn a number of advertisements that they wanted to publish in Wales with 'Stay alert' and so on, but, at the end of the day, they couldn’t withdraw those things that were included in newspapers printed in London that are sold here in Wales.

I agree with what Delyth Jewell has said, that it is essential that we try to strengthen the messages that the people of Wales receive from people working in Wales in the press and also in the media. But, it is difficult for the Government to step into that gap, because Government funding would raise concerns with people as to whether that would have an impact on the situation and would put pressure on journalists to convey the news in the way that the Government would want to see it conveyed.

So, we have been working—we have been working with the committee chaired by Bethan Sayed—to think about what we can do to strengthen the position here in Wales. But, if the Government were to do too much, then that would create problems. It would assist us with some problems, but would raise other issues.

First Minister, in your statement today you mentioned the ONS figures. When people hear what seems to be conflicting data in terms of cases, or cases of deaths, it does cause some anxiety. People in Powys, for example, would have heard news reports yesterday saying, unfortunately, there were 12 deaths in Powys, whereas the ONS figures report 75 deaths. Of course, this is because of the difference between Public Health Wales and the ONS in how they report data, and the fact that Powys does not have a district general hospital and, of course, because of the cross-border nature. What can you say to people who have this anxiety, which I think can cause some concern amongst people and distrust, I suppose, as well? What can be done to make data easier to understand for the public?

And also, secondly and related, when will the data reporting of care testing and, sadly, deaths in English hospitals for Welsh patients appear in the Public Health Wales figures?

I thank Russell George for that. I think he gave a very good explanation himself of why there is a difference between the Public Health Wales figures and the ONS figures. I do understand, if you're not close to these things, it is difficult for people to understand the differences.

He will remember that, early in the coronavirus crisis, there was a considerable call from Members of the Senedd and beyond—and understandably too—for the most up-to-date information to be published as quickly as possible, and that's why Public Health Wales publishes the daily figures that they publish, and they are, as Russell George has said, deaths of people in hospital, and that's capable of being brought together on a daily basis. But, it doesn't represent the totality of the picture because it doesn't include people who have died outside hospital and in the community. That is more difficult to collect together quickly because it relies on death certification. There is a lag in that. The ONS figures, which are more comprehensive but a couple of weeks out of date, reflect the totality of the picture.

So, I suppose the only advice I can give to people who want to make sure they have the most comprehensive understanding of this is that they've got to look at both sets of data. They cover slightly different things. I think the comfort that people might be able to draw is that, while the specifics in terms of numbers differ, the trends are broadly the same. So, you're not looking at a completely different understanding of the picture; you're seeing the picture at a different point in time and on a different basis, but what they're telling us about the trends of coronavirus are broadly consistent.

I'll make an enquiry on his second point because I don't have that information directly with me and I'll make sure that we write to him and let him know the answer.

I'm grateful, Presiding Officer, for the statement the First Minister has made this afternoon. I have to say, I think overwhelmingly the people of Blaenau Gwent fully support the approach that he has taken and the Welsh Government have taken over the last two months. They overwhelmingly agree that his calm and cautious approach, and putting people's lives first, is the approach that is best suited for our needs. I hope he can reassure us all that he'll continue to resist those siren voices, and sometimes very strident voices, who tell us that we should be simply repeating slavishly all the catastrophic errors, misjudgments and mistakes that the United Kingdom Government has made over the past few months.

And in going forward, I very much welcome the publication of his plan, his framework for taking us forward, last Friday. What people say to me is they'd like to understand more about what that means to them: how we will see the traffic light system be reflected in their daily lives over the coming weeks and months. He's been very clear about not publishing timescales, and I largely agree with that, but I think people would like to feel that they have a stronger indication of where we're going over the coming months—

You need to come to your question now, Alun Davies.

I've asked two questions.

Well, that's fine, then. The First Minister can respond. First Minister.

Llywydd, can I thank Alun Davies for the assistance he has given, alongside his colleagues, in reflecting the views of the people that he represents? Because one of the core reasons why we are taking the approach we are taking is because of the very firm indications we were getting from the population of Blaenau Gwent and other communities that they were fearful of an approach in which lockdown would simply be lifted and we would return too quickly to the way things were before. We've listened very carefully to those views, which Alun Davies and others have faithfully represented to us, and it's made a real difference to our thinking. I can give him a complete assurance that we will continue to exercise our own judgment as to the right measures and the right timetable in which to implement them here in Wales.

And what I would say to those people who want to have more definite ideas of how we will move through the traffic light system is that every three weeks we have to report on the state of the regulations; every three weeks we are able to make adjustments to them. It will be Friday of next week now—we're halfway through, just over halfway through, the current three-week cycle—and by Friday of next week, we will have had to have made new decisions, which I think will take us further into that traffic light system. People who want to know more, I think, will be able to see—every three weeks at a minimum—how we plan to move Wales along the pathway that we have set out.

I was very pleased to hear the First Minister referring, again, in his statement, to children and young people. The impact of this pandemic on children and young people is immense, and I believe it will be very long standing.

I very much welcome the announcement on Monday of the £3.75 million extra funding for children's mental health, and particularly the recognition by the education Minister that, for younger children, traditional counselling is not necessarily an appropriate approach, and that the Government will work with providers to deliver services in line with the reforms that are already being taken forward.

Can I ask whether the First Minister agrees with me that in spending that money, it is absolutely crucial that we build on the whole-school approach reforms and the wider system-wide reforms set out in the committee's 'Mind over matter' report? And would the First Minister agree with me that as we come through this pandemic, our 'Mind over matter' recommendations across Government will be more important than ever before? Thank you.

Thank you, Llywydd. I thank Lynne Neagle for that. Our own chief medical officer has emphasised, right through the coronavirus crisis, that it is more than just a physical illness. And while we can count, so sadly, the number of people who've been admitted to hospital or gone to critical care or, indeed, have died from the virus, it's more difficult to count the impact on people's mental health and well-being, but that harm is very real as well.

I thank Lynne Neagle for what she said in welcoming the £3.75 million. As she knows, it extends help lower down the age range. To be six years old and to have gone through three months of coronavirus is a huge proportion of your lifetime, and the impact on that young person, that child's life, will indeed, I think, last long beyond the current crisis. So, that's why we were keen to put that investment in now and to do it exactly in the way that Lynne Neagle has said: in a way consistent with all the other measures we have taken in recent years to make the whole-school approach, to put the mental health and well-being of young people at the centre of the way that we think about public services and their needs for the future, and that's exactly what we intend to do.

Thanks to the First Minister for today's statement. First Minister, in the past, you've spoken about the need for a common approach from the four nations during this crisis, and you've made reference to that again today. Now, clearly, First Minister, when we come to the end of this crisis, lessons will need to be drawn from it. Could I ask you if, on reflection, you feel there are any circumstances, during a national emergency, when it is right for the Welsh Government to voluntarily surrender powers back to the UK Government?

Well, Llywydd, that wouldn't be my approach. Where we agree with what the UK Government is doing, as we have in huge amounts of what has happened over the recent months, we can simply exercise our powers in a way that is consistent with what is happening elsewhere. There is certainly no need to surrender powers; it's just a matter of how you choose to exercise them.

Carwyn Jones.

[Inaudible.]—Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can. Carry on.

Thank you very much. Llywydd, you'll be very glad to know that I don't intend to try your patience this week with a very long question, if that, indeed, is what it was last week, so I'll be short. But just, very quickly, I'd like to remind the leader of the Brexit Party that, far from the British Prime Minister being stripped of powers, the people of Wales decided in 1997 and 2011 in referendums that, in fact, it was the Welsh Parliament and the Welsh Government that should exercise powers in the field of health.

Secondly, I do deplore the desire by some to see Westminster as always right. It's a sign of an inferiority complex, I think, that we have in Wales that, somehow, if England decides to do something different—it was England that broke ranks, not anybody else—then, therefore, they must be right and everyone else must be wrong. It's time to cast off those chains. 

My question is this, First Minister—we know that people are able to play certain sports and to take part in certain activities, providing, of course, that social distancing is respected. My question is this, then: golf clubs and tennis clubs have been mentioned, and there'll be other sports as well, but where people need to drive to get to a facility, as long as that facility is outdoors and as long as that is their nearest public facility, or the nearest facility where they are a member, which is the case of a club, would it be possible to give consideration as to whether further guidance might be available in order to help people in those circumstances? Clearly, we don't want people driving very long distances, but there'll be some activities, inevitably, where people will need to drive to get to them. It's impossible to make rules for every single circumstance, I understand that, but perhaps, First Minister, if not this afternoon, some consideration might be given just to making the situation a little clearer for those people.

Llywydd, I thank Carwyn Jones for that. I agree with him that you can't have a rule for every occasion, and each of us, as citizens, have to make some judgments about our own conduct, and judgments within the ambit of the rules as laid down. So, further guidance—we can certainly look at that, but this afternoon, I'm very happy to say to people in Wales that there are only three questions they need to ask themselves: are they going out to exercise? If it's exercise, then they've passed the first hurdle. Is it local? And if it's local, they've passed the second hurdle. And is that exercise capable of being organised in a way that respects social distancing? And if they can say 'yes' to those three questions, then they've gone a long way, I think, to making the sort of judgment that they need to make as to whether or not what they propose is within the rules as we've agreed them here in Wales.

I thank the First Minister.

The next item is the topical questions and the first question is to be asked to the Minister for Education and is to be asked by Helen Mary Jones.

I can’t hear Helen Mary Jones at the moment; we will wait to see whether we can hear Helen Mary Jones.

The microphone, Helen Mary, needs to be lower.

My apologies, Llywydd, I was so busy concentrating on what was going on on the screen and making sure that I'd unmuted myself there, I forgot to move the microphone, I'm very sorry.

And I couldn't properly see the microphone, because it was in your hair, so—.

Lockdown hair. [Laughter.] I'll start again. My apologies.

Thank you, Helen Mary Jones, for the question. I'm very proud that our universities have all stepped up in the fight against COVID-19, and their contribution to research, innovation, skills and employment will be vital for our economic recovery as a nation. We've taken steps to provide practical support to the sector, and we will continue to do so.

I'm grateful to the Minister for her reply and for the confirmation that she gives, of course, that she fully understands the importance of the sector. But I wonder if she can tell us a bit more about what the nature of the support that's been provided is. The Scottish Government, for example, as we know, has provided £75 million of research funding to its universities. Now, obviously, its model of funding universities is different from ours, and I wouldn't necessarily expect our Minister to respond in exactly the same way, but she has acknowledged herself the huge importance—5 per cent of Welsh gross value added, 17,000 direct jobs, 50,000 jobs in the wider economy depending on our academic institutions. So, can she tell us a little more about what efforts the Welsh Government are making, and are planning to make, to ensure the longer term sustainability of the universities? Because I'm sure that she will agree with me that the Wales Governance Centre report made sobering reading—not surprising reading, I'm sure, to her—and that it is essential that we protect this vital sector of our economic structure as well as our academic structure here in Wales. 

Indeed, and Helen Mary is correct to say that universities will need to be there to help us climb our way out of this economic emergency. As we've said before, this is an economic emergency as well as a public health one.

We have published a policy statement outlining the actions that we are taking to support financial pressures. We've provided an indicative annual grant to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, which is an increase on last year's grant. We are bringing forward Student Loan Company tuition fee payments to institutions so that a greater than usual proportion of that funding will be available to them in the autumn. We have sought to introduce admissions restraint measures that work for the Welsh sector and can be regulated by HEFCW to bring some much needed stability to our institutions moving forward. And we are working with Ministers from across the United Kingdom on the research and innovation taskforce to address the impact of COVID-19. Perhaps more close to home, we are continually in touch with HEFCW and Universities Wales to explore the options for any possible additional financial support that the Welsh Government may be able to be in a position to provide to help stabilise the sector ahead of the next academic year. We want to do that in a way that is really thoughtful, doesn't pick favourites, is transparent and ensures that we underpin the infrastructure that Helen Mary has rightly said will be important for this nation going forward, both in terms of academic excellence, but also the economy. 

Minister, there's a particularly brutal aspect to this part of the consequences of COVID-19, and that's that the most successful and research-based universities are the most vulnerable, because they have so much reliance on international economic patterns underlying a lot of their research, and their opportunities out there with global partners. But they also attract a lot of foreign students. That model, for at least a year or two, has now completely been removed, and has been instantly. What rapid response measures do you now propose to take, or are considering, to shore up our great universities, Cardiff, Swansea, Bangor—the ones that have research capacity? It's really important that we look at this and move quickly. 

David, you're right: we have to be particularly concerned about the impact on research. We know that the fees from international students have often gone a long way in providing support for research activities in our universities.

Earlier today, I was very pleased to announce in excess of £1 million to further support the Sêr Cymru programme in supporting research in a direct response to the COVID-19 crisis. As I said in answer to Helen Mary, we continue to have discussions with HEFCW, but I'm sure that David would recognise that the scale of the financial support required to address, potentially, shortfalls as a result of a potential drop in foreign students goes beyond what is available within the devolved Governments' budgets, and that's why I'm very pleased to work alongside Ministers from Scotland and Northern Ireland and the English Government on the research and innovation taskforce. My message to them is very, very clear: universities will be making decisions about their research capability not in the autumn, when indications around student recruitment will become clearer. We need to be able to do that now. There are established mechanisms for where we can hold universities accountable for spending research money, QR money, and we continue to look to work together to be able to respond positively in a timely fashion to address these decisions, which institutions will be making in the next couple of months. 

Thank you, Minister. The next question is to the Minister for Housing and Local Government, and Delyth Jewell will ask the question. 

Thank you for the question, Delyth. We are supporting local authorities to develop and grow local contact-tracing capacity. They are pivotal to preventing the transmission of the virus. Discussions are ongoing to identify their resource needs, and lessons learned from the trials will be invaluable in helping to form the next phase of our response. 

Thank you for that response, Minister. It's widely accepted that the most important part of any strategy to tackle COVID-19 is the test, track and trace aspect. Put simply, we have to have that kind of test and track regime in place before we can consider any substantial lifting of the current restrictions. I'm sure you'll agree with me on that. 

Now, on Monday, I was really pleased to see Ceredigion council publish its own coronavirus adjustment plan for the county, which is looking to the next phase. Now, that plan includes details of their already operational contact-tracing system. I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate Ceredigion for being at the forefront of these efforts, and I'd like to invite you, Minister, to do the same and offer to consider how the Ceredigion model could be used as an example to boost best practice in other areas. 

Now, Minister, local authorities are, of course, identified as having a key role in the successful delivery of your Government's test, trace and protect plan, but they do still await details at a national level from the Welsh Government about how contact tracing will operate on the ground across Wales and, crucially, what resources and support—particularly financial support—is going to be available to local authorities. Lots of the now invaluable public protection expertise within local authorities might have been lost through austerity, so I'd welcome your thoughts on how we can ensure that we come back from anything that's been lost in that regard.

Finally, just some specific questions to you, Minister. Could you update the Senedd, please, on how many people you envisage will be required to undertake contact tracing work across Wales? How many people have already been allocated to these roles, whether they are going to be taken from the existing local authority workforce or whether there is external recruitment that has been undertaken to add to this? What timescales will be involved would also be good for us to know. And, in terms of the technical resource to support the work of human contact tracers on the ground, is the Welsh Government recommending the use of a single app for local authorities and others, and could you give us details of that, please? Thank you. 

Thank you for that series of questions, Delyth. I'll do my best to answer them. I'm aware of the Ceredigion situation, of course, and Ceredigion have worked very hard to get that in place. They are amongst the many authorities that are building on and rapidly growing the contact-tracing expertise that's already existed in our local authorities and health boards and it's at the very heart of our test, trace and protect strategy. 

The reality is that the national plan will only work if we make full use of existing local knowledge, skills and expertise, and that has, as you rightly say, been built up over many years within the health protection teams of our local authorities and health boards, specifically in environmental health arrangements. That's exactly the approach that we are taking in Wales. We are very proud of our local authorities and their local expertise. I'm acutely aware that they will need our full support and that the resource implications are likely to be high. We are very committed to providing the resources that are necessary to do that. 

We've been working in close partnership to identify the full cost implications, and further advice and guidance will be issued when we have come to the end of that piece of work. All our health board and local authority partners have responded with determination and commitment to operationalise the tracing plan, as set out in the test, trace and protect plan.

Delyth will know—I know because I've had conversations with her about it—that I have a regular phone call with all of the leaders in local authorities in Wales and, later this week, I will be talking to them again. I am aware that, in the call this morning—which I wasn't part of, but I am aware that, in the call this morning, everyone expressed satisfaction with the way that it's going so far and continues to commit to the engagement that we have in rolling out the small-scale contact tracing trials that are under way in four of our health boards.

I'm not in a position to answer about the app as that's within Vaughan Gething's portfolio, but I'm sure that we can get an answer around that. However, I can say this about it: we are very determined to root this in our local communities and in their local knowledge and expertise. The app, I'm sure, will be assisting in that, but it will certainly not be the only solution.   

Mark Isherwood. Microphone needs to be unmuted.

There we are. Okay, thank you. Reinforcing the statement by the leader of the Welsh Local Government Association that tracking and tracing coronavirus cases in Wales is a mammoth task, and councils would need significant additional resources for the vital work, Welsh Conservative local authority leaders told me yesterday that they seek clarity from the Welsh Government on its 'Test Trace Protect' programme and the commitment to fully resource this. In stating that it wants the programme operational by the end of May, the Welsh Government has acknowledged this would require significant resources and said some 1,000 staff would initially be needed, including people working for local authorities. Alongside specially-trained council public protection officers and partners in health, other non-clinical staff will need to be either recruited or redeployed. How do you therefore respond to the statement made to me by local authority leaders that if the Welsh Government does not totally commit to fully financing its 'Test Trace Protect' strategy, some local authorities will be crippled? 

Thank you for that, Mark. As I said, we work very closely with all the local authority leaders in Wales. All of them join the call that I join them on at least once a week, sometimes many more times than that. As I said, we are developing a set of pilots that will explore key aspects of this particular plan: key aspects of manual tracing, scripts, volumes, workforce roles, training requirements, data capture, information flow, potential legal issues, including scenario planning and high-risk contact requirements. So, we are working with our local authorities to understand all the ramifications of that, and to understand what their resource requirements are. And as I said in response to Delyth earlier, we are fully aware that they need to be fully supported in that, and I've made that very clear to the leaders.  

Andrew Morgan, the leader of the WLGA, is absolutely right—it is a mammoth task—but I'm very pleased to say that our local authorities have all stepped up to that plate and are working very hard with us and with the piloting authorities to make sure that we all work together in partnership to deliver this very important plan for Wales. 

I thank the Minister. 

The next item is a statement by the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales on the response to coronavirus. And the Deputy Presiding Officer will take the chair for this item. Minister, Ken Skates. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Last Friday, the First Minister set out the framework that will lead Wales out of the coronavirus pandemic. The document we published sets out how and when decisions on the easing of the lockdown will be made in our economy, in our communities and in our public services over the coming weeks and months. And as Ministers, we are supporting that work. My task is to ensure that, when the time is right, our businesses, our transport network and our skills system are ready not only to adapt and transition to the post-coronavirus world but, crucially, that we are ready and able to build back better for the sake of this and for future generations.

A key plank of this work is ensuring we don't pull away too soon the critical economic underpinning of the lockdown—the support the UK Government has introduced through the job retention scheme. The job retention scheme has been essential to enabling large parts of the economy to hibernate throughout this crisis. None of the devolved Governments acting on their own had the fiscal firepower to secure incomes and livelihoods in the way that the job retention scheme has been. And so it's essential that the job retention scheme is not withdrawn or scaled back before businesses have been able to properly restart their operations.

This was the message that the finance Minister and I sent to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a joint letter last week, and I welcome the subsequent steps he then took to extend the scheme until October. While it provides an important window for us all to think about the future, I urge the UK Government to involve us in those discussions meaningfully.

We are all acutely aware that some sectors have been hit harder than others—that, for some, lockdown started sooner and will end much later. As we approach the summer season, we are all aware of the impact coronavirus is having on the tourism and hospitality sector.  One of the more recent concerns that has been raised with me is the issue of prompt payments to small businesses. I urge all large organisations, both in the public and in the private sector, to play their part in supporting those smaller businesses by making payments on time.

But the conversation needs to begin with the UK Government now about the future, about how economic life will function after the job retention scheme and the self-employment income support scheme have been taken away. In Wales, our priority has not changed. Public health and the control of the pandemic remain our No. 1 priority. That's why, on 14 May, I issued an important reminder to anyone considering travelling to Wales: please stay at home. Visitors will be welcome with open arms to Wales once we are through this crisis, but, for now, we must tackle the virus by staying home.

Now, a major part of our work has been to support businesses through this pandemic, and our package of support is the most generous for businesses anywhere in the UK, and it includes a £100 million loans scheme to help more than 1,000 businesses through the Development Bank of Wales; a £400 million economic resilience fund grant scheme, which, for phase 1, has attracted more than 9,500 applications, with over 6,000 offers already made to date, worth in excess of £100 million; and also, of course, the non-domestic rates-based grant support for small businesses and businesses operating in the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors, awarding to date 51,100 grants worth more than £626 million. It's a total package of £1.7 billion, worth 2.7 per cent of gross domestic product.

On 27 April, we paused the economic resilience fund to give us an opportunity to consider where further support could make the biggest impact, not only to help those businesses we haven’t already reached, but also to consider what support all businesses will need through the ongoing rescue phase, as well as into the restart and recovery phases, as lockdown measures are eased in line with last Friday’s framework. That work is advancing well and we are finalising the details of the next phase of the economic resilience fund. I expect to reopen the economic resilience fund eligibility checker for new applications by the middle of June, allowing companies time to prepare their applications. Following that, I expect to open for full applications later in the month. This will enable access to the remaining £100 million of the £300 million already approved and allocated to support microbusinesses, small and medium sized enterprises and large businesses.

Now, in terms of eligibility, phase 2 of the fund will operate in the same way as phase 1, but with an update to the micro scheme. This will enable limited companies that are not VAT registered to access the fund, something that so many small businesses have been calling for. In addition, we are also working with our partners in local government to develop further support proposals for those not yet reached—for example, start-up businesses. We've also supplemented the Government's discretionary assistance fund, which supports people who are recently employed but not eligible for the job retention scheme, as well as the self-employed.   

I will, of course, Llywydd, continue to keep Members up to date on these matters. In the meantime, the UK Government has a critical role in expanding its support for strategic businesses still struggling to find appropriate support. In particular, I have asked the UK Government to look again at what help it can provide to safeguard businesses critical to our national economic security, such as Tata Steel and Airbus.

Earlier today, Llywydd, the Minister for Education outlined a COVID-19 post-16 sector resilience plan to give education providers a clear framework for planning and delivering our employability and skills response. Employability support is vital in times of economic uncertainty and responding to those swiftly. One year on from its official launch, the Working Wales service has directly supported more than 31,500 adults, and over 6,000 young people, who are looking for employability support. That service has been adapted in response to the pandemic and has extended its web chat, text messaging and call service facilities to best meet the needs of users. 

But this is not the only change that we have made. For apprentices, we have developed online learning modules to ensure they are able to continue to progress through their learning. For our traineeship learners, we have developed digital learning packages and maintained their training allowances. And for those furthest from the labour market, our community employability programmes have adapted their delivery to continue providing outreach in our most deprived and vulnerable communities for young people and adults. For those closer to the labour market, support is being provided through ReAct, Jobs Growth Wales, and the employability skills programme. And for those in work, the Union Learning Fund, with support from the Wales Trades Union Congress, is delivering immediate skills solutions and support to workers during and after the coronavirus crisis.

Now, it has to be said, Llywydd, that none of this would be possible without the support of our social partners. And on 14 May, together with the First Minister, I met members of the shadow social partnership council to discuss the challenges we all face over the coming months, to discuss how we lift the lockdown safely, to discuss how we can take advantage of, and move towards, an economy that sees us travel less, but work smarter.

Last week, I also met transport unions, passenger groups, public transport operators, stakeholder representatives, and Transport for Wales to discuss the guidance we are developing to help prepare our public transport network for the new normal. In the short term, we are considering ways in which we can manage demand for public transport and maintain strict social distancing. Some of the measures that we discussed were the prioritising of public transport for key workers, encouraging greater pre-booking and better planning of travel, and staggering shift patterns in the public sector, and encouraging the private sector to do likewise. We'll publish this guidance in the coming weeks, in readiness for any easing of the lockdown that might occur through the next 21-day review of regulations.

Now, Llywydd, this week is, of course, Mental Health Awareness Week, and we recognise that this is a very uncertain and stressful time for businesses and employees. That's why, as part of our package of advice, we have included information on mental health and well-being on the Business Wales website to help business leaders take care of themselves and their staff. These include the Time to Change Wales programme and the Public Health Wales 'How are you doing?' campaign. Mental health is something that is very important to me, and I'd urge all businesses and employees to make use of these invaluable resources.

And, Llywydd, I'd just like to end by offering my thanks again to Members across this Chamber for the advice, the ideas, and the counsel that they have provided over the last few months. We will get through this crisis, and we will build back better in our economy, in our communities and in our public services, and we will work together to do it. And now I'm very pleased to be able to take questions.

Can I begin by thanking the Minister for the helpful and co-operative way in which he's worked with parties across this Senedd in this very difficult time? I'm sure this is a time when, whatever our differences, we all want to see the Welsh Government succeed, and, in the context of our discussions this afternoon, we want to see and to be able to support the Minister in his aspirations for us to be able to build back better and to keep our economy strong.

I'd like to ask a few specific questions, if I may. With regard to the economic resilience fund, I know that the Minister had hoped to be able to reopen slightly earlier. And I wonder if he's able to put on record the explanation that he's given as to why it's been important to ensure that there is no duplication in provision, so that those businesses who are still waiting for support can better understand why this slightly unexpected delay has been necessary, which I do accept that it has been. Can he confirm that this slightly longer pause—I'm very pleased to hear, by the way, what he says about including businesses not able to pay VAT, but can he confirm that this slightly longer pause will enable him to give further consideration to some of the other missing businesses that he might be able to include where proof may be a bit more difficult? He did mention start-up businesses, but I'd also draw his attention to tourism businesses that pay council tax not business rates, which currently, of course, cannot be supported.

He mentions the UK Government's furlough scheme, and I'm sure we are all extremely glad that that's in place, and very glad that it's been extended. But for, of course, some of the people caught in the issues around being new starters and therefore not being able to be furloughed, the extension to the scheme for those individuals is potentially not good news. Can I ask the Minister this afternoon if he will continue to make representations to the UK Government around the position of the new starters, now that we know that the extension is in place? And will he also continue to raise the concerns that I and others have raised with him about some inflexibilities in the scheme? Businesses may, for example, wish, as the lockdown begins to be lifted, to enable some staff to return part time, but they may not be able to take them back on full time. And in terms of a gradual restart to our economy, particularly in terms of tourism businesses, I hope that he’ll agree with me that that flexibility in the furlough scheme will be essential, because otherwise businesses may have no choice other than just simply not to open at all.

Can you bring your question to a close there now, because you're well over time?

I do apologise, Dirprwy Lywydd, just one final question. I'm very glad to see what the Minister has said about the guidance regarding safe public transport. Can he say a little bit more about progress on broader guidance around safe return to work?

Dirprwy Lywydd, can I thank Helen Mary Jones not only for her questions, but also the ideas that she’s been able to offer me in recent times? I really do value them. They have helped to shape not just the second phase of the economic resilience fund, but other interventions. So, I’m very grateful indeed.

We are looking to take advantage of the coming fortnight to be able to take stock of the UK Government’s bounce back loan scheme, and also to ensure that we can work very closely with local authority partners on any details of a hardship scheme for the remaining businesses that may fall through the gaps. It’s also important that we ensure that we don’t inadvertently or unfortunately, accidentally, double fund any businesses that may try applying for both ERF phase 1 and ERF phase 2. By setting mid June as the date when we will open up the eligibility checker, we can be confident that we will have completed all payments to successful applicants from the first phase of the scheme.

In terms of some of those businesses that have been highlighted, some of those sectors, those bed-and-breakfasts that pay council tax may be eligible for ERF funding, provided they are VAT registered and employ, or if they are not then they would need to meet two of three points in our criteria—those three points regard being VAT registered, employing people by PAYE, or having a turnover of over £50,000. If they cannot meet that, then we are looking at how a further hardship fund may be able to assist.

But the purpose of our economic interventions is to support business that employs people, business that is viable, business that the owners and their employees rely on for their living. I’m afraid that we simply do not have the firepower to be able to support lifestyle businesses, and so we are having to be selective in terms of which businesses we are supporting. That’s why it’s absolutely right that we put our financial resource to best use in those businesses that would otherwise cease trading and collapse.

I would agree entirely with Helen Mary Jones regarding the need to ensure that the furlough scheme is more flexible in the months to come, and that’s why we wish to be discussing the scheme for how it operates from August to October right now. We need to be engaged in a meaningful way and this is what was discussed just this morning with counterparts from the devolved administrations and from BEIS. I will continue to press UK Government to be more flexible in terms of the application criteria and specifically the eligibility concerning dates. We would wish to see applications for furlough extended to the period between 15 March and 1 April to take account of seasonal workers.

We have established a greater degree of funding within the discretionary assistance fund to assist people who have fallen through this gap, on a temporary basis. Should the UK Government not address that particular problem regarding the dates, then we would again review whether any further support is required through the discretionary assistance fund.

I think Helen Mary Jones raises the important point about guidance. We have to ensure that as we lift restrictions, as we ease the lockdown, people have confidence in accessing businesses, in going into the workplace. We’ve been discussing with our social partners the guidance that not only applies to public transport, but also to businesses, on a sectoral basis, that takes advantage of the work that was carried out by BEIS in terms of safer working, but which also incorporates, crucially, the regulations here in Wales regarding the 2m rule. I look forward to being able to publish that guidance in the coming weeks, so that it enables businesses to incorporate any new ways of working sooner rather than later, so that they can transition into normal operations relatively seamlessly.

I'm very grateful to the Minister for his replies. With regard to tourism businesses, I think I have already raised with him the need particularly for them to be able to have their safe return to work guidance as soon as possible. I think they're all very well aware that they won't be amongst the first businesses returning, but they're also well aware that they will need to undertake potentially structural changes in their premises before they can open, and that they may also need to provide some retraining for their staff so that the staff are aware. So, I wonder if the Minister can give us some indication as to when he might be able to make the sector-specific business guidance available for tourism. And can he confirm that that guidance will include specific guidance for different sectors within hospitality and tourism—everything from caravan parks to camping sites to tourism boats, for example, where there'll be different issues around social distancing in all of those? 

I'm grateful to him for what he said about the furlough scheme and continuing to press the case for the new starters. As he knows, it's up to 22,000 Welsh citizens, we think, who are caught in this position. And while I'm grateful for what he has to say about the discretionary assistance fund, I'm sure he will acknowledge that that is not a replacement and he wouldn't seek for it to be a replacement for those people being appropriately furloughed.

Finally, can I just thank him once again for keeping us updated and ask him to confirm that he will make a statement to this place as soon as he is able to about the exact criteria for the new phase of the economic resilience fund?  

I can give my assurance that I'll be publishing the criteria as soon as I possibly can—full criteria—and I'll be making a statement to Members. Can I say that we stand shoulder to shoulder with the tourism sector right now? It has never been through such uncertain times as it's going through right now, and we wish to support the sector in every way we can, alongside the UK Government, who obviously have far deeper pockets and the ability to support the sector with financial resource. 

In terms of some of the questions that Helen Mary Jones asked regarding guidance, the guidance we'll publishing will be relevant to sectors, and the guidance that's been published by BEIS has been relevant to workplaces, and it will outline how structural alterations, how construction work within premises, can take place in a safe way. We're trying to be as comprehensive as possible, in terms of the guidance that's being drafted, so that all businesses are able to reflect upon the regulations that we have here in Wales. But, of course, the guidance that is already available from BEIS largely covers in a satisfactory way safe working arrangements. What we are going to be producing is an enhanced version and a version that is strictly applicable to Wales. 

Minister, can I thank you for your statement and the constructive way that you have been working with opposition spokespeople? You mention that you are urging the UK Government Ministers to involve you in discussions, and I wonder if you've also extended an invitation to UK Government Ministers to be involved in your discussions in terms of the next phase of the economic resilience fund.

I am particularly pleased that you've given a date for the next phase of the economic resilience fund, but I'm a bit disappointed why it's so far off. I've been telling businesses that have been contacting my office, some on a daily basis, that 'It's coming soon.' That was three or four weeks ago. The next fund, if it's not available for the middle of June, that's three, four weeks away yet, and if applications are not open until the end of June, I think that's a long time for businesses to wait. Is there any way at all that you can bring that forward and perhaps explain the rationale about why that date is there? 

You've also said, and perhaps you can clarify this, that people will be able to prepare their applications in advance of the fund. What I don't understand is how they can do that if they don't know what the eligible criteria are. And if the checker isn’t available until the middle of June, how on earth can they apply in advance if that's the case?

In regard to VAT, you've specifically said that this is for limited companies only. This was a big concern raised by businesses: if they're not registered for VAT, they're not eligible. There are very few businesses that are limited that are not registered for VAT. The businesses that were raising these concerns are almost certainly not going to be VAT registered and you will be aware of the gaps. If you can give us any more indication about those gaps in business support that will be phased by phase 2, and I'm particularly thinking about businesses that started back in April 2019 that have still not been able to access any funds at all. I wonder if you could give us any hope for those businesses as well.

Minister.

Yes, of course, Dirprwy Lywydd. And for those businesses, we're looking at the establishment of, as I said a little earlier, a hardship bursary, which will require the support of local authorities who'll be required to administer such a fund. That requires quite a considerable amount of administration, and that's why we need to make sure that systems that are robust are in place before we hit 'go' on the scheme, which in turn explains the time frame that we're looking at.

Now, I'm keen to manage expectations and to underpromise and overdeliver, which is why I've said that the eligibility tool will be open by mid June. If we can bring that forward in any way, then we most certainly will do. I recognise that there's a need to act urgently. We've been doing that. We've got the most comprehensive and generous package of support anywhere in the UK. We are keen, in Government, to main our position as offering the best package of support for businesses. So, we'll do all we can to bring forward a scheme as soon as possible. But we also need to ensure that we do it in a way that takes account of the UK Government's bounce back loan scheme and, of course, the first round of awards that are being made from ERF.

But I totally accept what Russell George is saying, that we need to ensure that we give confidence to businesses that further support is going to be available, and we're going to capture as many of those business that fell through the gaps first time around, and have fallen through the gaps in terms of UK Government support, including the self-employment income support scheme and the job retention scheme.

Thank you, Minister. I think I'm particularly keen to understand how businesses can actually apply for the scheme before the checker is available. They can't prepare unless they know if they're eligible or not.

I wonder, also, if you could address why you were so reticent, I suppose, to publish an aspirational timetable with clear milestones for a phased reopening of the Welsh economy, and when that will take place.

I am also very concerned about the coach and bus industry, and I wonder if you could offer any outline of support that is coming for this particular sector.

I also note that the Federation of Small Businesses has made some very good suggestions on how the Welsh Government can support businesses to reopen, and I wonder how you would respond to some of their suggestions, namely that the Welsh Government should: publish advice and guidance on the 2m rule; introduce a social distancing grant fund that would target those businesses that are perhaps struggling to make some of those adaptations; introduce a tourism hibernation scheme to ensure that businesses in this sector particularly can survive until the 2021 season; and finally, how the Welsh Government's £19 million transformational towns programme can help towns to adapt in readiness for the recovery phase.

Russell George has asked a number of really significant questions there that I'll try my best to answer succinctly. First of all, the eligibility tool will be available before the scheme is open, so any business that is considering applying will be able to check whether they're going to be eligible. All the criteria will be available online. I will endeavour, as soon as possible, to launch that fund, but we have to do so knowing that all of the systems are in place and that we have the full support of our colleagues in local government in any hardship bursary scheme that we introduce.

And in terms of a time frame for the reopening of certain sectors of the economy, I think it's important that we all operate our best endeavours in trying to get to grips with the pandemic and trying to kill off the virus right now. Setting an artificial, even an aspirational time frame, may lead to people being a little more relaxed about the need to actually kill the virus. If people know that business will only resume as normal as a consequence of killing the virus, I think the effort will be so much more intense, and that's why I'm keen to make sure that we just focus on controlling the virus.

In terms of the support that's being offered to the coach and bus sector, we established a £29 million hardship fund for the bus service providers. Now, the fund was financed through a consequential from the UK Government, but it only lasts until the end of June. We've been clear in our correspondence and our discussions with UK Government counterparts that there needs to be longer term surety funding for the bus sector to ensure that bus providers don't walk away, that they don't hand over the keys. So, I'm hopeful that the UK Government will listen to what we've called for and we'll be able to provide a much longer term support package for the bus sector.

But in addition to that, the economic resilience fund has been operating for businesses across all sectors, and I'm pleased to say that we have been able to support coach and bus operators with that particular fund. Offers have been made to some major employers in the bus industry and the coach industry. And I do welcome very much the paper that was produced by the Federation of Small Businesses. We published the 2m regulations. The advice and the guidance for safely operating at work for both employees and business owners will be published. That will be an enhanced version of what's already been provided by BEIS, adding in Welsh regulations on social distancing. And I've raised already with UK Government Ministers the need to consider a grant in order to help businesses adapt to what will be the new normal. I'm hopeful that the UK Government will be able to provide financial resource in order to be able to administer grants to businesses, particularly small businesses where the costs could be overwhelming. 

In terms of the tourism industry, we have asked UK Government to consider a VAT holiday in the tourism sector. I think this could be very beneficial, particularly in the recovery period, but equally, my friend and colleague Dafydd Elis-Thomas has been having numerous calls with UK Government counterparts and with the trade bodies concerning longer term support for the industry to do exactly what you've suggested, Russell, which is to ensure that they can hibernate through the worst of this crisis.

Thank you. We have about 12 minutes left and we've had two sets of questions, so I'm going to ask for brevity, Minister, and sorry about that, and brevity from the next set of questions as well. Jenny Rathbone. Jenny Rathbone? No. Okay. Huw Irranca-Davies. 

I'm not sure Huw can hear you, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's on mute.

Jenny? 

I think I'm through now. 

Right. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Minister, beyond COVID-19, we're still facing a climate emergency, we have a biodiversity crisis, we have underlying deep social and economic inequality, we have companies that are not as ethical as others and do not pay their fair share of taxes, and so on. So, in the building back better, can I ask you to elaborate on this and what it would mean for a different type of Wales socially and economically in future? Would he agree with me that we do have the opportunity because of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, because of the Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013, because of our Senedd's vote on climate change, recognising the climate change emergency, to genuinely build back better in Wales—jobs closer to homes, people and places as important as big business? How are we going to do this, Minister? There's a real opportunity here. 

Well, I would agree entirely with Huw Irranca-Davies that there is an incredible opportunity to do as Andy Burnham has said, to build back better—he coined the phrase. I think it's entirely appropriate in terms of describing some of the ways that Welsh Government has been operating in recent times, including through the economic contract, how we've been promoting responsible business, including some of the groundbreaking legislation that we have here in Wales, including the active travel Act and the well-being of future generations Act. I was able, during the course of the discussion that I had with Mayor Burnham, to highlight some of the unique ways of working in Wales that will enable us to build back better and which, if followed by other Governments, will enable the whole country to build back better as well.

I think some of the exciting work that can be taken forward to ensure that we create a greener, fairer society and a greener, fairer economy includes the work that has been commenced on working smarter, and this ties in with Russell George's question that I didn't have an opportunity to answer in terms of how we might be able to support town centres and high streets. It's our view that behaviours will never revert to how they were in February of this year, and that, once we're through this crisis, behavioural change will lead to more remote working. We need to embrace that, and we could support a wide take-up of remote working if we were to invest in redundant shops in town centres on high streets, offering opportunities for people not necessarily to work from home, but certainly to work closer to home. This could be a great leveller as well for the Welsh economy. It would mean that people wouldn't have to necessarily travel tens upon tens of miles to the larger towns and cities of our country to attend meetings. It would enable town centres to feel more vibrant for us to be able to invest in some of the infrastructure that would also enhance town centres and high streets, including wider pavements, active travel infrastructure.

And I think also, in terms of some of the work that we're looking at doing on the Wales transport strategy, as we build back better, we will of course be investing in more active travel provision, including greener transport solutions. And in terms of some of the ethical employment procedures that we're keen to promote, Huw Irranca-Davies will be aware that we recently announced that we won't be providing economic resilience funding to businesses registered in tax havens. I think it's absolutely vital we do this; if you're not paying into the system, why should you be taking money out of the system ahead of those who have paid their fair share? We want Wales to be seen as a fair, green nation and I'm confident that, through the work that's being undertaken now as part of the recovery, we will be able to achieve that reputation.

David Rowlands.

David, you're muted.

David Rowlands.

Can I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon, and also to thank him for his own strenuous efforts during this very, very difficult time? I'd like to also acknowledge the broad spread of interventions by the Welsh Government and, indeed, their implementation in an efficient manner, particularly through the agencies of local government and the Development Bank of Wales. And I think we also want to acknowledge the great part that Business Wales is playing in this in giving such good information to companies out there.

Talking about companies, Minister, the people of Wales are dependent upon many companies making their lives much better during this lockdown, but I'd like to bring your attention to a company that I believe is not doing this and is failing their customers during this crisis. I refer here to customers of SSE, which was previously SWALEC, the electricity supply company. Apparently, the failure of an electricity meter caused a customer to lose their electricity supply. They found it impossible to inform the company of this breakdown. I myself then attempted to contact the company using their website and a number of telephone numbers, including the number given to Western Power specifically for the coronavirus crisis, only to get on repeated occasions the message that the service was not available. There appears to be no emergency number available to SSE customers, or indeed any way of contacting them during an emergency. This customer has been without electricity for some 48 hours. Whilst it's not the case in this instance, this could have been a household where health aids depend on an electricity supply to function and these would have, of course, not worked, possibly putting lives at risk. Do you feel the failure of the company is acceptable in these matters?

I thank David Rowlands for his question and also for his very generous and kind comments regarding staff of the development bank and Business Wales. They really do value kind comments such as those that you've made today. They're working in incredibly difficult circumstances, juggling the strains of working from home with the many demands of businesses, and so those generous comments really do go a long way in boosting their morale.

In terms of SSE, Dirprwy Lywydd, I must declare an interest as I am a customer of SSE, and I have been receiving regular texts through the crisis. But, in regard to the level of service that David Rowlands has highlighted and the disappointment about being unable to contact SSE, if the company has not heard what David has highlighted this afternoon by the end of this week, then we'll certainly chase the company up and ensure that they are responding to customer concerns because, as David says, it's absolutely vital that people are able to access utility support services in a timely way and in an appropriate way during the crisis. 

In England, small bed-and-breakfast businesses are already eligible for a business grant, but the Welsh Government still excludes these businesses in Wales. A fortnight ago, the finance Minister told me you look forward to making an announcement, but you failed to do so today. How, therefore, do you respond to desperate bed-and-breakfast businesses in north Wales asking me to try and get answers from you now, or they will otherwise have to decide whether to cease trading this month?

A fortnight ago the Welsh Government announced that small charities within the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors will receive a £10,000 COVID-19 business grant. Today the Business Wales website is still saying,

'More details on how to apply will be on the website shortly.'

What is your response, therefore, to the charities and social businesses telling me they have numerous bills to pay and hope this financial help may come sooner rather than later?

Well, can I first of all say that the UK Government's announcement regarding small bed-and-breakfasts that pay council tax is based on an extra £617 million, of which I believe we have not seen a consequential, and so trying to replicate a scheme of that nature in Wales without UK Government funding would not be affordable. Perhaps Mark Isherwood could convey his disappointment about the lack of the resources that have been available to Westminster. However, I can confirm to bed-and-breakfast operators that, if they are VAT registered and employ people, they are eligible for the economic resilience fund, and they will be eligible for the second phase of the economic resilience fund. As I said in response to others and as I outlined in my statement, we're determined to make sure that we take the opportunity of the second phase of the economic resilience fund to establish a bursary—a hardship bursary—to capture any individuals or businesses that risk collapsing as a result of coronavirus. But, as I also said to other contributors, our financial resource is finite, and we have to use that money to keep businesses alive where it is a sole or majority income for the owners and for their employees. We won't be able to support all leisure businesses, I am afraid. We have to prioritise money to those businesses that need it the most. 

In terms of social businesses, they are also eligible for the economic resilience fund and, indeed, I believe more than 1.5 per cent of awards have been made to social businesses—higher than the proportion of social businesses as a total of the economy as a whole, demonstrating our commitment to that particular sector. 

Minister, can I thank you for your statement today and in particular the indication that the economic resilience fund will be reopened up in mid June, as there are many organisations in my constituency that have failed to actually get there so far, but they are looking for that to be reopened. It's very much welcomed. 

I had a cross-party group meeting on steel on Monday, and I'm very pleased that you commented upon steel in your statement, but the employers and the trade unions were both expressing deep concern that Westminster Government appear to be giving the perception that Wales was expendable. Can you reassure me, and the steel workers in my community, that you will fight for steel in Wales, and you will ensure—not just ask the Government, but you will demand—that the UK Government actually protect the steel industry as we come out of the recovery, because we'll be facing global challenges and competition from Europe, where the level playing field of Europe is actually better for Europeans than it is for the UK industry?

Well, can I thank Dai Rees for his question and for the opportunity he gave my officials to be part of the recent steel round-table discussions as part of a cross-party group? We raise every single week in our quadrilateral calls—myself and other Ministers from the other devolved administrations—the need to support the steel sector in the United Kingdom, recognising that it's a sector important to our national security.

There are discussions taking place between the UK Government and Tata regarding further potential support. The nature and details of these discussions are a matter for the UK Government and Tata, but I can assure Dai Rees today, and the thousands of workers employed by Tata and other steel businesses in Wales and across the UK, that the Welsh Government is standing behind them, that we will continue to press the UK Government to offer the appropriate and sufficient resource in order to overcome this current crisis, and that we are demanding that long-term changes are made, in particular regarding the volatile and high price of energy for the sector, so that it can emerge from the crisis in the best possible condition so that those thousands of people who had uncertainty about their future employment prospects before coronavirus have far more certainty that they will be employed in the sector in the years to come as we emerge from this terrible pandemic.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. I'm really pleased that you have mentioned Mental Health Awareness Week. The Intellectual Property Office is one of the largest employers in Newport and has been leading the way on mental health and well-being. Their vision is to be an organisation where mental health issues are widely understood and destigmatised, and where mental health and well-being are promoted. For example, they've started a virtual mindfulness course with Bangor University, a new initiative to contact staff who are new to the office, who live alone or who are first-time homeworkers, and virtual tea points and fitness sessions through desk yoga or group activities from home.

COVID-19 is likely to change how nearly every workplace operates. Social distancing and remote working have both their benefits and their challenges. What discussions has the Minister had with businesses and public sector workplaces on how they can adapt to ensure that the duty of care to their employees' well-being is not forgotten in any workplace setting, no matter how big or small, and how can the Welsh Government help to promote and share the good practice so that everyone has the opportunity to benefit?

Well, can I begin by thanking Jayne Bryant for the nature of the question? The mental health of the nation is not good right now, and that's to say the least. I don't think many people have experienced such a traumatic time outside bereavement or the break-up of a relationship. This is a major issue for the nation's health. We're utilising the economic contract to encourage more responsible business behaviour.

We went into coronavirus with hundreds of economic contracts in place. The number of economic contracts that we will have secured once we come out of the crisis will have increased by more than 1,000 per cent. As part of that contract—there are only four points to it—a business has to demonstrate how it is improving the mental health of its workforce. We've seen from those businesses that have signed up to the economic contract to date incredible creativity, innovation and responsibility in improving their workers' mental health. I'm keen to go on working in collaboration with organisations such as Mind Cymru to promote schemes such as Time to Change to ensure that, as we emerge from coronavirus, the well-being of our nation is at least as important a consideration as the wealth of our nation, and that the mental health of people across Wales is improved dramatically and swiftly as we come out of the pandemic.

Minister, I asked you—. Well, I've been trying to get answers since 6 April. We asked for a meeting with you on 10 May—we asked for a 15-minute slot during any time of the 24 hours. This is about play centres, which, for some reason, officials are not supporting—they're not being classified as leisure businesses. These businesses are going to go to the wall unless they're supported. So, the very simple question is: will you please ensure that play centres, which provide a really valuable function in our communities—will you ensure that play centres are supported, please?

Can I thank Neil McEvoy for his question? This is a question that's also been raised by others, particularly in regard to some of the soft play centres as well that exist and that are very popular. The economic resilience fund is applicable to play centres and the second round of the fund will, of course, be open to them as well.

Minister, can I thank you for meeting with me and Nick Thomas-Symonds MP recently to discuss the 200 proposed job losses at Safran in Cwmbran? The situation remains extremely worrying for the workforce there. I and Nick Thomas-Symonds MP are trying to get another meeting with the management of the company, so far without success. I wonder whether you would agree with me that, when communities are faced with substantial job losses, it is crucial that the leadership of companies engage both with elected representatives and with the trade unions they are members of, in this case Unite the Union. Can I also ask, when we're looking at funding for companies, going forward, when resources are so precious, what you will do to make sure that a good approach to social partnership and trade union working is incorporated into the requirements for those companies? Thank you. 

Can I thank Lynne Neagle both for her question and for the opportunity to discuss the situation at Safran in Cwmbran very recently, along with Nick? I would urge the company to meet with elected representatives without delay.

It's absolutely vital that, in a time of crisis, employers communicate clearly with their workforce and with elected Members and with the communities that they're based in in order to avoid unnecessary anxiety and, indeed, panic, because that's what I'm picking up in Cwmbran at the moment regarding future employment prospects. It's absolutely vital that engagement does take place in a meaningful and transparent way, and that involves as well the trade unions.

I can assure Lynne that, as part of our roll-out of the economic contract—I've already mentioned that mental health is part of the criteria for the economic contract—other elements of the contract concern fair work. And, of course, we set up the Fair Work Commission to make recommendations on how to improve standards of employment in Wales, and we'll be ensuring that, during the next iteration of the economic contract, we're more stretching in what we expect from employers in terms of engagement with trade unions and with the workforce in general, and that they take full responsibility for employees during downturns and during a crisis of the sort that we're experiencing right now.

The three groups of businesses that I wanted to ask you about include children's play centres, social enterprises and those small businesses that aren't registered for VAT and don't necessarily pay business rates, who really are the lifeblood of local economies and are the people that we need to invest in, both to maintain our social infrastructure and to ensure that they have the best possible chance to recover from the disruption we're witnessing at the moment. Can you confirm—and I think you already have in some of your answers today—that all three of these gaps that currently exist will be filled when you reopen the economic resilience fund?

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm pleased to be able to confirm that all three will be offered support, obviously provided that they meet the eligibility criteria. As sectors, they will be eligible to apply for funding, yes.

Thank you very much, Minister.

We now move on to a motion to suspend the Standing Orders and I call on the First Minister to move that motion—Mark Drakeford.

Formally, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Formally. Thank you. I have no speakers. Therefore, as indicated on the agenda, today's vote will be conducted in accordance with Standing Order 34.11. So, we will now move immediately to a vote. Each political group may nominate one member of the group to carry the same number of votes as there are members of the group. In the case of a political group with an Executive role, that nominee will carry the same number of votes as there are members of that group, plus any other members of the Government. Members who do not belong to a group or grouping will vote for themselves.

I now conduct the vote by roll call. I call for a vote on the motion to suspend Standing Orders, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. On behalf of the Labour group and the Government, Joyce Watson, how will you cast the 30 votes?

In favour.

In favour. Thank you. On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar, how do you cast the 11 votes?

For.

Sorry?

For. Support.

For. Thank you. Support. Thank you. On behalf of Plaid Cymru, Siân Gwenllian, how do you cast your nine votes?

In favour.

In favour. Thank you. On behalf of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless, how do you cast your four votes?

For. In favour.

In favour. Thank you. Gareth Bennett, how do you cast your vote?

Sorry, Dirprwy Lywydd. Abstain.

You're abstaining.

Yes.

Thank you. Neil Hamilton, how will you cast your vote?

In favour.

In favour. Thank you. Neil McEvoy, how do you cast your vote?

On behalf of the Welsh National Party, in favour.

In favour. Thank you. So, the result of that vote, then, is—and it requires a two-thirds majority to pass—in favour 56, abstentions one, and nobody against. Therefore, that motion to suspend the Standing Orders has been agreed.

I now intend to take a technical break before we move to the next debate, and so we will now break for 10 minutes.

The next item is a debate on COVID-19 'Unlocking our Society and Economy: Continuing the Conversation', and I call on the First Minister to move the motion—Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Last Friday, the Welsh Government announced our latest plans on how we can start to relax the rules in our society and our economy. Three weeks ago, we announced and published our framework for recovery, and both documents go hand in hand. We have had an ongoing conversation with the people of Wales to discuss what we should do and when. We are working with people in order to safeguard each and every one of us. We are making decisions in our own way—a model that we have established over a period of time. That means working in partnership with unions, with employers, with public service associations and all others who are working for the benefit of the people of Wales.

Llywydd, over the last eight weeks, the response from people across Wales has been outstanding. Our collective efforts have helped slow the spread of the virus and have helped the NHS to prepare and to respond. If, as a result of these efforts, the rate of infection continues to decline, a greater range of choices for unlocking restrictions will open up.

Our framework document of three weeks ago set out how we intend to make decisions about easing the stay-at-home restrictions. Last Friday's document takes us further. Our road map is based on a traffic-lights system. It sets out a series of changes that potentially could be made in a number of areas, including seeing friends and family, going back to work, shopping and reopening public services.

People are at the heart of our thinking. We know just how much everyone wants to see family and friends, and this is a key consideration for us. This isn't just a plan to get people back to work, important as that is, it is a plan for people too.

This road map doesn't signal dates, because changes will be made when the scientific and medical advice tells us that it is safe to do so, but it does show how we are moving carefully and cautiously into the red zone—the first steps on our journey of recovery. We will monitor the impacts of those steps really carefully, and, provided the virus remains under control, we will move towards the amber zone. In amber, there will be more signs of something like normality, and if our monitoring shows that we are still on top of the virus, we can begin the move into the green zone. In the green zone, life begins to look more like it was before coronavirus began, but not identical to it, because until we find a vaccine or effective treatment, coronavirus is with us for a long time to come.

Now, some things have already begun to unlock. Shops are opening for click and collect, recycling centres are beginning to reopen, and planning is taking place to see if library services can be resumed as well. Garden centres are opening, of course, with social distancing arrangements in place. Education Minister Kirsty Williams has set out her approach to schools, and more detail will be provided for other sectors as we work together with our partners in the trade unions, in businesses and in the wider public sector.

Llywydd, it is absolutely right that we debate our different perspectives on this, the most pressing set of circumstances we have faced since the establishment of devolution. But I do believe that, in this crisis, people in Wales look to all of us to come together where we can and to share a sense of our common interests. In that spirit, I am very pleased that the Government can support all but one of the amendments laid to today's motion. Llywydd, I'll return to all amendments in replying to the debate, but I do want to thank those parties who have laid them for the constructive spirit in which they have been drawn up, and for the positive contribution that they make to this debate.

Last week, the Government also published our test, trace and protect plan, which will be vital as we move out of lockdown. Any move towards resumption of more normal activities must go hand in hand with a viable plan for tracking and identifying any new cases and those hotspots as they may emerge. Last Friday's document is based similarly on the latest scientific advice. We will act carefully and cautiously in partnership with people, in a way that is right for Wales. That will always mean putting people's health first. 

Now, Llywydd, I have always said that we want to move together across the United Kingdom, because that is the best way forward for all of us. On Sunday, I met with Michael Gove, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and my Scottish and Northern Irish counterparts, to discuss issues around quarantining people from abroad. Yesterday, I met my devolved colleagues and the Mayor of London, again to continue our discussion, and a further meeting has been arranged between the devolved Governments and the UK Government for later this week. We are engaging actively with other administrations throughout this crisis, but we will, of course, make our decisions and exercise our responsibilities in the interests of Wales. 

Llywydd, I do need to stress that the virus remains a threat and will continue to be so even as we take steps towards greater normality. There is no risk-free future. The 2m social distancing rule remains in place, and we must all take those basic public health precautions, washing our hands carefully and often, for example. Travel should only be local, and it should only be essential. All of this is in place simply to go on reducing the risk of spreading coronavirus. In our two documents, we have set out a pathway towards making those vital decisions. We are required by law to review legislation and remove restrictions when they are no longer justified. There are choices to be made at every point in this path. The interests of all sections of our society need to be balanced, and this Government will always have particular regard for those who struggle under the disproportionate burden of disadvantage.

Now, we will have to make those decisions on a 21-day pattern, and we are now halfway through the latest three-week cycle. We will continue to be guided by the scientific advice and the advice of our chief medical officer, and those decisions will continue to be informed by the goals and the ways of working enshrined in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, put on the statute book by this Senedd.

Llywydd, there are those who urge relaxation of measures without regard to the consequences of doing so. This is the very opposite of the approach we are taking in Wales, and as set out in our road map. The Welsh Government will not take chances, and we will not act on whims. My message is one of continued solidarity in the face of this great threat to lives and to society—a solidarity demonstrated so steadfastly by individuals and communities right across Wales. We have all played our part, and together we can continue to protect one another and to prepare to unlock and to renew our nation. Diolch yn fawr. 

I have selected six of the nine amendments tabled to the motion, and in accordance with Standing Order 12.23(iii) I have not selected amendments 6, 7 and 8, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. I call now on Paul Davies to move amendments 1, 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Darren Millar—Paul Davies. 

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move the amendments tabled in the name of my colleague, Darren Millar. 

Whilst I appreciate that the Welsh Government has now published the steps it is intending to take in order to lead Wales out of the current pandemic period, I have to say from the outset that this has been a missed opportunity for the Welsh Government to provide some much-needed hope to the people of Wales. 

Now, if I can turn to our amendments—and I hope Members will consider supporting all of them as the thrust of these amendments is to constructively add to the motion of this debate—the first amendment calls for more collaboration with Governments across the UK. Now, the leader of the UK Labour Party has rightly called for a four-nations approach—an approach I've endorsed throughout the entire pandemic period. The COVID-19 virus knows no boundaries, and so it makes absolute sense that Governments at all levels should be working together to protect the people of the United Kingdom throughout this pandemic. 

Whilst the UK and Welsh Governments have worked together on issues, the divergence of some policies between Wales and England has left some people understandably confused and frustrated, and the reality is that there was far more understanding and clarity over Government guidance when the Governments' policies were more closely aligned. 

Now, I've made it clear that the Welsh Government's exit strategy should have been supplemented with concrete proposals and milestones by which the Government's progress could be assessed. This document doesn't offer the people of Wales any tangible detail that progress can be measured by and, instead, the exit strategy is effectively a list of consultation phases that the Welsh Government plans to initiate. There are no indicative timescales for the lifting of lockdown measures, and so individuals and businesses across Wales are no further forward in being able to start planning for life post lockdown. So, I can understand the sheer frustration felt by so many who had hoped that, last Friday, the Welsh Government would deliver a plan that they could follow with certainty. Ian Price, the director of the Confederation of British Industry Wales was right to say that, and I quote,

'Indicative timelines outlining when sectors and workplaces can come back online are also needed, so businesses of all shapes and sizes can quickly ramp-up essential restart planning and decision-making.'

Countries like Ireland, for example, have recognised the importance of timescales and provided them in their exit strategy. However, I accept that when the science changes, Governments may need to change course and, as a result, those timescales may then need to change. Now, the Welsh Government's road map does not include a comprehensive strategy for how and when restrictions may be eased. Indeed, the document itself confirms that specific detail on each label is still being developed with businesses, trade unions, local authorities, public service providers and others.

Now, moving forward, I believe the Welsh Government should be establishing taskforces within key ministerial departments to oversee the implementation of its exit strategy. In each portfolio area, Ministers should be considering how best to co-ordinate those taskforces and they should be set to work immediately. For example, the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales should be working with a dedicated taskforce to prepare businesses across Wales for reopening and to better understand the specific challenges that businesses may be facing in moving from one category to another. The Welsh Government is right to say that no two businesses are the same, and that's why establishing a taskforce is needed to ensure that the views of the business community are heard at each stage of its progress. Similarly, the Minister for Housing and Local Government should be establishing a taskforce to oversee the implementation of the exit strategy with public service providers and local authorities. 

Now, to avoid a significant second peak, the Welsh Government has made it clear that it's putting in place the infrastructure needed to manage future outbreaks of the disease via the test, track and protect strategy. Of course, for that to be realistically possible, local authorities across Wales will require a serious injection of cash to ensure that this widescale testing can actually be delivered. Not only are there significant resource implications for local authorities, but according to the Welsh Local Government Association, there are significant recruitment issues to consider as well. And so, perhaps in responding to this afternoon's debate the Welsh Government will give cast-iron assurances that its testing programme is capable of meeting the significant increase in community testing as well as confirming exactly how much the Welsh Government will be allocating to local authorities to enable them to carry out this testing.

Llywydd, the Welsh Government's road map doesn't provide a proper financial plan to support its delivery, and so there's no indication of how resources will be allocated to effectively see this plan through. Now, I know that a supplementary budget is on the way and I hope that, as well as the details the First Minister mentioned in his statement today, it will also include specific financial details regarding how the road map will indeed be delivered. And it's absolutely essential that those resource allocations firmly spell out how each portfolio area is not only limiting the impact of the virus on individuals, communities and businesses across Wales in the short term, but how public services and businesses will be able to implement the Welsh Government's exit strategy. 

So, with that, Llywydd, I hope Members will support our amendments to help ensure that Wales is as prepared as possible and is fully resourced to start moving us out of the lockdown. Thank you. 

I call on Adam Price to move amendments 4, 5 and 9, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I first of all thank the First Minister for his kind remarks about the spirit of the amendments? There was a tantalising reference there to the one amendment that the Government hasn't been able to accept. I hope it's not the amendment calling for support for the request, the unanimous request, by the four chief constables and the four police and crime commissioners for raising the fines for those that have broken the lockdown rules so that they can do their work of protecting people in our communities. 

Now, the first question, and the most important question of all, I think, in thinking about the next phase, is what we're trying to achieve. We really have a choice here, it seems to me, based on the strategies that other countries have followed—and there's reference in the document published by the Government to learning from other countries. We can adopt a suppression strategy to try and eliminate the disease, which is the approach that New Zealand and others have explicitly adopted, or we can try to flatten the curve, as it's come to be known, once more, with the main focus being trying to ensure the NHS isn't overwhelmed by a second or third wave. 

Now, we have asked the Government to clarify which of those two strategies it espouses, and it would be good to get clarity on that today, because I think that the language of the recovery and road map documents is a little ambiguous in some senses, because the strong emphasis on test, trace and isolate points in one direction, but in the document, for example, released on 24 April, one of the key metrics that has been set for evaluating relaxation measures is

'evidence that we can cope with the expected increase in healthcare needs for at least 14 days if the infection rate goes above 1 and the virus is spreading widely once again.' 

That sounds more as if it's pointing in the direction of managing the spread of the disease below a critical level, rather than trying to eliminate the disease wherever it re-emerges. 

The New Zealand approach means ending widespread community transmission before relaxing lockdown measures, and it means also, of course, rejecting the herd immunity approach. We had proposed two amendments on both those matters. They haven't been selected, but perhaps the First Minister, in responding, could state what the position of the Government is. 

Moving on to—. As well as ending community transmission first, we believe a second prerequisite for ending substantive lockdown measures is making sure that the contact, trace and isolate system is fully operational and a proven success. We have the pilots, but we need time to evaluate the pilots before confirming that they are working properly. And what would be good to know from the First Minister is: what does success look like? What level of the proportion of contacts do we need to be able to trace in order to control local outbreaks? Is it 50 per cent, is it 80 per cent, or 90? 

The emphasis within the Welsh Government's approach with the traffic lights is sectoral, and the UK Government, on the other hand, has a five alert-level system applied nationally. There is at least some potential for confusion here. One interesting suggestion is that the Joint Biosecurity Centre will produce rate-of-infection assessments at a very local level, and that could be used then to stop new local hotspots by re-imposing lockdown measures at a local level. Indeed, we've heard mayors in England like Andy Burnham calling for a more decentralised approach, which is also supported by the WHO. Does the Welsh Government see some potential in the next phase for that kind of localised approach?

And, finally, it's not just test and trace, of course, it's test, trace and isolate. The current position is that people with symptoms should isolate for seven days. The WHO recommend 14 days for people with symptoms, for quarantine, and that appears to be evidence-based, as viral shedding in some people can last longer than seven days. So, will the Government look at that and adopt it, based on the WHO's advice?

And, finally, could we also consider establishing central isolation quarantine points for people to isolate, for example, repurposed hotels? We know that the virus exploits overcrowded housing. We know that many people have caught it from a family member or housemates. Establishing these kinds of community facilities for quarantine has been key to eliminating the virus in Wuhan and parts of Italy, and many people would also feel reassured they were not putting family members at risk. So, could the Government, as we enter this new phase with test, trace and isolate, look at strengthening the 'isolate' element within the measures? 

Lynne Neagle. If you can wait for your microphone, Lynne. Can we hear you? No. Can you lift your—

Hello?

Oh, yes, now we can hear you.

Okay. Thank you, Llywydd, for the opportunity to make a brief contribution in this debate. It will be relatively brief, because I must admit this is not an entirely comfortable arena in which to be debating, with all the technology, et cetera.

I wanted to start by thanking the First Minister and the rest of the Government for the immense work that they are doing in this area, in particular, the core team of Ministers, Kirsty Williams, Vaughan Gething, Julie James and yourself, who I know have been very much at the centre of responding to this outbreak. I think the First Minister knows me well enough by now to know that I would not say those things if I didn't believe them to be true, but I have felt very reassured by the diligent, detailed and forensic approach you've taken to ensuring that we all remain as safe as we possibly can in these very difficult circumstances. As I've said to the First Minister in private meetings, there remains strong support for the lockdown in my constituency in Torfaen. So, I very much welcome the continued approach that has been taken by the Welsh Government.

I wanted to make a few points about principles that I feel are particularly important as we look at easing the lockdown. The first relates to equality issues. What we've seen with this virus is that although it doesn't discriminate in terms of who it attacks, I believe it is very clear that some of the poorest communities and the most vulnerable are susceptible to it, and I believe that very firmly has to be at the forefront of our minds as we consider easing the lockdown. I'd like to quote Professor Devi Sridhar, who is chair of global public health at Edinburgh university, who said yesterday: 

'What's clear is that wealth is the best shielding strategy for this virus, and from experiencing severe impacts.'

And I think that we need to be mindful of that as we go forward. 

I'd also like to raise the issues of funding. I'm sure the First Minister will have seen David Hepburn, the intensivist from Gwent, who has been very prominent in the media. One of the things that he has called for is for more funding to be directed to the worst-hit communities following this virus. And the First Minister will remember from 20 years ago the discussions we had about the Townsend formula, and I know too that, had that formula been fully implemented, Gwent, over many years, would have had more funding than we have received. So, I hope that that is something that we can look at going forward.

The other area that I think has to be a really prominent focus is that of children's rights. Children are not just massively impacted by this situation, but they are also much more voiceless than many other citizens. It is for that reason, and because of our commitment to children's rights in Wales, that I would like to see much more evidence of child rights impact assessments in taking these decisions. I'd like the Government to start showing their workings on an ongoing basis regularly as regards children.

The third principle I wanted to highlight, which the First Minister's already referred to, is that of partnership and co-production. I think that is vital going forward, and in particular I think a co-production approach with local government is absolutely crucial. Local government have been absolute stars of the show, as far as I'm concerned, in dealing with this virus. And it is crucial that we recognise that and ensure that they are fully involved in all the decisions that we take.

And I'd just like to close by saying that I think there are positives arising from this virus as well. I've seen them in terms of the approach to mental health—hearing about people who are engaging more with mental health services because virtual access suits them better, children and young people who've said that they value that approach, where they can get access to the digital technology. And I hope that, as we come through this pandemic, we can try and take the positives with us and build on them to make a better Wales going forward. Diolch yn fawr.

I'm pleased to be able to contribute to this debate. These are certainly unprecedented times. It's clearly vital that the correct balance is now struck between dealing effectively with the current pandemic whilst getting the economy moving again as swiftly as possible and protecting jobs and livelihoods. With that in mind, can I back those calls that have been made already for, as much as possible, a four-nations approach to this pandemic? I come from a border constituency, like a number of other AMs, and the virus doesn't recognise borders, so it's important, as was recognised, in fact, by the Welsh Government recently, that we do have a cross-border—as much of an integrated approach as possible.

We know there's going to be a supplementary budget in the near future, and this budget will be extremely important in making the relevant spending priorities and providing transparency. Those financial allocations must be sufficient to meet the needs of businesses and public service providers through this period of great uncertainty. I wonder if, in rounding up, the First Minister can update us on his discussions with local authorities at this time. Lynne Neagle has just mentioned the important role of local authorities in many of these areas. We know that council budgets are stretched at the best of times, and the current pandemic has put them under massive pressure. As we now look towards greater community testing, that burden will increase, so they need to know where they stand.

Can I just talk a bit about universities? Because, clearly, universities are going to be key to providing expertise for future employment and jobs, and to taking us out of this pandemic over the longer term. They are in a seriously difficult financial position. The Office for Budget Responsibility's outlook is worrying, so we really can't afford to make budget allocations that don't keep an eye on our university sector and look to future economic growth.

And the First Minister mentioned mechanisms in place for monitoring at the start. I'd be grateful if the Welsh Government could provide greater clarity on what those monitoring mechanisms are going to be over the weeks and months ahead.

Now, we've seen a number of blanket statements over recent times, such as there's going to be £11 million for those facing hardship as a result of the pandemic. As far as they go, a number of those statements say some good things, but, of course, as ever, it's important that we actually see action on the ground and we see incentives in place that really do move things forward. We need to see a particular support for our tourism industry, which has taken a massive hit. By its very nature, the tourism industry is seasonal, so, even if there's a lessening of the lockdown over the weeks and months to come, the season that delivers the revenue has been effectively lost, and the industry will not have the usual financial resources to invest over the winter period. So I'd like to see greater clarity in the framework being set forward by the Government of how the tourism industry is going to be supported. In my constituency, the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal is a major part of the tourism economy—not just the canal, but also the businesses along it, which are going to be affected. And a large number of people who use that canal are from overseas, so I imagine that they're not going to be coming back in droves any time in the near future. So, I think there's going to be more financial clarity needed there.

The Finance Minister said last week that she's seeking greater fiscal flexibility in terms of transfers between capital and revenue budgets and also borrowing—all understandable, but with that must come greater accountability and transparency. And as I said to the Finance Minister, the current UK budget deficit is expected to come in at over £300 billion, almost double where we were at the peak of the financial crisis over 10 years ago, so there must be a limit to the type of flexibility that can be expected. So it makes it even more important that existing resources are used wisely.

Fiscal devolution of taxes, such as land transaction tax and land disposals tax, mean that the Welsh Government revenues are going to take a massive hit with a fall in revenue. Now, I know that the fiscal framework agreement between the Welsh and UK Governments is designed to support the Welsh Government at difficult times like this, and I'd like to hear a bit from the First Minister and the Welsh Government on the extent to which that framework is going to be supportive of the Welsh economy.

In terms of getting chunks of the economy moving, the UK Government has moved to get the housing market moving—clearly, a huge and important part of the Welsh economy, like the rest of the UK. Estate agents are looking to the Welsh Government for support, so I'd like to see proposals in the Welsh Government framework for supporting the housing industry as soon as possible. 

I have received many—to come to a close, Llywydd—enquiries from constituents who are confused about the lockdown and different guidelines between Wales and England. As I said earlier, I think we need a four-nations approach as much as possible, but, where differences will exist, I think we need to see a drive to provide greater clarity to the public about what's permissible here. So, I wonder if the Welsh Government framework could put a much greater emphasis on explaining to the public where we are at the moment and the measures that are being put in place to make sure that we all come out of this pandemic crisis as swiftly and as safely as possible.

I wish to speak to two of the amendments, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian—amendment 4 with regard to supporting the police and crime commissioners and the chief constables in their wish for higher fines for breaches of the health regulations, and amendment 9, which talks about the need for a universal basic income as we move out of the lockdown.

I'd like to begin by commending the approach that the Welsh Government has taken. I think a more cautious and more sensible approach is certainly what I hear from my constituents across mid and west Wales that they believe is right. It's also what I hear from my friends and from my daughter's friends. We don't think it's safe—as a nation, we don't think it's safe to lift the lockdown too quickly. And while I hear what Nick Ramsay says about a four-nations approach and I know that that's what the First Minister and his colleagues seek to achieve, if the UK Government, acting as the Government of England, gets things wrong, then the First Minister is obviously, in my view, right to disagree.

I want to talk about the situation in mid and west Wales with regard to people's fears in terms of tourism kicking off again. And I need to say to the First Minister that my constituents across mid and west Wales are frightened. Many of them are lucky enough to live in parts of Wales where the R rate has remained really, really low and we really, really want to keep it that way. They also know that they are very lucky to live in some of the most beautiful communities and most beautiful places in these islands, and I feel proud to represent them. But this is not the time for people to be coming.

Now, the vast majority of our regular visitors to Wales, and to rural Wales from urban Wales as well—because this is not about Wales and England; this is about keeping the rural communities safe—are being respectful; they are staying away and we look forward to welcoming them back. But our police service are making it really clear to us that there is a small minority of people who are flouting those regulations. I think we would all agree, and I'm sure in this the First Minister would agree with me, that the approach the police service is taking in terms of educating and informing is the right one, and the vast majority of people, last weekend, who were confused because of the changes of regulation in England, which didn't apply in Wales in terms of being able to drive to take a walk, for example, were happy to turn around and go back. 

But the police are telling us that there is a small minority of people who simply appear not to care. There are police officers in the north of my region who are telling me that they have seen repeat offenders—people who have driven repeatedly, not one weekend, but weekend after weekend, back into the area, because the fines just simply don't put them off—they don't provide a deterrent. Now, I know that this Welsh Government prides itself rightly on listening to people on the front line, and when we are in a situation where the police and crime commissioners—all four of them—and the chief constables—all four of them—tell us that, in dealing with that recalcitrant small minority, their hands are tied behind their back because the punishments available are not sufficiently severe to act as a deterrent, I really, really ask the First Minister to explain to me why he won't listen to them, and, more importantly, to explain to my constituents and to the police officers who have to implement these polices, why he appears not to be listening to them. I've heard what he's said; I don't understand his reasoning.

But I turn to an area where I hope that we can agree, and that is the idea of moving in the post-COVID era to a universal basic income. Now, this is an idea that I've been advocating for a very long time, and it has seen sometimes like a romantic idea that would be nice at some point in the future, but we have, of course, seen the Spanish Government introduce this. In response to the crisis, we must commend the efforts of Welsh Government and UK Government in terms of supporting people's livelihoods, but, as we've just heard in the statement from the economy Minister, that's left us with a very complex picture. It's left people confused about what they're eligible to and what they're not eligible to, and it has left some people, through no fault or through no intention, I don't think, on the part of the Government, without support.

We talk a lot about building back better, about living our lives in a different way, about perhaps being able to learn some positives about what we've all had to live through in this crisis. And we, in Plaid Cymru, believe that now is the time—and we accept that, with the physical settlement as it is, it would have to be at a UK level, but that we would aspire in the longer term for Wales to be able to do this ourselves—for our nation to provide all citizens with a basic income so that they know that they are safe.

Now, where this has been introduced, there is no evidence whatsoever that it has stopped people from wanting to work, and, where it's been piloted, it's had the opposite effect. It's enabled people to work in different ways. It's enabled them to take risks—entrepreneurial risks—that they might otherwise be afraid to do. It's enabled them, for example, to work in the creative sector, where their contribution is huge but where the pay is low. It's enabled people to provide a better balance between work and family life, and it's enabled people to take on civic responsibilities like doing unpaid public work as a community councillor, for example.

We really need to be thinking differently now, and I think most of us, though perhaps not all of us in this Chamber, would acknowledge that the current benefits system is unfair, is divisive. It's also very expensive to implement, very expensive to police. I've lost track of the number of people who've never come across the benefits system but who are now having to in the last few weeks and who've said to me, 'I cannot live on this', when they're talking about the level of universal credit. And, yet, the truth is, as the First Minister knows, that there are many of our citizens that have no choice.

I hope that perhaps, in this greater understanding where more people who perhaps would never have expected to find themselves in economic hardship, find themselves in difficulties, where we are all rightly praising a lot of very low-paid staff who could also be helped by a universal basic income, like carers, one of the good things that will come out of this dark time is a stronger sense of social solidarity and a chance for us to live our lives in a different way. A citizen-based universal income that was available to all of us and, for those of us who didn't need it, would be repaid through the tax system, would be the best and clearest indication of that new social solidarity and would put everybody on a firm footing to enable them to really be part of the process of building back better. Diolch yn fawr. 

I'm grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate today, and I can confirm that my group will support the motion as it stands. 

There is no issue to take with public health being at the forefront of any plan to return to some semblance of normality, no issue to take with acknowledging the efforts of the general public in observing the rules, and every support for the gratitude expressed to all key workers who have kept the country going. 

We can also note the publication of the document that is the subject of this debate. This did feel like it was dragged out of the Welsh Government only after much canvassing by the Conservative group in the Senedd. While we can note this document, that's about all we can do, as it doesn't really tell us much at all. We, here in the Senedd, must also acknowledge that the majority of the Welsh public will not have read it cover to cover. I have, and it raises more questions than it answers. Time won't allow me to go through each one, so I'll limit it to three, and these are in accordance with the issues raised by my constituents.

In the early days of the outbreak, there was talk of measures to flatten the curve, suggesting the objective was to slow the numbers of those contracting the virus and, in doing so, to enable the NHS to cope. So, the original purpose of the lockdown was never to lessen the total number of cases, just to make the number, at any one time, less than our intensive care unit capacity. And the slogan was still, and is in Wales, 'Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.' In this document, you state that we can only move out of the green phases and back to some sort of normality—my word—once a vaccine or effective treatment is in place. Can I ask you when exactly did the scope creep from flattening the curve to finding a cure?

And while I do not seek to dismiss the good intentions here, I would also point out that we haven't found a cure for winter flu, the common cold or cancer, and they all kill too. We need to see some sort of balance between the lives at risk from COVID and the lives at risk from lockdown too. Monumentally difficult, but monumentally important; I'm not pretending there is an easy option.

In the document, you mention more than once a four-nations approach, and yet your Government has now diverged from the UK Government's approach, and Wales is subject to more stringent measures from those living in England. You mention the advice of the Chief Medical Officer for Wales, the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies and your technical advisory group. Considering the close working relationships between the groups and the four nations, what was the difference in advice that led to different approaches being taken by the four nations?

I will turn now to public health. We can all agree that this should be the cornerstone of the considerations for easing restrictions. I see much communication activity by health boards, encouraging GP visits during this time as visits are down, accident and emergency department activity is vastly reduced, and elective surgery has been cancelled or delayed. Most worryingly, cancer referrals are down, and we all know how important early detection and treatment is in cancer cases. And the toll on the nation's mental health is extremely concerning, with both anxiety and depression on the rise.

The health case for beginning to ease the lockdown grows stronger by the day, so, in dealing with COVID-19, I would also like to seek reassurances from you that we are not stockpiling other public health issues, like an increase in cancer deaths due to late diagnosis, relatively minor ailments turning into life-threatening illnesses for want of treatment, and that the mental health of the nation will continue to get the care it deserves. We know the massive economic harm that lockdown is causing, but it is also causing massive health harms, and while I commend the health service for coping with everything that's been thrown at it, I do fear that we are saving many other health-related matters indeed for later.

After nine weeks and counting, the public is tired. We must see some sort of light at the end of the tunnel and of the lockdown tunnel here in Wales. Thank you very much.

Huw Irranca-Davies.

I think I'm going to need to pause you. We can't hear you at this point. No, we still have a problem. Say something again. No. I'll go to Mick Antoniw, and I'll come back to you.

Can you hear me?

Yes, you pressed something, there—that worked. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Thank you for a few moments to contribute to this debate. First of all, I'd like to take as my keystone for this contribution a word that Paul Davies, the leader of the Welsh Conservative group in the Senedd, used earlier on in reference to this, which is the matter of hope. He said that people need hope through milestones and timescales. Actually, I'm not sure that that is correct. What people need is hope through seeing a Government that takes a careful, evidence-led, considered and cautious approach to easing the lockdown, whilst watching the behaviour of this virus that is still out there and that we still haven't seen the back of and won't for some time.

So, rather than hope coming from arbitrary milestones and timescales that we see, as in England at the moment, unraveling every few days, it's actually the confidence and hope that people get from looking at a Government that says, 'The first priority is public safety. We're going to do this together. We're going to work through the difficult choices here together and we're going to ease our way out, but we're only going to ease our way out on the basis that if the virus flares again across the nation or flares again in localities or regions, we will have the measures in place that allow us to stamp down on it once again.'

Now, that's where hope does come from, and hope comes from the people of Wales; the citizens; the businesses; the charities; schoolchildren and grandparents; anglers; football players knowing that their Welsh Government is not going to set arbitrary milestones and timescales, but it will actually follow the evidence and it will set—as it has done with this traffic light system—a road map of the decisions that we need to make in a timely manner to lift restrictions as we can do it safely.

And hope is actually moving at a pace that matches our capacity to identify and shut down new outbreaks of the disease with the test, trace and protection measures being in place. Hope comes from that calm and cautious and considered approach being adopted by the Welsh Government that is realistic and focused, that doesn't set out to be in any way showy or unremittingly overpromising or upbeat. It's realistic and says, 'We can do this; we can ease these restrictions, but in a cautious manner.' And it is an approach that works with people, as set out in this document, with employees and employers and with unions, with parents, with teachers and children and young people, listening to them as well to find those safe, practical and timely ways in which to ease restrictions, and not some sort of arbitrary diktat that Ministers then have to retreat from. 

Hope is also, I have to say, letting families know that there will be a safe way soon in which they can see family members, perhaps in a limited way at first, in the open air—one family member, perhaps, at first—but that if people comply and we do not see a resurgence of the virus, that this could be, indeed, extended when the evidence says it is safe.

Hope is easing the restrictions in a smart way; capturing the opportunities for outdoor exercise like walking and cycling; building on the renewed enthusiasm of people for these most basic but enjoyable of activities; developing, if you like, a more Swedish or a more Nordic way of activity here in our beautiful outdoor playground, which it normally is, which is Wales, so that as we emerge from lockdown, we're more active as a society, more outdoorsy, and we can tackle the several diseases linked with a sedentary lifestyle, which are harming and killing our people every year and which have a doubly pernicious effect on the poorest and the most disadvantaged in society. 

Hope is also, as in this document, being honest with the Welsh people that the new normal is not the old normal, and certainly not until a safe and efficacious vaccine is brought forward, and even then, the way we live, work and travel and build social and economic relationships will be different.

And my final point is the hope that all Governments and Parliaments and administrations of the UK, including the Executive in London—as a UK Cabinet Minister referred to our Government here—they can all move in lockstep as we ease the constraint of lockdown, but this does depend on the willingness of UK Ministers to convene those discussions with the nations and the regions of the UK, including the large metropolitan mayors in England. The First Minister made a memorable phrase, which has now become a popular meme to a soundtrack, 'Such discussions would need to be on a regular, reliable rhythm.' Can he give us some hope that this regular, reliable rhythm of engagement, which requires the UK Prime Minister to commit to this, might now indeed happen? As the catchy meme ended: 'Give us a call, Boris Bach.'

Can I first put on record my deepest sympathy for all those who've lost their lives as a result of COVID-19? I can't imagine what many of the families and friends of those individuals are going through right now, but we owe it to them and I think we owe it to the key workers who are caring for them and those others that are keeping our economy working, our country functioning at the moment, to make sure that we get the lifting of these restrictions, these considerable restrictions on their lives, lifted in a way that is safe and will not needlessly risk people's lives. And I think it's important also that we get the balance right between, yes, saving individual lives, but also saving livelihoods too. And I've been impressed, frankly, by the levels of support that have emerged from both the UK and the Welsh Governments to support people's livelihoods as well as their lives during this pandemic so far.

I have been concerned about the recent drifting apart from a four-nation approach in respect of the lockdown. We know that all four nations have access to the same scientific evidence, so, understandably, members of the public are contacting their Members of the Welsh Parliament, asking why there is a different approach in Wales, and sometimes it's very difficult to explain why there has been a different approach, given that it is the same scientific evidence. It effectively leaves it down to some of the political decisions that are made by Ministers in accordance with their own judgment. And of course, we're all entitled to use our own judgment on these things after considering the evidence, but I think the further we drift apart from a UK-wide approach across the four nations, the more difficult it will be—as Nick Ramsay quite rightly said—to communicate those differences with the public and expect people to abide by them.

People are envious sometimes of the freedoms that people enjoy elsewhere in the UK at the moment, to be able to travel to meet family members in a way that they're not yet able to in Wales. I think we've got to think carefully about how we can safely lift some of these restrictions in a way that is compatible with the scientific evidence, that still protects people's lives, but also helps families to get back together, helps loved ones to see one another, helps to get society beginning to open itself back up again, and of course, where possible, gets the economy functioning again. Because of course, the longer that we have greater levels of restriction, particularly on our economy here in Wales, then the less competitive we will be with other parts of the country that perhaps are loosening some of those restrictions.

We've already heard about the potential impact on the property market at the moment, but just consider the tourism industry too, which Helen Mary Jones was referring to. When you look at our tourism industry, it is incredibly important in many parts of the country—including in my own constituency—but if we don't lift restrictions on the tourist industry at the same time as the lifting of restrictions in England, Scotland or Northern Ireland, there is a potential that those people who would have chosen to come to Wales on their holidays will decide to go elsewhere, and the lack of level playing field could cause us here to have less of a competitive edge and give an advantage to industries in other nations within the UK. I don't want to see that, for the sake of holiday caravan parks, hotels and the important tourist attractions here in north Wales and around my constituency. I want to make sure that there's a lifting at the same time, where possible, in order for them to continue to be able to operate successfully.

I think that Paul Davies's point about timescales is incredibly important. I listened carefully to what Huw Irranca-Davies had to say, but it's not true to say that people are playing loose and fast, if you like, with people's lives. As I say, people are considering the same scientific evidence and if you can set a tentative date—and that's all that the UK Government has done is put tentative dates in the diary to say, 'We hope to be able to do these things by these dates if the science says it's safe to do so, if the rate of infection, the R rate, and the rate of transmission have come down to a certain level.' We have none of those indicators in the document that the Welsh Government's given to us. There's absolutely nothing in terms of the conditions that must be met in order to move from red to amber and green by industry, or by sector rather, and I think that that is something that people are crying out for, if they are to see how we can inch our way out of this particular pandemic. So, I would urge you, First Minister, to really consider whether it is possible to put some of those conditions into the document in a way that is easy for people to see whether the tests can be met in order to move things up in terms of lifting that lockdown. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Siân Gwenllian. If you'd wait for the microphone, Siân Gwenllian. Try again.

Thank you, Llywydd. The establishment of a robust test, tracing and isolating system for all aspects of COVID have to be at the heart of any plans for lifting the restrictions, including the reopening of schools. The public need very clear messages about the process, and we need robust arrangements in place for the isolation period, as well as appropriate arrangements so that people can isolate away from their homes where necessary. Along with that, we need detailed data about the epidemic in each local authority area down to ward level.

Reopening our schools in a staged manner will be reliant on the success of the test, trace and isolate strategy. Unless pupils, parents and staff in our schools have confidence in that system, then it will be hugely difficult to convince them to return to school. Even if all the necessary measures are in place—the issues discussed in the education Minister's decision framework—unless there is confidence in the testing system, then reopening schools will be very difficult indeed. One must only look at the huge argument that's ongoing in England on this issue, and I'm now very doubtful as to whether the schools will reopen there on 1 June. The unions are entirely right in insisting that an effective testing and isolation system should be in place before the reopening of those schools, and that has shown the folly of placing a particular date on this and then finding that the important elements in order to lift restrictions haven't been delivered.

The careful approach of the Welsh Government to reopening schools, as compared to the unplanned rush of the Tories, is to be welcomed therefore. It's not clear yet what the role of children is in transmitting the virus, and there are a number of contradictory reports, so we have to be very guarded on that point, and we need to be careful in the steps that we take in reopening schools. But, we also need to be highly aware of the damage done by the closure of schools. The virus period has shown how important our schools are for the well-being of very many children, and it is heartbreaking for me to think about those children who aren't receiving support as a result of this virus. Some children are being abused during lockdown, without being able to turn to their schools for assistance. Young carers are under huge pressures without the respite provided by schools, and there are thousands of children with learning difficulties who are losing that additional support and the routine that is provided by our schools. And the longer the schools remain closed, then the greater that attainment gap will become—it will grow; there is no doubt about that. There are huge differences already, and it will get worse. So, I would today like to hear from the First Minister that the Government will give a clear focus on supporting those who are being left behind because of the closure of our schools.

In planning for the next phase, we must also introduce strong mitigating steps for the transition period, the long transition, facing us before everyone is back full-time in our schools. We must make all efforts to engage with the large cohort of those who are described as reluctant learners, those who don't engage fully with their education even at the best of times, but who are now being left behind because of circumstances beyond their control.

We need to ensure that every child has contact with the internet and has the appropriate technology. Every school needs to maintain regular contact with every pupil, encouraging them to use the online resources available. And crucially too, we need live distance learning. This does have to happen across Wales. We need clear encouragement from the Welsh Government. It should be an expectation that every school presents lessons via live streaming as the most effective way of garnering the interest of those learners who are being left behind at the moment. So, I very much hope that you can give full consideration to these issues. 

To conclude, Llywydd, I think, and I think we all believe, that education is a fundamental human right. The Government must lead and must insist that the best practice happening across Wales is replicated in all schools and all classrooms during this virtual time, and that all possible efforts should be made to maintain quality education for all, but particularly those who need most support in the context of COVID-19.

When I call Rhianon Passmore—just to say that I'm going to need shorter contributions from now on if I'm going to get anywhere near calling all the Members who've indicated that they want to speak. Rhianon Passmore.

Diolch, Llywydd.

Yes, carry on.

Thank you. New figures announced yesterday by the Office for National Statistics, which includes fatalities in all settings, show that up to 8 May there have been 1,852 deaths related to the virus in Wales, and that is 1,852 families that have been devastated. So, I firstly wish to place on the record my appreciation, as the Member of the Senedd for Islwyn, and my sincere thanks for the heroic efforts of the men and women of the national health service, serving on that front line. They, along with all care and critical workers, continue to ensure that the communities of Islwyn function, and Wales continues to demonstrate that there is such a thing as society.

So, as political representatives of the Welsh people, we look to the future and how Wales can move forward safely and proactively as we seek to function more fully as a society together. I wish to welcome the Welsh health Secretary's comments that Wales will take a deliberately cautious approach in unlocking the lockdown measures with the next review to be held on 28 May. It is right that human lives are paramount and not ill-judged haste. As Members know, as a lifelong socialist, I believe that our public policy actions must and should be governed by the principles and values of social justice.

It is important that we facilitate further activities, yes, but only as it is evidenced safe to do so, with outside activities and other solitary sports that allow people to recommence whilst fully observing common sense and social distancing, and enjoyment of visiting garden centres in the fresh air and other outside activities. We do know that the virus dislikes sunlight and being outside.

Equally and fundamentally, as a Welsh Labour Government, we remain committed and dedicated, as we always have been, to ensuring that those poorer and more vulnerable members of our communities—who are often living, as has been said, in smaller accommodation, often without large gardens, often cramped, or in flats without outside space—are and will be able to experience greater liberty for mental as well as physical health. We know and have heard again today that the virus disproportionately impacts on the poorest in our society.

We also know the dangers of the hidden pandemic within this global pandemic, namely women and their children, majoritively but not solely by any means, who are now forced to live under lockdown rules with controlling and abusive partners who are able to remorselessly exploit Government rules for their own invidious advantage. So, if this is you or someone you know, you must please say. You do not have to suffer, and help and support is available to you right now.

Llywydd, the First Minister re-articulated today how Welsh Government's actions are governed by the science. We are all longing to see the day where restrictions on meeting people from other households outdoors will be eased. We do know that the virus is very likely to decay very quickly a few minutes outdoors in air and on surfaces exposed to sunlight. And we also know of the very strong desire for grandparents to see grandchildren and vice versa. This is not felt just in Islwyn, but beyond. But we all know that timing must be right.

So, as the First Minister stated, COVID-19 thrives on chains of human contact. The lockdown and the new normal must seek to limit those changes, otherwise we fear, based on scientific evidence, the virus will simply spread and spike again. This is simply what Wales's lockdown restrictions are trying to negate. At all costs, we must now stop the exponential growth of an invisible killer. What is rushed in law is not good law, and with this pandemic, the same principles apply.

Finally, Llywydd, we also need, I believe, to begin to formulate a legacy programme for some hopeful good, as has been stated by others today, to come from this dreadful and tragic pandemic. In Wales we need to consider, as we have, a new way, new cultures of working, travelling, procurement, organisation, education, and climate management, but mostly how the most vulnerable in our society, whether they are children or adults, can be better safeguarded and aided in times of good as well as the bad times they are experiencing now. Would the First Minister agree that there will be green shoots of great potential?

And as the First Minister also put it—

You'll need to bring your contribution to a close now.

Thank you. So, I would just like to reiterate that I am extremely proud of the people of Islwyn for everything that they have done in this time of struggle, and I know that our Welsh Government are working in partnership, cross-party, and that with strong social partnership, we will build together a brighter future. Thank you.

Thank you. Mohammad Asghar.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. After more than seven weeks of restrictions, the United Kingdom Government recently announced measures to ease the lockdown in England. This easing has been widely welcomed as it marks a significant milestone on the road to the return of normality. The United Kingdom Government strategy offers and sets out a clear vision for the future.

In contrast, the Welsh Government has produced a document that is vague and offers little clarity for the people of Wales. Instead of outlining a clear timetable for the easing of restrictions, it lacks the details vital to provide the confidence that people and the businesses desperately need in Wales. By not working in collaboration with the rest of the United Kingdom to develop a clear, consistent approach in easing restrictions, the Welsh Government has chosen to indulge in party-political point scoring. The result has been confusion about what can and cannot be done, particularly for constituents in south-east Wales living in close proximity to the border.

The border from Chepstow to Chester is a pretty long one, and the Minister must realise that in England, people are allowed to meet one person from another household outdoors, if they remain 2m apart. I wonder, with a 100 mile-long border, how people—[Inaudible.]—and everything can be stopped. Households can also drive a distance to destinations such as parks and beaches. However, they cannot travel to Wales, even if the border is a short distance away. People in Wales are confused and dismayed that what is permitted in England is not allowed in Wales.

Coronavirus does not respect race, gender, age or personal qualities, but the Welsh Government appears to have a fixation with the border and it is determined to be different. The difference of approach is almost clearly exposed in their approach to the housing market. This strategy document only contains a pledge to consult on guidance in relation to housing and construction. In England estate agents, removal firms and surveyors are among the essential housing industry services given the green light to go ahead and go back to work. Buyers and renters are allowed to move homes, and estate agents can now reopen with strict social distancing guidelines in place. In addition, new-home developers can reopen show homes, while local councils have been encouraged to support extended working hours at construction sites for the extra time it takes to implement safe social distancing measures. The resumption of work will play a major part in helping the economy recover, as well as delivering the houses they need. In Wales the housing market remains shut.

Presiding Officer, non-essential retailers in England will be able to open, in phase 1, on 1 June, if they follow social distancing guidelines. Pubs, restaurants, hairdressers, hotels, cinemas and places of worship will open from 4 July at the earliest as long as they implement social distancing measures. Clear, sector-specific guidance is essential to ensure adherence to current social distancing and hygiene guidelines if the restrictions on shops and services are to be lifted in a controlled manner that prioritises activities and services having the lowest risk of transmission.

The Welsh Government has not succeeded in publishing any evidence to support its current strategy and to inform businesses how to achieve COVID-19 secure status to allow them to reopen within the current guidelines. This can only hinder and delay the Welsh businesses as they struggle to recover. Thank you, Presiding Officer.

Neil Hamilton. If you can just pause whilst your microphone is turned on. Neil Hamilton.

Thank you, Llywydd. Well, the First Minister, like all the Governments of the United Kingdom, says that his policy will be based upon the science, but what do we mean by 'science' in this context? It's not medical science. We're talking about statistical modelling, and nobody thinks that econometricians and economic modellers are scientists, so why should we think that statistical modellers in the field of the medication have any more credibility? After all, the UK Government's strategy has been founded upon the study of Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, a man who famously lost his job because, rather than practice social distancing, he was practising one of the more extreme forms of social proximity. His track record is actually very poor. He was the one who said that the BSE outbreak would cause us to lose 150,000 people who would be dying from contracting it. In fact, the actual number in the event was 200. Nobody knows what's the basis of Professor Ferguson's modelling; it hasn't been peer-reviewed. So, I would certainly counsel caution in treating that as science.

An alternative is the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford, which has said that beyond cyclical theories about influenza, we know little about whether pandemics follow distinctive patterns at all and making absolute statements of certainty about second waves is unwise.

Of course, countries that have begun to relax their lockdown like Germany have experienced no such resurgence as a second wave, and even more interestingly—I was pleased that Huw Irranca-Davies mention Sweden in his contribution—Sweden has had no lockdown enforced by law at all, and what's been the experience of Sweden? The infection rate in Sweden is 3,000 cases per million. In the UK, it's 3,700 cases per million. Our infection rate in Britain, in spite of our total lockdown and the economic price that we've had to pay for it, is greater than in Sweden. Looking at the death rate as well, that's higher in the United Kingdom than it is in Sweden. The deaths per million in Sweden are 371, in the United Kingdom, they are 521, almost 50 per cent higher than in Sweden. The infections in the United Kingdom are about 0.4 per cent of the total population. In Sweden it's 0.3 per cent.

So, there's no actual evidence that the lockdown has made as much difference as is claimed for it. Of course, it's difficult to make international comparisons because the way statistics are collected differs, and also the social and psychological characteristics of different countries also differ. But when you consider the huge economic and social costs that we are bearing for the Government's response, not just in Wales but also throughout the United Kingdom, I really do think that we ought to have a greater sense of proportion. Mandy Jones, I thought, asked some very important questions, and so did Adam Price in his speech earlier on also. What are we hoping to achieve from this? Mandy Jones asked a very pertinent question, I think: are we trying to just flatten the curve or are we trying to stop the infection spreading? Well, if the choice is the latter, then the lockdown is going to continue for a very, very long time indeed.

The Swedish economy is forecast to contract by about 2 per cent as a result of its response to the crisis. In the United Kingdom, it's going to be anything between 15 and 30 per cent—a fall that is as great as anything that we suffered in the 1930s in the great depression, and that's going to have an impact on public services, not least the national health service. So, we really need to do all that we can to get the economy moving again. In Sweden, what they've said is that people should be socially responsible, and a third of people have avoided going to their workplace, and daily restaurant turnover has fallen by 70 per cent. But Swedes are voluntarily adhering to the guidance rather than having to be forced to. And what's the result of all that in Sweden? Fewer ICU beds now occupied, and the number of patients in intensive care in Stockholm has dropped by 40 per cent. The daily death toll flatlined in the second half of April and has been declining ever since. The famous R number is 0.85 in Sweden, and it's anything between 0.7 and 1 in the United Kingdom. So, our experience is broadly very, very similar. But the economic price that we are going to pay in this country is vastly greater than is going to be paid in Sweden.

Of course, we must behave in a sensible way. For the vulnerable parts of the population—the elderly and those with underlying health conditions—then, there ought to be isolation, and social distancing is sensible for everybody in these circumstances. Our problem is that our policy has been too little and too late in the things that should have been done, and now we're extending for too long the things that have no real beneficial effect. So, I would counsel the First Minister, without being too specific about how the traffic light system is going to be operated in practice, that he should err on the side of being bold, as I said to him last week, rather than being timid. Because there is no evidence that the health risks that are going to be run are anything like the economic and other risks flowing from it, which will have an ongoing effect in the future and will lead to other deaths as well for other causes, as Mandy Jones pointed out.

There's a philosophical quandary thrown up by this debate—how can we unlock a door without the key? Surely, the key to unlocking our society and moving out of lockdown is to have a contact tracing system in place, to have adequate stocks of PPE and to have the best reliable measures to support and give confidence to the public. Regrettably, in too many ways, the key is still missing here, and the door is jammed.

I welcome the Welsh Government's paper, but I think the Government needs to do more to acknowledge the injustices in society exposed by the lockdown. The past couple of months haven't been the same for everyone. For people able to work from home and who have gardens, this time has been disruptive, but manageable. But for people unable to work from home, lockdown has meant being exposed to dangers without adequate protection. For older people living alone, it has meant acute loneliness, and for young families living in flats with no outside space, it's meant day after day of climbing the walls. Any path out of lockdown needs to prioritise helping the people who've struggled most in this crisis. We must show compassion and resolute support to the people who need it, and at the same time, we need to show firmness to the selfish minority who are deliberately ignoring the rules—the people who insist on driving to Pen-y-Fan and Pembrokeshire. For any rule to work there has to be a deterrent, and the First Minister has to show leadership here and increase the fines.

To set us on the right track, surely we need co-operation from the UK Government to make clear when rules apply only to England. We need an approach to eliminate the virus, like in New Zealand, not maintaining dangerous levels of transmission, and we need flexibility so that localities can re-impose lockdown if outbreaks emerge. Red can't turn to amber without the danger of a car crash being removed first.

Llywydd, we have to also address the hidden harms that have been exacerbated by this crisis—people in abusive relationships, those with mounting debt, even those whose non-COVID medical conditions have worsened during the crisis. Our path out of lockdown has to put them at the forefront of any considerations—the indirect injuries and distress undergone in homes in every street across Wales.

We've learned a lot about COVID-19 these past few weeks. One of the most shocking things is that it is aggravated by poverty. Our path out of lockdown must address this poverty and not ignore it, or else it would be as good as saying that there are some lives that are more expendable than others. We have to prioritise well-being. Reopening workplaces without easing restrictions at the same time on some elements of social life could look like prioritising the economy over the well-being of people, and a rush to reopen schools without easing the ability of children to see their grandparents could look like prioritising league tables over a right to family life. A lockdown can only work with the consent of the people. Easing it requires the key of track and trace, and a plan that puts well-being first. 

So, in closing, Llywydd, I'd say yesterday the health Minister conceded that there will need to be an inquiry into how the Welsh Government has managed some elements of this crisis. I hope that that inquiry's scope will be wider than only looking at PPE and testing. It should consider the structural faults in society that are the result of long-term policy decisions that have resulted in people at the wrong end of the inequality spectrum paying a disproportionate price for poverty that isn't their fault, often with their lives. 

I have to reiterate, we as a group support much of what is contained in this statement and welcome this debate and the opportunity it gives to add, cross-party, to this vitally important discussion. But it has to be said, the Government's statement is rather short on detail. I want to concentrate on the economic elements of this statement and the different approach taken by this Government to that of the UK Government. 

Whilst I understand the Welsh Government's desire for caution, one has to ask the question: could most of its concerns be alleviated if we work closely with employers to ensure that any employees returning to work will do so in as safe an environment as possible? The UK Government is now encouraging some workers in England to return to work, but it must be understood that the underlying law has not changed as far as work is concerned. This law, the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, came into effect on 26 March. This made it an offence for a person to leave their house to go to work, unless that work cannot reasonably be done from home. This rule has not changed.

The administration of public health is, of course, devolved to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, so this has allowed the Governments in the three nations to retain their own lockdown rules, and they have said that they are not yet following the UK Government's approach of encouraging more workers to go to work. However, there seems to be some indication of when Welsh Government will allow some form of return to work—or there needs to be some indication on returning to work for those who are unable to work from home, particularly the self-employed. And there must be a clear set of rules that will govern them when they do return. 

There is some confusion about the rules that apply to businesses in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. As public health is devolved, businesses in these nations will need to operate in accordance with the relevant devolved lockdown regulations. Meanwhile, health and safety law is not devolved to Scotland and Wales. Ultimately, employers must undertake their own risk assessments that take account of all available guidance, which will include the UK Government's 'Working safely during coronavirus (COVID-19)' guidance and the public health guidance issued by the devolved administrations. Given these complications, it is essential that the Government gives some sort of indication of how lockdown restrictions will be lifted in order to give the business community the opportunity to conform to all of these—sometimes disparate—rules. Thank you, Llywydd. 

I've heard some rather disparate opinions here this afternoon, but I'm obviously going to speak in support of the Government, and I'm really proud to be part of a group—the ruling group in Wales—where all the feedback that I get is in praise of the calm, considered approach to help keep people safe in Wales; to help people actually come through an unprecedented situation where we have a virus that is lurking around us. And we cannot see it, we cannot feel it, we cannot touch it, but one thing we do know is that we cannot, at this stage, cure it either. 

So, I have listened intently this afternoon, and Paul Davies accuses us of not giving any hope. I have to, obviously, refute that, because I read from his statement that hope, in his case, means blindly following a reckless UK Government. He also calls for collaboration and yet, we've seen the UK Government making an announcement to open schools in June in England without any consultation, of course, with his English colleagues who are supposed to implement those changes. So, I think it's somewhat difficult to have collaboration with a UK Government when they can't even collaborate with the local governments within their own borders. 

I have heard an awful lot, again, about the denying of science, and let's not take any heed, of course, of the projections. I'm not surprised, of course, that Neil Hamilton did that, because he denies the very science that tells us that we have climate change going on around us, so, at least he's persistent in that. But what I do want to discuss here today is giving hope back to people, is actually saying to them that you can trust a Government that will take a careful, considered approach to help you, and we'll do that, as has been mentioned in the document, by valuing all people, those people who are now at the front line delivering services that we all value and we go out every Thursday night and clap, quite rightly. We won't refer to those people as 'low skilled' and, therefore, undervalue them—that's exactly the conversation that happened in Westminster on Monday night when we were talking about migrant labour in the NHS. We won't do that in Wales, and we won't do it to be different; we will do it simply because we actually do value those people. And when we come out of this, we will carry on valuing those people with the social partnerships, the contract, that will ensure that all conversations for people to return safely to the workplace will have all the players around the table. That means that those people who have kept this nation going through the hardest, the most difficult of times, will remain valued. 

That is why I'll be supporting this today, because that social contract, that social partnership, is exactly what we have now, and it's exactly what we will need for the future. We cannot ever go back on that. I fully support the statement that has been made that no company in Wales that has decided to put their tax arrangements offshore will get any funds from the public purse. If you can't pay into the public purse, why on earth should you be allowed to take out of the public purse? And so, going forward, we have set out our stall and we will keep to it. 

I have to congratulate, of course, all those people who work on the front line in the most difficult of times. And they are the most difficult of times. People have lost their lives. We know that. And people are putting their families on hold. Those people who are delivering the front-line services are self-isolating away from their families. And I've heard cases, terrible cases, of people sharing space, living in accommodation where they are not the only person—it's shared accommodation—and yet they're being isolated by the other people sharing that accommodation, and I think you need to look that. 

I am going to wrap this up, and I just really want to put it on record that I absolutely fully support the motion going forward. Thank you.

Just the one request for an intervention contribution. Dai Lloyd. 

Thank you very much for your patience, Llywydd. Could I just push the First Minister further and ask specifically what your strategy seeks to achieve, First Minister? Are you trying to eradicate the virus entirely from our communities, as New Zealand has done, or are you not?

The First Minister now to respond to the debate. First Minister. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I said in opening that I would return to the amendments laid to the motion having heard from their movers, and I plan to do that, and then, depending on how much patience you still have, I'll try and reply to some of the people who contributed to the debate, if time allows. 

Llywydd, the Government is very happy to vote in favour of the amendment that emphasises collaboration and coherence across the four nations of the United Kingdom. Our media attention focuses always on differences. The fundamental approach we are taking is common across all four Governments—a gradual unlocking of lockdown, the public health lens through which specific measures are assessed. It is not a matter, as some contributors have suggested, of our approach diverging from the United Kingdom. There is no template against which everybody else is judged. In fact, in many ways, I think an analysis of what has happened recently would suggest that it is the Government in respect of its English responsibilities that has chosen to diverge from everybody else. 

But what we will be about is not, as Darren Millar suggested, looking to lift particular restrictions at the same time. Our lens is about lifting restrictions at the right time. And that is a far more important lens through which to view things. And the more we are able to talk with our colleagues in other Governments of the United Kingdom, the more likely we are to agree on the right measures and what is the right time, and that remains my ambition—to contribute positively to that possibility. 

The second amendment on the order paper, Llywydd, draws attention again to those who have lost their lives and those who are left behind to grieve. I try to say at every press conference and every statement that, behind the figures we quote on these occasions lie individuals, with lives that could have continued for longer, and a human cost that remains behind. The Government will support the amendment, having heard what Darren Millar had to say, having heard from Rhianon Passmore in her eloquent description of the disproportionate impact that this virus has on some people and some places. What we will not be doing, Llywydd, is to take the advice of Mr Hamilton and his calls to be bold. His calls to be bold are—. The price of his call to be bold would be paid for in the lives of other people. And I remember that every time we have a decision to make here in the Welsh Government—that there are real people, with real families and real lives to lead, and I am not going to be bold at their expense. 

Amendment 4, Llywydd, calls for an increase in the maximum fines that can be issued for non-compliance with public health regulations. I'm very grateful to our chief constables and police and crime commissioners for the close co-operation we have enjoyed during the crisis, and for the evidence that they submitted to the Welsh Government at the start of this week. I intend to act on that evidence in advance of the coming bank holiday weekend.

I thought Helen Mary Jones offered one of the most reasonable accounts that I have heard of the need to respond to those people who recalcitrantly and persistently refuse to observe the regulations. It was not fair of her to say that the Government has not been listening; we have been in a continuous conversation with our chief constables and with our police and crime commissioners, and, once the necessary legal instruments can be put in place, I will be able to provide details of our intentions and how our proposals allow us to vote in favour of this amendment.

Llywydd, as I set out earlier, a test, trace and protect system is being set up. In advance of any substantial lifting of restrictions, that has to be in place, and I'm happy to confirm that again in voting in favour of amendment 5.

The Government will also support amendment 9 on the order paper. I need to be clear that, where the amendment says, 'introduce a universal basic income', our support is for the introductory work that would be needed to establish a basic income for the United Kingdom. I doubt that even the strongest supporter of that system would claim that it is ready on the shelf simply for wholesale introduction. However, Llywydd, many aspects of a universal basic income are already in place—the state pension for older people and child benefit to name just the most obvious. As we come out of the economic crisis that coronavirus has created, effective demand will be what our economy will require. And the best way to create effective demand is to make sure that there is money in the hands of our fellow citizens to be able to buy goods and services. Whether we call it a UBI, a citizen's income, a social dividend, all of them are rooted in a sense of social solidarity. And, as many other speakers have said, this whole experience surely teaches us that social solidarity is the most precious resource that we have as a community.

Llywydd, the one amendment we cannot support is amendment 3. It is overspecific in some aspects, and not capable of implementation in others. We have a proper financial plan; we've set it out over time, we will reiterate it and draw it together in the first supplementary budget. And we have groups in all parts of the Government—as Paul Davies asked for—already there, working on implementation of a pathway out of the crisis. But timescales, milestones and targets are the language of a different time and a different context. As I explained earlier today, the implementation of any measures depends not upon managerialism but upon an agile ability to identify the progress of the disease and to calibrate our measures against the medical and scientific advice at the time. It is to offer a false sense of certainty to populate a road map with actions that lie far in the future and in circumstances of which none of us are able to foresee. And Huw Irranca-Davies made that case, I thought, very strongly this afternoon.

We will not be tying ourselves to specific actions that are necessarily arbitrary in nature. Our chief medical officer has said many times that coronavirus turns out to be a virus with lots of surprises, and we will need to navigate our way through that future in a way that is attentive to the evidence, attentive to the circumstances, and clearly capable of being able to demonstrate to people in Wales that the measures we take are based on the circumstances that we face together.

Llywydd, if you will allow me, I will respond very briefly to some of the specifics in some contributions. A number of Plaid Cymru contributors particularly have pointed to New Zealand and its elimination strategy. And Adam Price said that it was important to learn from others. I agree, it is important to learn from others, but Neil Hamilton's contribution showed just how easy it is to draw the wrong conclusions from experience elsewhere, rather than the right ones. And New Zealand is an island. It has no land border with another population, and an elimination strategy is a good deal easier to implement and to achieve when you are not cheek by jowl with an administration who may be doing different things.

I did agree, however, very much with what Adam Price said about the joint biosecurity centre and its ability for us to look for local-level actions. I agree with what he said about the potential for that and we will want to maximise our ability to draw on that potential. 

I listened carefully to what Nick Ramsay said. He asked me to spend money on local authorities, on universities, on the discretionary assistance fund, on tourism and a number of other entirely deserving purposes. He asked me for financial clarity. Let me say: it's not more clarity we need; it's more money. And in order to be able to attend to the many demands that there are there to meet the circumstances we face in Wales, we will need a UK Government capable of acting, not by re-imposing austerity, but by injecting demand into the economy, by offering us the stimulus—the fiscal stimulus—that we will need in order to attend to the many things that Nick Ramsay referred to.

I want to end by just drawing together a couple of contributions from Lynne Neagle and from Joyce Watson. Let me just say how much I agreed with three of the key principles that Lynne Neagle set out. Equality: it is just desperate that wealth is the best shield against this virus. I thought Joyce Watson made an outstanding contribution to the debate this afternoon in drawing attention to the practical ways in which people's lives, which are hard enough in the first place, are now being made additionally difficult by the onset of this disease. And this Government has put equality at the front of the lens that we will use as we plot a path out of coronavirus together.

And when I say 'together', I'm drawing attention to the second of the principles that Lynne outlined, that of partnership. And the strength of local government really has come to the fore in this crisis. And I pay tribute to the leader of Torfaen County Borough Council—the community that Lynne represents in the Assembly—for everything that he has done with other leaders to turn the power of local government and their presence on the ground in communities across Wales to the benefit of those local populations and especially to those who have needed that help the most.

And finally, can I just share in what Lynne said about the positives of the experience and to draw some hope out of everything we have gone through? Last night, Llywydd, I took part in a virtual Iftar, drawing together people of all different faiths from across Wales in a very moving ceremony, attended by my colleague Jane Hutt and others. In that event, the voice of what was described as an ordinary community member in the centre here in Cardiff was given an opportunity to talk to us about what it was like to live in a densely populated inner-city area in a small house with three teenaged sons and a husband all trying to live under the same roof, and she was absolutely inspirational in focusing on the positive things that that family and that community have drawn out of this experience.

And that's where I find the hope—that's where I find the hope—in those experiences that Welsh citizens have had, how they have found ways of drawing closer to one another inside the home and with those who live around them, and the determination that was expressed there to build on the calm and considered way this Government is determined to find a way out of coronavirus, to be diligent, to be detailed in the way that we attend to decision making here in Wales, and then to draw on that strength, that key strength, that gives us solidarity—the solidarity of knowing that we share those experiences, we find the positives in them and together we act to find a way beyond coronavirus that attends to those whose needs are greatest, whose contribution has been the most and on whose requirements the future needs to be based. 

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? Yes, I see an objection from Siân Gwenllian. There's been an objection, and therefore I will defer voting on this item until voting time. 

That brings us on to item 6, which has been withdrawn. 

Then, the regulations, and, in accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the motions for the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020 and the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regulations 2020 will be grouped for debate, but with separate votes. Are there any objections to that proposal? I see that there no objections to the grouping of the debates.

Therefore, I ask the Minister for Health and Social Services to propose the motions on both sets of regulations—Vaughan Gething. 

Thank you, Llywydd. I formally move the two sets of regulations before us today, and I ask Members to support the regulations before us. I will refer to them as the 'No. 2' and 'No. 3' regulations, rather than repeating their full long title. 

Members will recall the debate that we held on 29 April on the two preceding sets of regulations to those being debated today. These were the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) Regulations 2020, that were made and came into force on 26 March. These are the principal regulations that placed restrictions on our movements and required the closure of certain businesses. Their main purpose was to minimise the extent to which people leave their homes during this emergency period to help contain coronavirus, to minimise the burden on the health service and, of course, to save lives. 

Further amendments were made in the amendment regulations that came into force on 7 April. These introduced the requirement for social distancing measures in all work places and made important changes in relation to burials and cremations.

As the lockdown has continued, the Welsh Government has continually reviewed the requirements, and we are very aware of the effect that these constraints are having upon the people of Wales. Our continual review is in addition to the 21-day review cycle, which requires Welsh Ministers to review the need for restrictions and requirements every 21 days.

As with the sets of regulations that precede them, the two sets of regulations that we're debating today were introduced under the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 through emergency procedures to support our approach to tackling coronavirus in Wales.

In the No. 2 regulations, which came into force on 25 April, we made a number of revisions. We made provision to permit exercise more than once a day, if needed, because of a particular health condition or disability, and made it clear that visiting a cemetery or other burial ground or garden of remembrance to pay respects to a deceased person is a reasonable excuse for leaving the place where you live. We also widen the definition of a 'vulnerable person' to include other specific groups or conditions where people could benefit from assistance, and providing supplies for them is a reasonable excuse for another person to leave home, for example to assist people with dementia. These changes supplemented the rules already in force but were made to respond to some of the challenges that we know were being faced by families throughout Wales, whilst at the same time ensuring the aim of controlling the spread of coronavirus has been maintained. 

The No. 2 regulations also ensure the 2m physical distancing requirements are in place for click-and-collect style services, and extended the physical distancing duty to cafes accessible by the public in hospitals, and to those responsible for canteens in schools and prisons and for use by the armed forces to ensure that all reasonable measures are put in place.

In the No. 3 regulations, we've taken steps, in line with public health and scientific evidence, to improve well-being and support economic activity. We've lifted the limit on exercising no more than once a day, and permitted the opening of libraries, provided distancing requirements are followed. A 'stay at home' message in Wales remains in place, and our regulations specifically state that exercise must be taken within an area local to the place where a person is living. These regulations also provide that garden centres and plant nurseries may open subject to the social distancing requirements.

So, we've changed what constitutes a reasonable excuse for the purposes of section 8(1) so that it is explicit that a person may make use of a recycling or waste disposal facility or collect goods ordered from a shop on a click-and-collect basis if they need to. I'm pleased to see that recycling centres are now reopening on a planned basis across Wales.

Importantly, the No. 3 regulations increase democratic oversight by removing provisions about terminating requirements or restrictions by ministerial direction. This means that all changes to the principal regulations must be brought before the Senedd. Llywydd, these restrictions are in place to protect people's health and control the spread of coronavirus. The law is, however, clear that these restrictions can only be kept in place for as long as they are necessary and proportionate, and I am very aware of the extraordinary efforts that have been made by so many people across Wales to help all of us to slow the spread of the disease.

Our road map, published on 15 May and just debated, lays out specific steps that we are considering as we move out of lockdown. As part of our cautious and coherent approach to easing the restrictions, we will consider if and how we bring forward further regulatory changes in the coming weeks. For today though, our message to the people of Wales is to stick to the advice to stay home, and, if you need to leave home for one of the permitted reasons, to stay local. In doing that, you'll protect our NHS and help all of us to save more lives. Thank you, Llywydd.

Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee—Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, Llywydd. Members will be aware that these two sets of regulations amend the principal regulations on the coronavirus restrictions, and they're made, as has been indicated by the Minister, under the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984. Now, for context, I'd like to briefly outline the purpose of the principal regulations, which came into force on 26 March and were subsequently approved by the Senedd on 29 April.

Those regulations put restrictions on the movement of individuals, setting out circumstances in which they may leave the place where they live, and prevent gatherings of groups of more than two people, except in certain circumstances, and again, as has already been commented on, require the closure of certain businesses and impose requirements on other businesses, as well as duties to close certain public footpaths and land. The No. 2 amending regulations came into force on 25 April, and the No. 3 amending regulations came into force on 11 May.

Our reports on these regulations are provided with the agenda, so they are before Members. There are no technical reporting points that we wish to raise in either case, but I do want to make absolutely clear that we have paid very close attention to these regulations. We do all fully understand the reasoning behind these powers. The Minister himself has explained this reasoning as well, but, nevertheless, it is important to recognise that they are probably the greatest restriction on fundamental liberties and rights that have been put in place across the whole of the UK since the second world war. It is therefore fundamental that the implementation and operation of these extraordinary powers are kept under regular scrutiny by committee and by this Parliament, as we are the custodians of the liberties they restrict, and ensure that they are only in place for as long as public safety requires it and they are a proportionate restriction to the risk.

Now, our human rights obligations are also fundamental, so it is important that these are highlighted, and what I'd like to do is to focus on the human right aspects of the amending regulations, which we highlight in the merits section of our report. So, we noted that the following articles are engaged in relation to the No. 2 regulations: article 8, which is the right to respect for private and family life; article 9, which is with regard to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; article 11, freedom of assembly and association; and article 1 of the first protocol, protection of property. Now, all of these are qualified rights, which, as the Minister has already indicated, can be interfered with provided the interference is justified.

Now, the Welsh Government's explanatory memorandum originally did not identify the specific articles that it considers are engaged in respect of these regulations, so we noted that the Government set out a limited commentary on the justification for interfering with the exercise of human rights as a result of the regulations, mainly to prevent the spreading of infectious diseases and protect public health, and in a manner that is proportionate. However, it should make its justification by reference to the specific articles of the Human Rights Act 1998 that are engaged, and such an approach allows the Welsh Government to explain more clearly the balancing exercise it undertook as it required under human rights law when a private right collides with a public interest. I do not, of course, say that there has been any breach of human rights; I only emphasise that, even in times of emergency, human rights must not be forgotten.

Furthermore, we must at all times resist the temptation to allow the restriction of liberties and rights to become in any way normalised. So, I therefore welcome the Welsh Government's response to our report. It identifies that, in addition to the articles referred to in our report, article 5, that is the right to liberty, and article 14, the prohibition of discrimination, are also engaged. It also provides a more detailed commentary justifying and explaining the interference with the exercise of human rights.

Turning now to the No. 3 regulations, these regulations do a number of important things, again, as the Minister has outlined: permitting libraries, garden centres and plant nurseries to open subject to requirements to take all reasonable measures to ensure a distance of 2m is maintained by persons on the premises and persons waiting to enter the premises; specifying that leaving the place where you live to collect goods ordered from a shop operating on an order-and-collect basis constitutes a reasonable excuse for the purpose of regulation 8(1) of the principal regulations; and removing the limitation on exercising no more than once a day.

Now, as regards human rights, the explanatory memorandum explains that the regulations engage articles 8 and 11 as well as article 1 of the first protocol. Again, some commentary on justification for interference with these rights is provided. Of particular note, the regulations add the proportionality of requirements and restrictions as a consideration when the Welsh Ministers review the principal coronavirus regulations. In our report, we note that proportionality is a fundamental consideration when assessing the justification for interfering with certain individual rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and it goes to the root of the lawfulness of the decision to interfere with those rights. So, as such, we welcome this amendment because it recognises not only the Welsh Ministers' overarching duty of proportionality, as the Minister has confirmed, under the 1984 public health Act, but also their overarching responsibility to ensure compliance with the Human Rights Act, which we are satisfied there is. Diolch, Llywydd. 

I would like to put on record that I believe that the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee has articulated in a very clear and passionate way the necessary regard we must pay to our fundamental liberties and rights despite the difficult time we're currently in, and, therefore, he very clearly enunciated my concerns about these ongoing regulations and the way that they're being handled and brought forward. These principal regulations are subject to constant amendment in a number of areas, because the Welsh Government put them on the face of the legislation rather than in the guidance, and that, I think, is acceptable. But it does mean that we, the Welsh Parliament, are always discussing the amendments after the event, and that is not in my view a wholly satisfactory situation. Properly scrutinising these regulations is vital, and although there is a need for Parliament to approve them in order for the regulations to be enforced for more than 28 days, it cannot be acceptable, for example, that these regulations were only brought before the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee on 18 May. In my view, this denies a clear scrutiny process, and whilst we're living in difficult times I would urge the Welsh Government to submit and allow themselves to submit to due scrutiny, and they must ensure that they do not allow the circumstances we're in to subvert that scrutiny.

We need more clarity on both regulations and the guidance that accompanies them, because the current regulations are confusing and in many cases apparently contradictory. People don't know what they mean. I know that my inbox has a multitude of e-mails from constituents who are unclear as to the meaning behind the regulations. And I noted in today's answer by the First Minister to Carwyn Jones, who was trying to bring further clarity to the regulations, and he had to give that further clarity. Alun Davies also said that his constituents were seeking clarity, so I am not alone.

I am pleased that the regulations place a requirement for a proportionality of restrictions, but I want to draw the Senedd's attention just to a couple of areas, so, for example to regulation 8, which is amended to allow reasonable exercise more than once a day. Now, here's an example of how unclear these regulations are: what is local? I note Welsh Government state there is no desire to define 'local', as there will be different meanings whether you're in Cardiff or in mid Wales. So, we have a situation where you can drive to your nearest golf course, which may be 30 minutes away, but you can only go fishing if you can walk or cycle there. And if you drive 10 minutes to a beach to surf on your own, socially distancing, you're reprimanded and possibly fined by the police. You can exercise from your own house in a crowded street with difficulty to get social distancing, but you can't drive for a couple of minutes to go to a common just up the mountain from where you live. You can now eat during a walk, but local authorities have blocked picnic spots, so again, a contradiction. All this is based on the science, we are told. 'It's the science' is Welsh Government's mantra, and rightly so, but how come, then, it is so vague and contradictory, and, as the police tell me, very hard to enforce?

There are many other anomalies, other examples within these regulations of a lack of clarity, other areas that appear contradictory, and I don't have the time to go through them all. But suffice to say that the Welsh Conservatives will support amendment 2 to the health protection coronavirus restrictions regulations. We will, however, be abstaining on amendment 3 of the aforementioned regulations. And, Minister, I want to give you and the Welsh Government notice that we will not hesitate to vote against future amendments if the Welsh Government is unable, unwilling or incapable of improving the clarity of further amendments, and explaining the science and the social rationale behind these further changes to us and to our constituents, because we are indeed in difficult times, but we must always, always pay real heedance to people's rights to life, to liberty, to freedom of movement, and you've got to explain to us very clearly, because people are confused; they are worried; they are fearful they're breaking the law.

Obviously, in Plaid Cymru, we do support these regulations, though as has already been noted, this vote is retrospective as the regulations are in place, and as a member of the legislation committee, I support, naturally, the excellent comments from our Chair, Mick Antoniw. The fact is, though, the R rate remains too high to risk a further wave of cases, and we were too slow to enter lockdown, it's cost lives and it means we have to stay in lockdown longer. And that's why we need a more cautious approach in easing restrictions; in the long run it means not having to re-impose them again. But, we do have several concerns.

First, the Welsh Government's communications have been all over the place here. People are allowed now out to exercise more than once a day, as we have heard, provided they don't drive, but some people are still very unclear about all of this, and I have a filling inbox as well to that effect. Obviously this hasn't been helped by the contempt the UK Government has shown Wales with no consideration that its changes to allow driving would inevitably lead to people driving to tourist spots here in Wales. We're also concerned by the failure to properly prevent an exodus to second homes. We note new COVID cases are on the rise in Betsi Cadwaladr.

Now, moving on, I realise the Welsh Government has published its exit strategy with its traffic lights; there's a distinct lack of detail in it though, and many people will be none the wiser about basic questions relevant to their lives now, like when can they take their children to see their grandparents. Key to being able to answer all of this of course is suppressing the virus, in our view, but instead, what we have from both Governments is managerial intonations about mitigating and managing the R rate to prevent a second wave. The maths of it is simple: a few more weeks of relentless efforts to keep R below 0.5 will yield far greater results than months of attempting to keep slightly below 1. Testing and contact tracing will be key.

Now, this country used to have a superb public health and communicable disease control system, with a system of notifiable disease notification and personal contact tracing reaching back over decades. That excellent public and environmental health infrastructure has been decimated by austerity and Government complacency about the possibility of pandemics in general. Now, Welsh Government are on the charge to install a new layer of private testing and app-based tech as though we've never thought of contact tracing ever before in our lives. Local public health teams need to take back control. Contact tracing and testing, case finding, isolation and quarantine are classic public health measures that have always been used for controlling communicable diseases since Victorian times, since Dr John Snow, in fact, isolated the Broad Street water pump in Soho in London in 1854 as the source of a cholera epidemic.

In closing, huge personal sacrifices have been made in lockdown to suppress the virus. We are not there yet. Cases of COVID infection are still on the rise in parts of Wales. Voting against any of these regulations today though makes no sense, because it'll be like turning the clock back to not allow visits to garden centres, and not allow more exercise—things that have already kicked in. That's due to the retrospective nature of both the debate we're having and the voting that we will shortly undergo. So, we shall be supporting the regulations. Diolch yn fawr.

It's a pleasure to follow Dai Lloyd, and I thank him for his comments there. I know the John Snow story well as, 25 years ago, I lived in a flat above the John Snow pub, looking over that pump that has been preserved in now Broadwick Street.

We all emphasise the public health issues, we all have concern for the other health issues, and my colleague Mandy Jones spoke very ably about those in the debate earlier. I think we also need to have a degree of consideration for the economy, not least because if we don't have the resources, we won't be able to fund the health.

We are voting against both sets of regulations today. The amendment 2 regulations—quite minor amendments in them; I find it extraordinary the Minister can sign them off as being urgent, at least in some of the cases. We have moot changes to the once-a-day requirement to allow certain groups to be exempt from that, but that once-a-day requirement, which should never have been there in the first place, has already been removed by the No. 3 regulations that came into force before we had a chance to consider them. The No. 2 regulations, I mean it's an extraordinary minor point: apparently a requirement

'to resolve the tautology of having a "need to obtain basic necessities"'. 

I mean, has Welsh Government got nothing better to do? How on earth can that have been urgent, Minister? And it's not just pedantic, but it's wrong. Whether or not you have a need to basic necessities will depend in part on whether you have them or not already.

The third area of these where there's—I hesitate to say significant, but it does extend them, is the 2m requirement for social distancing put into legislation, which I find absolutely extraordinary. What is the scientific evidence of Welsh Government that they have, that apparently others don't, that 2m is the key determinant? Why do they think that key determinant would be the same inside as it is outside? Why do they think the countries in Europe such as Germany, which has 1.5m, or France and Italy, which I believe have 1m—? Even the World Health Organization, which I certainly don't accept as gospel, says 1m. Why do we in Wales know better?

Has this 2m actually just been carried over from an English template used by UK Government? But of course they haven't put that in law. They're working sensibly with businesses, industries and sectors to think how best to get them back to work in a way that minimises spread of risk in a sensible way while getting the economy going. It's much harder to do that in Wales, because legislation specifies that 2m and it refers to 'persons responsible for businesses'. That requires a business to determine who in that business is legally responsible. And it may be that the person who is responsible and usually does things doesn't want to be named as the person who is responsible and maybe guilty of this offence set up by Welsh Government, and therefore that business may not reopen when it otherwise could.

Many, many large businesses operating across the UK, in many cases beyond, reopening many of their places of business in England, will look at this and think, 'Well, actually, there's going to be an offence if we do it in Wales, and we have to be certain we're not committing that offence, and actually, to date, we haven't got any Wales law specialists on our staff, and it's difficult to go out and get external advice, and we don't want the risk of potentially falling foul of that regulatory requirement', so they don't reopen. I just do not think this is a sensible approach. 

The amendment 3 regulations: I thought actually much of what Angela said about that. I think she spoke very well, and many of the points about the exercise regime I won't make as she's already made them. I welcome that the Conservatives will actually be abstaining on these amendment 3 regulations. It's about time we saw at least a degree of opposition from them to what Welsh Government is doing and their determination to have difference for difference's sake from what is going on in England. 

For the first time, we actually see in law that requirement in terms of local for exercise. Of course, the First Minister says things that are very different. He keeps on going on about exercise having to start and finish at home, but that isn't in law and, at least when I last checked, I couldn't find it in the Welsh Government guidance anyhow. It did however say that local, if you lived in Cardiff, wouldn't be as far as Porthcawl, so I hope some people find that helpful, that if they do drive to exercise but they don't drive that far at least they're being consistent with that element of the guidance. I think it's very difficult to judge what people can do. We've heard, I think, Dai Lloyd say you couldn't drive, but I've heard some other people say you can in some circumstances. And the legislative requirement that we—or, at least, I fear others—are going to agree to is that it should be local, which is undefined.

But our strongest reason for voting against these regulations is that they remove the requirement for Welsh Ministers to get rid of restrictions if they're unnecessary. I find it absolutely extraordinary that you can have these restrictions on people's lives, as extreme as they are, consider that they're no longer necessary, but change the law so you can keep them anyhow for up to six months. And the health Minister has the cheek to tell us that that's increasing democratic oversight. What it's doing is it's giving it a ratchet. It is entrenching these restrictions. Ministers can willy-nilly bring them in when they like, claim they're urgent and make them law, without the Assembly having agreed them—as, belatedly, we have the opportunity to do here—but when they become unnecessary they can keep them. I think that is wrong. 'Reasonable', 'proportionate', those are all in the UK law. It is outrageous that Welsh Government is changing the law so it can keep restrictions when they are unnecessary. So, instead, they can put them through their continuity-Corbyn equality tests and sieve them on that basis. It's not a proper basis for retaining these types of restrictions, and we'll be voting against both sets of regulations.

The Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate—Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Llywydd. It's important to recognise that these regulations are just part of a comprehensive response to effectively managing the coronavirus outbreak that continues here Wales, and that we're doing everything that we can to tackle the pandemic and to protect public health. It is thanks to the efforts made by people across Wales that we have helped to slow the spread of the disease, to protect our NHS and to save lives.

We know that the continued lockdown is impacting upon people's health and well-being as well as our economy. We are now, though, entering a critical stage. We will continue to be guided by scientific evidence, direction and the advice we receive from the chief medical officer in how we move forwards in defining how the restrictions currently in place, in different areas of Welsh life, can begin to be eased.

There is now a regular publication of the summary of that scientific advice that is going to take place each Tuesday, so the charge made by Mr Reckless in particular, that there's no evidence of what the advice is—we're providing a regular update on what that looks like. It underscores the choices Ministers make. It's also important to underscore the purpose and the requirement for the regulations and to help inform the continuing public debate.

We of course take seriously the points made by a number of speakers about the clarity, and the point and the purpose of the regulations, what that means is within the regulations and not, and we aim to provide that within our guidance. We will of course take that forward as part of the next review. We'll need to look again at the point and purpose of the regulations. I disagree; I don't particularly agree with Mr Reckless's quasi-legal attempt to define what's happening with the powers. We still have to have regulations that are necessary and proportionate. We still have to have the check of the advice from the chief medical officer that these are regulations that should be in place to tackle the public emergency, the once-in-a-century event, that we're all living through.

We know that we cannot tackle the virus without a collective approach, so we want to encourage that continued conversation with all of our partners, the most important of whom remain the people of Wales. The conversation about how, with the limited headroom that we have, we make choices that we need to make to ease the current regulatory restrictions, and we don't put at risk the lives and well-being of people across Wales. These are difficult choices to make and they will remain difficult choices. The balance of what we choose to do in the regulations will need to reflect the reality—that those choices in themselves are difficult—and we then need to consider their cumulative impact, and then to be able to explain those in a way that is genuinely persuasive to the people of Wales. But I recognise, in the previous debate, there still is widespread support for the cautious approach that we're taking, and that remains the Government's approach.

The amendments to the regulations that we've debated today were made in response to stakeholder views, to help promote further economic activity and to support families across Wales. For today, the regulations, in our view, must stay in place as they are proportionate to the threat that we face, and they will only be in place for as long as required.

I do therefore ask that the Senedd support these regulations and agree that they're necessary measures to respond to the pandemic and to protect public health here in Wales.

The first proposal, therefore, is to agree the the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, I see an objection and therefore we will defer the voting under this item until voting time.

The second proposal is to agree the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regulations 2020. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, again, there are objections and therefore we will defer voting on those regulations until voting time.

The next item is the Direct Payments to Farmers (Crop Diversification Derogation) (Wales) Regulations 2020. I call on the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs to move this motion—Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move the motion. The greening requirements in retained EU legislation provide that the agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment are crop diversification, maintaining existing permanent grassland and having an ecological focus area on the agricultural area.

The crop diversification rules require farmers on holdings with between 10 and 30 hectares of arable land to grow two different crops, with the largest crop not covering more than 75 per cent of the arable land. On holdings with more than 30 hectares of arable land, farmers are required to grow at least three different crops, with the largest crop, again, not covering more than 75 per cent of the arable land, and the two largest crops together not covering more than 95 per cent of the arable land.

Over the past 12 months, Wales has experienced higher than average rainfall. As a result, this has limited farmers' capacity to comply with crop diversification rules, either because they cannot access flooded land, or land is too wet to plant. These regulations remove the crop diversification requirement completely for the 2020 basic payment scheme year. This means farmers in Wales will not have to comply with the crop diversification requirements to plant more than one crop in 2020. It also means, in order to receive payment in full, farmers will not be required to provide evidence showing they've attempted to comply but failed for force majeure reasons. Diolch.

I have no speakers, and therefore I'm assuming that the Minister doesn't want to respond to herself, so I'll ask if—. The proposal is to agree the motion, then. Are there any objections to that? I see no objections and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

That brings us to voting time, and, as indicated on the agenda, today's votes will be conducted in accordance with Standing Order 34.11, and to remind everybody: each political group may nominate one member of the group to carry the same number of votes as there are members of the group. In the case of a political group with an executive role, the nominee will carry the same number of votes as there are of members of that group, plus any other members of the Government. Members who do not belong to a group or a grouping will vote for themselves as individuals. I will conduct the votes by roll call.

The first vote will therefore be on the debate on unlocking our society and economy, and we will take the first vote on amendment 1. So, we start the vote on amendment 1, which is tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

On behalf of the Labour and the Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes?

In favour.

On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar, how do you cast your 11 votes?

In favour.

On behalf of of Plaid Cymru, Siân Gwenllian, how do you cast your nine votes?

Against.

On behalf of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless, how do you cast your four votes?

In favour.

Gareth Bennett.

In favour.

Neil Hamilton.

In favour.

Neil McEvoy.

Against.

The result of the vote, therefore, is that in favour, there are 47, no abstentions, and 10 votes against. Therefore, the amendment is carried.

Amendment 2—a vote, therefore, on amendment 2 in the name of Darren Millar. On behalf of the Labour group and Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes?

In favour.

Darren Millar, how do you cast the Welsh Conservative votes—11 votes?

In favour.

Plaid Cymru, Siân Gwenllian—how do you cast your nine votes?

In favour.

On behalf of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless, how do you cast the four votes?

In favour.

Gareth Bennett.

In favour.

Neil Hamilton.

In favour.

Neil McEvoy.

For.

The result of that vote is 57 in favour, zero against. Amendment 2 is agreed, therefore.

Amendment 3 is the next vote—amendment 3 in the name of Darren Millar. On behalf of the Labour group and the Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes?

Against.

Darren Millar, the Welsh Conservative group—11 votes.

In favour. 

Plaid Cymru, Siân Gwenllian—nine votes.

Against.

Gareth Bennett.

In favour.

Neil Hamilton.

In favour. 

Neil McEvoy.

For.

Mark Reckless—

In favour.

Did I go too quickly, did I?

I'm not sure if you missed me or I didn't hear. I hadn't had an opportunity to do so.

My apologies for that. For the record, therefore, Mark Reckless on behalf of the Brexit Party—the four votes are cast in favour. Which gives the result of the vote: in favour 18, against 39. Therefore, the vote on amendment 3 is not agreed. 

Amendment 4 is the next vote, and amendment 4 is tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. On behalf of the Labour group and therefore the Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes?

In favour. 

On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar, how do you cast your 11 votes?

In favour. 

On behalf of Plaid Cymru, Siân Gwenllian, how do you cast your nine votes?

In favour. 

On behalf of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless, how do you cast your four votes?

Abstain. 

Gareth Bennett. 

Abstain. 

Neil Hamilton. 

Against. 

Neil McEvoy.

Was that me?

Yes, Neil McEvoy.

Sorry, I didn't hear that. 

In favour.

Neil McEvoy in favour, therefore.

The result of the vote is, therefore, 51 in favour, abstentions five, and against one. Amendment 4 is therefore agreed. 

Amendment 5 is tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. On behalf of the Labour group and the Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes?

In favour. 

Darren Millar, how do you cast the 11 votes in the name of the Welsh Conservative group?

In favour. 

Siân Gwenllian, the nine votes on behalf of Plaid Cymru. 

In favour. 

Mark Reckless, the four votes on behalf of the Brexit Party.

Against. 

Gareth Bennett. 

Abstain. 

Neil Hamilton. 

Against. 

Neil McEvoy.

In favour. 

The result of the vote, therefore, is in favour 51, abstentions one, against five. Amendment 5 is therefore agreed. 

Amendments 6, 7 and 8 were not selected. Amendment 9 is the next vote. Amendment 9 is tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. On behalf of the Labour group and Government, Joyce Watson—the 30 votes. 

In favour. 

On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar—the 11 votes. 

Against. 

Siân Gwenllian on behalf of Plaid Cymru—the nine votes. 

In favour. 

Mark Reckless on behalf of the Brexit Party—four votes. 

Against. 

Gareth Bennett. 

Against. 

Neil Hamilton.

Against. 

Neil McEvoy.

In favour.

The result of the vote, therefore, is—I wish I could count as I go along, but unfortunately I can't. I'm waiting for somebody else to do it for me. Somewhere in Wales, somebody is counting the votes, and about to send it to me. And this time it's come in on my WhatsApp, not my iPad. How these things vary from one vote to the next.

In favour 40, 17 against, no abstentions. Was that correct? At this point, I'd be looking at the clerks by my side to get it confirmed to me if I was in the Senedd. Yes, I've had it confirmed on WhatsApp. I read that out correctly. Apologies for this—there are quite a number of votes today, due to the fact that quite a number of you submitted amendments. Amendment 9 is therefore agreed.

We therefore hold a vote on the motion as amended, tabled by Rebecca Evans. 

On behalf of the Labour group and the Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes on the motion as amended?

In favour.

On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar, how do you cast your 11 votes?

Against.

Siân Gwenllian, on behalf of Plaid Cymru, your nine votes.

In favour.

The Brexit Party—Mark Reckless, how do you cast your four votes?

Abstain.

Gareth Bennett.

Against.

Neil Hamilton.

Against. 

Neil McEvoy. 

In favour. 

The result of the vote, therefore, is: in favour 40, abstentions four, against 13. The motion as amended is agreed. 

The next vote will be on the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion, as tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. On behalf of the Labour group and the Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast the votes? 

In favour.

On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar, the 11 votes.

In favour. 

Siân Gwenllian, how do you cast the nine votes in the name of Plaid Cymru?

In favour. 

On behalf of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless, your four votes.

Against. 

Gareth Bennett.

Against. 

Neil Hamilton.

Against.

Neil McEvoy.

In favour.

The result of the vote on these regulations, therefore: in favour 51, against 6. The motion is therefore agreed. 

The next vote is on the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. And on behalf of the Labour group and Government, Joyce Watson, how do you cast your 30 votes?

In favour.

On behalf of the Welsh Conservative group, Darren Millar, the 11 votes.

Abstain.

Plaid Cymru, Siân Gwenllian, how do you cast the nine votes?

In favour.

The Brexit Party, Mark Reckless, the four votes.

Against. 

Gareth Bennett.

Against.

Neil Hamilton. 

Against. 

Neil McEvoy.