And then we come to the item and the statement by the Minister for Health and Social Services on coronavirus, and I ask the health Minister to make his statement. Vaughan Gething.

Diolch, Llywydd. Members will know that I committed to provide regular updates about the COVID-19 developments here in Wales. We can see from the data that, thankfully, admissions to hospital, the number of people in critical care and the number of people who are sadly still losing their lives to the virus have been falling. We're not yet sufficiently far along the curve to be able to further lift the restrictions beyond the modest and cautious steps that the First Minister announced to the public on Friday, 8 May. As you heard, the Cabinet agreed those measures later on Thursday the seventh.

We must remain vigilant and disciplined in supporting the lockdown so we can continue to protect the NHS and to keep people safe. We have been clear in Wales that we must build on the good work that has been done to date, both by members of the public and of course by our NHS and social care staff. The 'stay home, protect the NHS and save lives' message is still very much at the centre of our strategy and approach here in Wales, and will remain so for, at the very least, the next three weeks. However, we recognise that there is a balance to be struck between the level of harm that COVID-19 is causing us both directly and indirectly.

I issued a written statement last week to alert Members to the new operating framework that I issued to assist NHS organisations to focus and plan in quarter 1. The framework described four levels of harm: harm from COVID-19 directly itself; harm from overwhelming the NHS and social care system; harm from reduction in non-COVID activity; and harm from wider societal actions that may flow from lockdown.

Now, I want to talk more about the harm from a reduction of non-COVID activity. There are still many people living with serious conditions that need diagnosis, treatment and ongoing care. We need to ensure that these people have the confidence that they can be treated safely. They need to know that they will continue to receive the same level of care and expertise for urgent treatment, and that it is safe to come in for procedures and diagnostics. Ultimately, though, this comes down to discussions between patients and their treating clinicians, with honest conversations about whether there are particular issues to be considered. And, at the end of it all, the patient can, of course, choose to follow or not follow the advice that is given. The reality is that striking the balance between COVID and non-COVID care must and will be done with the utmost care. But the message is clear: the NHS is there for you and it remains open for business.

I want to specifically recognise the harm from a reduction in non-COVID-19 activity for those people who require support from our mental health services during the pandemic. During these unprecedented times, we must ensure that we maintain parity between physical and mental health services. I know that the period of lockdown is difficult for many people, but for some people with mental health issues it can be particularly challenging. For some, it will have caused their condition to deteriorate at a time when they're separated from their normal support networks—family, friends and potentially work as well—and when access to non-emergency services will have changed. In response, we've worked with our partners to introduce a range of measures to provide support to those who may need help and reassurance. That includes tailored online information and access to telephone-based support.

A mental health COVID-19 monitoring tool has been developed within the service to ensure that we receive assurance in the Government that mental health services are operating safely and responding appropriately. Health boards are required to submit monitoring information on a weekly basis, which is considered by our mental health incident group. The information provides a live picture of the capacity of mental health services to enable us identify where additional support, advice or guidance is needed. While service models will have adapted during the pandemic, health boards and partners have reported that they've continued to meet mental health needs during this period.

NHS organisations will submit their quarter 1 plans next week, setting out how they can undertake non-COVID-19 activity. To support that work, Public Health Wales has worked together with the Welsh Government and the wider NHS to develop advice built on three strong pillars: the need to understand the current infection level and transmission rates for coronavirus in Wales; principles that are both grounded in scientific evidence and address the wider societal and economic impacts; and the need to test, trace and protect. I am pleased to announce that earlier today I published our 'Test Trace Protect' strategy. It sets out, over seven and a half pages, how we will work in close partnership with Public Health Wales, health boards and local authorities to deliver one of the biggest public health interventions of a generation.

Working together, we will enhance health surveillance in the community, undertake effective and extensive contact tracing, and support people to self-isolate where required to do so. To support this activity, we will require a testing programme of a different scale. We've significantly expanded our testing capacity in Wales over the last week, with laboratory capacity now available to process over 5,000 tests a day, and with testing centres now open around the country. We'll continue to increase this capacity in Wales over the coming weeks and months, within the range of 10,000 tests a day. That will enable us to test more people staying in hospitals and care settings, together with workers in other critical-worker settings.

To support our move to mass population testing, we'll draw on the testing programme operating across the UK. Now, NWIS, our NHS Wales Informatics Service, are working with Public Health Wales and NHSx—that's the joint unit that brings teams from the Department of Health and Social Care in the UK Government and NHS England and NHS Improvement to help deliver digital transformation and care in England; they're behind the development of the app that people have heard about in the Isle of Wight. Working together with NWIS and Public Health Wales, they're developing a data solution so that test results will be reported electronically back to Wales on an hourly basis, and that now means we can take our population share of the UK testing programme. It is crucial that this test record is able to be integrated directly into Welsh clinical record systems. Participation in the UK programme will significantly further increase the number of tests available and allow people to have tests delivered to their home for them to self-administer. 

In total, we could require as many as 20,000 tests a day to support diagnosis and treatment, population health surveillance, contact tracing and business continuity. That will, of course, enable key workers to return to work more quickly and safely. It will also, of course, depend upon the progress not only of the coronavirus but our phasing out of lockdown and further activity for members of the public. But this number is highly dependent on the spread of the disease, the prevalence of symptoms and the emerging evidence on how testing can best be deployed to prevent further infection. We'll continue to keep that evidence under review and to adapt our estimates of need accordingly. Combining our own capacity here in Wales with that of the UK puts us in a strong position to test as needed.

We have to learn to live with the virus that is circulating in our communities for many months to come. Adopting this approach is a way in which people can be told quickly of their exposure to the virus so that they, in turn, can limit their exposure to others. This will help us to prevent infection and track the virus as lockdown restrictions are eased.

Finally, the people of Wales are our most important partners. It is only through their willingness to do the right thing—to report their symptoms, to identify their contacts and to heed the advice when told to self-isolate—that we can break the chain of transmission. I want to thank the public for continuing to support lockdown arrangements. I have been reassured by the response both from those within the NHS, social care, policing and, indeed, the general public. They support the cautious and realistic approach that we're taking, and it's been widely welcomed.

I don't doubt for a moment, though, that it's difficult to continue with the restrictions that have been imposed. However, keeping these extraordinary measures in place, together with that widespread public support for them, remains the single most important factor in protecting the NHS and keeping our family, friends and loved ones safe. More than that, it makes the biggest difference in keeping people safe who we may never know and may never get the chance to know.

Diolch. I'm happy to take questions on the statement, Llywydd.

Minister, I'd like to welcome the statement, and I am pleased to see the test, trace and protect initiative being launched today. However, I do have concerns. As you know, I would have put a dedicated team with a very visible lead in place, and I'd be really grateful if you could tell me whether or not you do have an entire department or group that is literally focused on this, because it's so important that we get testing right to ensure access for all, to ensure prompt delivery of test results, to show that everyone has the same ambition and targets.

As we heard from the very shambolic evidence given to us by the head of Public Health Wales, there was a distinct divergence in targets between Welsh Government and the Public Health Wales ambition. We need to ensure appropriate laboratory capacity to ensure the data and results get to the right people. And we need all of this because we need to get safely out of lockdown. So, are you confident that Public Health Wales will be capable of managing the test, trace and protect programme?

Your ambition to have 10,000 tests—you don't say by when; it just says 'over weeks and months'. Is this an actual target, and is it a target that all of the people working in the health services cleave to? 

In terms of health surveillance work by Public Health Wales, are you confident that this will be able to be done in an accurate way given the problems we've had over the last few weeks with data coming out of health boards?

In terms of the contact tracing element, have you more thought about how many people would be needed to do this? You talk about 1,000 and I note that Scotland want about 2,000 for a population of 5.5 million to our 3 million. Is that what you're basing it on? I'd be interested to know that, because we know how difficult it is to get people into the right roles.

And are you really confident that NHS Informatics, not necessarily the most stellar organisation, are able to deliver a single digital platform for contact tracing in the time required? Can you tell us now, once you put the proximity tracing in place, will the follow up after the proximity tracing be the same?

And finally, on this suite of questions, may I ask about the protect element? You talk about people having to self-isolate maybe multiple times. I absolutely understand that and the reasons why, but what support will be put in place for those people, because if they've got caring responsibilities, children trying to go to school, if they live in an environment like a big block of flats, they may constantly be being asked to self-isolate, and this is going to damage their mental health even further?

Thank you to Angela Burns for the series of questions. I'll try to go through them briefly. Yes, we do have a director, a senior civil servant, who's been empowered with oversight, not just within the Government but the Welsh Government needs to co-ordinate and lead the system to make sure that the test, trace, protect programme actually works and that everyone buys into it and understands the varying roles and responsibilities that the different parts of our system will have.

So, that's going to draw together right across not just Public Health Wales, but our other trusts, our health boards and local government, and that is working well. I've been really encouraged by the way that health boards and local government have been working together on the planning phase for wanting to move ahead and to deliver this programme. But Public Health Wales won't be managing the whole programme. They've provided lots of the ideas and some of the clinical oversight. They've provided the public health evidence about what we need to do in overall terms. This is now the operational end of it, and they're not going to lead the operational end of the system. That's again why we've empowered a senior civil servant to lead that, to hold the ring, and, of course, I've got ultimate oversight for what is taking place. 

On the 10,000 or so tests we expect to have, I want those to be able to be in place for the end of May. That's set out in the 'Test Trace Protect' document. That's when I want us to have that sort of capacity in place. As I say, that's a combination of the capacity we already have in place in Wales together with a share of the UK-wide arrangements. So, I've got a reasonable measure of confidence that that will be in place for the end of May, when we want to be able to potentially roll this out on a wider basis.

But our use of those tests, of course, will depend on where we are with the amount of circulation that is taking place from the public. If there's a further release in lockdown measures and people circulate more freely, there's a potential for more contacts, even with the social distancing rules in place. So, at each stage, we may need more tests, and in particular as we get up to the autumn period of time where flu and colds and other illnesses that are often like coronavirus symptoms are in wider circulation as well. That's where we've got to forecast and anticipate a change in demand. 

That also comes back to your point about staff as well, because the initial figure in the document of 1,000 staff comes from plans that health boards and local government are already working together on, and I'm really grateful for the way that the local government family across Wales, of varying political allegiances, have worked together with health boards on planning for this. We're making use of the resource that exists in local government—the staff who aren't necessarily at work. Some of them want more things to do and this is an area where we can help those people to work, and including people in their own homes depending on the digital solution.

So, that's the initial point, but, again, we may not need 1,000 people sat waiting for calls on 1 June, but that's the figure that we're working to with the sort of staff numbers we're going to need. And you're right—it is a rough approximation of the numbers in Scotland, but we'll have to judge the evidence on the extent of the programme and what we're going to need and whether we need more people. That's an active conversation that local government, the health service and, indeed, my officials are having. 

On your point about NWIS, NWIS aren't looking to build their own system within a few weeks; it's actually about what they're procuring and the work they're helping to lead on, but to make sure that that digital system works and is able to integrate with other systems we have in Wales. So, they've got a really important role in helping us get that right.

It's also important, I think, to recognise what I said earlier about the UK Government testing programme. We're now in a position where the data transfer issues are being resolved, and that gives me a much greater amount of comfort, because previously we could have had tests but not understood what the results were, so the utility of them would have been really, really limited. We're now in a much better position, and so that will be useful.

We've got the same issues on the NHSX app that's being developed as well, because if it works, if we resolve all the privacy issues about who owns the data and how it's resolved—and I think we're in the right sort of place on that—then, that will help us in terms of contact tracing, and if that works from the trial, then I'd want Wales to be able to take advantage of that, but, again, to make sure those data transfer issues are resolved.

On the conversation with local government and the wider voluntary sector on supporting people, that is a conversation we're starting. I've had a very constructive series of rapid conversations—and this is an extremely rapid development of policy, and putting it into action, that we're undergoing—but they recognise, as we do, that if we're going to have a group of people, who are being supported now, and they go out into further circulation, doing more things in the future, if we then ask them to self-isolate again, they'll need to be supported. We'll need to have mobile teams around those people who may need to isolate more than once. But the purpose of this really matters. There's harm caused by being in lockdown, and there's potential harm being caused if we ask people to self-isolate again in the future. But it's to balance that harm, and as you heard in the First Minister's statement and questions afterwards, if the R value goes up to 1.1 over a three-month period, that's thousands of extra deaths that will take place in Wales, and we have to bear in mind that difficult balance we have to take. But I certainly won't take a cavalier attitude that could potentially risk the lives of thousands of Welsh citizens, and I will of course continue to keep Members updated.

Thank you for that. So, just for clarity's sake, I want to confirm that it's 10,000 tests by the end of May, because your document says,

'We will continue to increase this capacity over the coming weeks and months, potentially to as many as 10,000 tests a day', and I think we just need that clarity, given the shambles we've seen over the last few weeks.

I'd like to just turn quickly to non-COVID harms, and particularly to the diagnosis and treatment of critical conditions such as cancer. You mention the non-COVID harms in your statement. Now, we were already behind on so many metrics before the pandemic. People are contacting me because they need investigative treatment, they can't get it, they think they have cancer, or they've been told they might have cancer. They're really worried, and they see that hospitals are under less pressure than we all thought that they would be, and so these people are suffering excruciating mental torment, not sure what's going on and when they can get that treatment.

I understand the health boards are working on this, but when will services start? Can you give us a rough time frame? Are we talking a couple of weeks or a couple of months? And can we restart the screening programme, such as for breast cancer, because that's not hospital based—that's a mobile unit? Can we use the mobile units of organisations such as Tenovus to actually give and to administer treatments? Because, again, those kinds of areas should be easy to keep as green zones. What plans do you have to cope with the backlog, and how do you plan to engage with the public to get them to come back into these vital services for the treatment that they so desperately need?

Yes. Thank you for the follow-up questions. On cancer, actually, we had better waiting times relative to England before lockdown took place and, of course, we'd also introduced the new single cancer pathway, which is a more honest measure of waits within the system, and it's been widely welcomed both by clinicians and the campaigning third sector. So, actually, on cancer, we're in, relatively, a better position in many ways than over the border in England, particularly given the fact that in Wales, as a poorer, older country, you'd normally expect cancer outcomes to be markedly different and more adverse in Wales. So, actually, we were in a better position at the start, but I don't want to lose sight of the fact that there are some people who are not coming into our cancer services, even where there's an urgent need. Cancer services never stop. The urgent need never stops. What we've seen, though, is a drop-off in some of the referrals in and a drop-off in the number of people attending, and that is a choice that people are actively making. I've had conversations with NHS chairs and chief executives, and they've had their clinicians actively speak with people to try to reassure them that the system is safe to treat them, but people are still fearful and are pausing or postponing their own treatments. Now, that's part of the point about wanting to keep on reassuring the public that we're doing this work, we want people to come in, and, in the wider restart of our system, including the screening service that is actively under consideration, there are things that I'm looking for, just as Members are as well, because those urgent care needs that have been paused over a period of time, well, that is building up need that isn't going away of its own accord.

That's why the operating plans for the first quarter will be important, and I fully expect to update the Chamber and the committee again on those plans as they're being developed, because, in terms of the balance of harm, some of the things that I've been particularly aware of and concerned about over the past weeks are the figures and information that we've seen.

So, I can give you a very clear reassurance that urgent cancer care services have not stopped; they're still available today. We want people to use them, but we need to build the confidence of the public to use them, which I think was Angela Burns's final point, and that's why I think statements from myself, from the NHS Wales chief executive and, indeed, clinicians across the country encouraging people to use our services will be really important in a consistent way to rebuild public confidence, to make sure that this treatment really can make a difference in limiting harm in the future, and that people have the confidence to come and use them, because the NHS, as I said in my statement, is open for business.

I'd like to start with the 'Test Trace Protect' document and thank the Minister for its publication. It's useful because it adds to our sum of knowledge about what Government is trying to achieve, but I think a detailed plan for testing, tracing and isolating was long overdue, and I think it remains, unfortunately, long overdue. What we have here is largely a statement of principle that few would disagree with, in reality: that having a test and trace strategy is vital in the battle against coronavirus and that it will need to bring lots of different partners together to deliver it.

We all, surely, hope to be able to start moving towards significantly lifting restrictions in the not-too-distant future. That's what we all hope for, but we can't start thinking of significantly lifting lockdown restrictions before we have a robust test and trace plan, and I don't think this can be described as anything like a robust, comprehensive or detailed plan, so we'll wait for that.

The document mentions, as we heard, potentially, the need for 10,000 tests a day—it's clear on that—double the current capacity that we know has taken a very long time to reach, yet Public Health Wales suggest the range of numbers of symptomatic people you may have to test is between 7,500 and 17,000. Surely, that's what we should be aiming for. There is reference to 20,000 later in the paper, but it's very unclear from the document what that refers to. I think you may have made it a bit clearer in your oral statement, but, in terms of the document itself, it's very unclear.

It's not just about the numbers, it's about how you process those tests and go about the tracing. You talk of easy and rapid access to testing. How quick do we need—how rapid does it need to be in order to be effective? What's the local level of access to all our communities going to be to this, given that we only have a certain number of mass testing centres?

A strategy, at the end of the day, is only as good as the implementation plan that we need to put it into action, and there's no detailed plan here that I can see to put the already widely accepted principles into practice. So, when can we expect that strategy that we have to turn into something that can get us ready to actually lift restrictions, not just talk about it in abstract terms?

In terms of the strategy document, it's similar to the strategy document that Scotland published, in the sense that it's a public-facing strategy document to give an explanation of the strategy we're going to follow, about what the ask is of the public and how our whole system is gearing up to deliver that. There will, of course, be a detailed operational plan that's in development between the different parts of our service, and we'll learn more about that as, at some point over the next week, we'll have health boards and some of their partner local authorities looking to trial some of the contact tracing element of it, with a particular focus on the care home sector. There'll be lots of learning to take from that. I'm expecting to have confirmation of the particular pilot areas, if you like, in different parts of the country that are going to move forward. That again comes from the work that the health boards and local authorities are undertaking themselves. There'll be lots of learning over that trial period before we get to the end of May, not just in those pilot areas, but to deliberately share across the rest of the country.

So, actually, in a really brief period of time, we've had lots and lots of development, and real progress. We'll have a trial that's going to start in different areas next week, we'll have learning that comes from that, and, of course, I expect that not just in terms of confirming who's undertaking trials, but then the learning from those as we build towards having that more detailed operational plan in place—so, all the detail about the scripts that the tracers will need to use, and the detail of it you can expect to find in those documents available in the service to go with the training for people. This document, though, is a public-facing document that says, 'This is the strategy we're going to take. This is the approach. Here are more of the numbers following the leaked draft report that people discussed. We now have more finesse and understanding across our whole system of what's needed and how we're going to go about it'.

In terms of your point about local access, that's why we've got mobile testing units and it's also why our ability now to make proper use of the home testing service is really important. It's UK led, but there's been sign-up and agreement from all countries in the UK to make use of that home testing service, and that will mean that our reach in remote areas of the country—and they exist in rural, semi-rural and urban Wales as well—will be increased. So, that's a really important step forward, and, again, the point I made in my statement really does matter—to have the ability to have the results of those fed back into the clinical record to make the maximum use of it I think will be really, really important. Of course, that will make more of a difference when we have a reliable antibody test and we're able to deploy that within our system.

I'm pleased the Minister mentioned the care sector. I want to turn to care homes now. It's a very real concern for me that more robust steps are not being taken to safeguard this sector, which of course is facing such a huge risk. The Minister will know that I'm of the view that the Government needs to have a plan to extend asymptomatic testing to include all care homes, whatever their size. The evidence is very strong on that.

But we need to look at how we can close the door on the virus reaching care homes in the first place. I still have people in the care sector telling me that they're extremely concerned about people who are released from hospital after treatment into care homes, with the possibility, of course, of bringing the virus with them. There has been some tightening up on testing. It is shocking that there isn't automatic testing already for people who are released from hospitals, but we need more than that. Would the Minister agree with me that we need to put steps in place in order to ensure a barrier, or quarantine, if you like, between that area that could be at risk, namely the hospital, and the care home—perhaps providing seven days' quarantine for an individual before they go back to a care home, in a hospital green zone, or even in a hotel, in order to ensure that we close the door as firmly as possible on the risk that this virus could reach care homes, because we know what the dangers are when that happens?

Thank you. As I said before, and I guess I'll have the opportunity to say this on every single occasion I come here, when the evidence changes, if the advice changes, the Government will be happy to reconsider its position on any of the areas of activity we're undertaking. That includes the developing evidence base on asymptomatic testing in care homes. We made a move on changing our policy on testing across the whole care home environment, you'll recall, a couple of weeks ago for areas where there was either a confirmed case or a suspected case where someone was symptomatic, so we'll learn more from that about asymptomatic testing, the likely prevalence and also the value in how we deploy our testing resource, and the value we expect to get from that. It's really important to understand how we use it in the best way to keep as many people safe, well and alive as possible. So, again, if the evidence does change, then I'm happy to move, and I'm certainly not looking to be stubborn and dig my heels into the ground on any of these issues, because it's all got to be about the overwhelming priority and purpose, which is about keeping people alive and well.

On hospital discharge, we've introduced a policy where there should be testing on discharge in hospital before they go to a care home. If Members of any group are aware of somewhere where they think that isn't happening, or they've got cases of people who have come to them, they should take that up with the health board initially, but if there isn't an appropriate response, then by all means contact my office, because I would want to know if those issues aren't being addressed in accordance with the ministerial decision on this that I have already made and communicated.

The points about quarantine are rather more difficult because, again, we need an evidence base on where the value is for that. The Member and others will know that the phrase 'quarantine' is probably unhelpful, but I understand what the Member is trying to get at. But if you're going to hold people in an environment, what environment is that? Are you still making sure that people are mobilised, because real harm is caused when people are kept in an inappropriate environment, where a hospital is no longer the right place for someone, especially older people, then real harm can be caused, not just healthcare-acquired infections but also physical deconditioning as well.

When we're talking about the harms that are caused, what we don't want to do is ignore that harm that really can be caused and the wider social harm that can be caused by people becoming deconditioned and losing their independence as well. What I don't want to do is to fill up all of our field hospitals as centres where people are held before going back into the care home sector. We've had a proper national conversation on how we make use of that capacity. What I would not want is that we potentially have a further rise in coronavirus in September and our field hospitals are then full of people who could and should be in care homes.

We need to understand the evidence, we need to have a conversation with all parts of our system, and that includes local government and people like Care Forum Wales, who represent many people within the care home sector, to understand what the right answer is, how we build confidence in the system, how we understand the different harms that can be caused by making different choices. So, it's not a closed-door response, but I do think we've got to think about what that evidence looks like, and there's already a conversation that I've asked for to take place between health and local government, and then to draw in our colleagues in Care Forum Wales to understand what that could and should look like. 

Minister, on Monday night, many of us watched the heroic actions of the ICU staff at the Royal Gwent Hospital as they battled to save the lives of those infected with COVID-19. It was both truly heartbreaking and heartwarming at the same time. It brought home the sheer horror of the disease and it highlighted the fantastic levels of care and compassion of all the staff working in our critical care departments. We simply cannot thank them enough. They went through hell to save lives, and the least we can do now as a public body is to stick to social distancing rules. Minister, thankfully, we seem to be over the worst of the outbreak and, according to the modelling update provided by the technical advisory cell, the number of cases is halving every 10 days or so. However, history tells us that pandemics come in waves. Minister, we were woefully unprepared for the first wave. That was no-one's fault, but we have to learn lessons. So what steps are you taking to ensure that we are fully prepared for future outbreaks of this or any other pandemic?

We must also ensure that we are not prolonging the current outbreak. I was contacted by a constituent yesterday whose elderly mother was sent home after being told that she probably had coronavirus. This lady was sent home to spread the infection on to her family and carers. My constituent is still extremely unwell and is aged 79. Minister, why aren't we testing everyone leaving hospital to ensure that we are not adding to infection rates?

Minister, there is emerging evidence of a strong correlation between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 mortality rates. Given this, and the evidence that the risk of spreading the virus is much less outdoors, shouldn't we be encouraging people to spend more time outdoors, provided they stick to the social distancing rules, remembering that not every family has a garden for children to play in, and whilst also noting at the same time the rise in cases in Germany after relaxing some of the measures?

Minister, our whole approach must be a balancing act, and the harms of coronavirus have to be weighed up against the harms of strict stay-at-home orders. So, can you give us your assurance that tackling the harms associated with loneliness and isolation will be a key factor in the Welsh Government's approach, going forward? Will you also outline a timeline for when our NHS will be open for all patients and not just those with life-threatening illness?

And, as ever, I thank you and your department for all the efforts in the fight against coronavirus. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you for the questions. I'll try to get through them as quickly as I can, Llywydd. On pandemic preparations, we'll have lots of lessons to learn on the back of this. Our primary preparations were for a flu-style pandemic, but this is a slightly different form of pandemic. We'll have lots of lessons to learn. We're learning as we go, and the way that we're not just stocking but restocking our personal protective equipment stores is part of what we're doing in the here and now, but we'll definitely need to take a look back ourselves. And as I've said before, I'm sure that, in every Parliament across the United Kingdom, there'll be a desire across parties to look back at what's happened when we finally reach the end of this to learn lessons, to understand what we did, but, crucially, to understand what we need to do for the future. I hope that inquiry can take place sooner rather than later, because that would mean that we're actually at the end of the coronavirus pandemic, but I do appreciate that this is going to have to wait until we really do reach that point in time. 

On the point about testing every hospital resident, I think, from the example you've given, if they were symptomatic, as you suggest, then that's the sort of thing where there should have been a clinical view on that and a test offered, if appropriate, before they left. And again, I think this is the sort of thing to take up with the health board directly, and if you don't get a satisfactory response then do come back to me. As I said in response to Rhun ap Iorwerth, we're continuing to review the evidence on what we should do, and that may well change what we need to do around testing of both hospital patients but also of our staff in health and social care as well. 

In terms of spending more time outdoors, we changed the regulations in Wales. One of the modest and cautious easements we made to the lockdown regulations and approach here in Wales was to say that people could go out for exercise more than once, because the evidence the First Minister referred to was about the fact that the half-life of coronavirus is significantly reduced outside and in sunlight. So, that's a change that we have made to encourage more people to go out more than once a day for exercise. 

And in terms of your point about loneliness and isolation, it's been a point that Ministers considered at each stage in the changes we're making, and it's a matter of real concern. There are many Members in the Chamber who I know, like me, have older parents who they are effectively caring for, and it's something that bothers me about my own family and I know other Members take that seriously too as well. So, the strategy for loneliness and isolation is part of the support we've put in place and that we funded especially with the third sector to provide support. That will absolutely be one of the key factors we need to consider in terms of exiting lockdown and the eventual path to and through recovery. 

And in terms of a timeline for further NHS activity, I should be in a position to provide a better idea about that as I both receive the plans on quarter 1, and, as I indicated I think in response to Angela Burns, I do intend to bring back a further statement to give some more detail on that. And I believe I've had the pleasure of an invite from Dr Lloyd to return to the health committee in the next few weeks as well. So, there will be opportunities for me to set out where the NHS is and to face questions from Members on that.  

[Inaudible] COVID-19-related inflammatory disease, which affects children in the UK and, indeed, other parts of the world. Will the Minister give an assessment of the risk to children and young people in Wales, and update us on any action taken by the Welsh NHS? And could you also confirm that any evidence that emerges in respect of child-specific COVID-19 illness risks will be factored into the decision-making process in respect of school reopenings?

And can you also comment on reports that, in England, the UK Government is recruiting unpaid volunteers, working alongside paid workers, to carry out COVID-19 tests? Do you agree with me and with the trade union Unison that this really takes the notion of volunteering way too far? So, will you be able to confirm on behalf of the Welsh Government that those contracted to carry out testing in Wales are properly trained, properly provided with protective equipment and that they are being properly paid whilst carrying out this work? 

Thank you, Mick, and I think it's important to acknowledge that Members may or may not have seen reports of an inquest that opened today of a very young child who had passed away after their mother passed away, with COVID-19 being I think the primary cause of the death of the mother. And whilst not the primary cause of death of the very young child, I think the child was just a few days old. The general evidence is that despite the tragic circumstances that are being resolved by the coroner there, the general understanding is that younger children have a different response and are a lot less likely to come to harm. That doesn't mean, though, that we should be cavalier about our approach to young children and their care and treatment, and that's why this Government is taking a properly cautious approach to school opening, because we don't fully understand all of the evidence about the transmission both between children, and between children and adults of this particular virus, because there was real concern at the start of this that you could potentially have children mixing with older grandparents, where people in a lower risk group could be mixing with people in a higher risk group and you could end up transferring harm. And one of the really difficult parts about this, I know, is that there are grandparents who aren't able to see their grandchildren. I know that there are grandparents in the Assembly and that we've all got constituents who feel some of that real pain and difficulty in not being able to see their family. 

But the school reopening will have to take account of the developing evidence and the developing understanding we have of the impact upon children, but crucially about the behaviour of adults around school openings as well, because, actually, if children themselves are less likely to come to harm, you've still got to think about the staff and how staff mix if they're going back to a school that's been reopened. You also need to consider parents dropping off and collecting, in particular in a primary school environment, around the school gates. So, we've got to think through how all of that could work. We're not at the point where that decision is being made in Wales, but I can give you the assurance that you're looking for, that the evidence will definitely lead to and inform the choice that the Welsh Government makes. And when that choice is made, you'll hear from our education Minister first. 

On your point about volunteers and the testing programme, I'm happy to confirm that our approach in Wales is not to ask people to undertake voluntary work to either administer tests or, indeed, to undertake the contact tracing that we've been discussing earlier today. Where it's paid work, they should be paid, and the appropriate conditions for that employment adhered to, including if there is a need to wear PPE. So, that's not the way that we're looking to roll out the service here, and it's for England to explain what they're doing in England, but the approach we have here in Wales is that you can expect paid staff and proper terms and conditions to do that work. 

Yesterday, an e-mail from the Welsh Government detailing the criteria for the extra £40 million for adult social care, announced on 14 April, advised that eligibility is limited to local authority commissioned care only. So, I therefore query why care homes with NHS or privately funded clients have been excluded. Now, because of this amended guidance, issued only by e-mail and not published, as has been mentioned, by the Welsh Government, one local authority has just this morning asked their nursing homes to clarify which of their PPE is used for social care and which is used for nursing purposes. I find that to be outrageous, Minister.

And, during last week's Plenary, the First Minister denied my claim that local authorities knew nothing as yet about the £500 bonus for carers announced on 1 May, and how it would be distributed. I have had it confirmed very robustly this week that no criteria or guidance have been issued. So, when will this be the case, and when will this money actually reach the pockets of all our valuable social care workers? Diolch.

Okay. On the £40 million, it's been issued to local government to support the social care sector. I would expect that those people who have care commissioned through the national health service will find they're having the appropriate support for their businesses as well. I'm happy to take up a further conversation with her. I know that our lead director here on social care and integration is having that direct conversation with the Welsh Local Government Association, with the Association of Directors of Social Services, and I expect that's a conversation that should reach a proper conclusion. We also have regular engagements between myself and the WLGA, and, of course, there's a regular—three times a week, I think—leaders call from all 22 leaders with the local government Minister, and opportunities to have those conversations to understand how we use that money. I also think it's really important to recognise that this isn't a one-shot. We're going to be in these extraordinary circumstances for months to come, and we need to make sure that the calm, rational and, at times, searching conversations we need to have are the way that we deal with this rather than making rather more extraordinary claims. 

On PPE, I'm not sure that I really understood the point that the Member was making; it seemed to be confused about whether or not local councils are asking about how PPE is used for nursing and non-nursing care, or whether it was about the provision. But, ultimately, the Government is paying for all of that. We are paying for the PPE that is distributed to nursing homes. We're paying for PPE whether people are receiving nursing care or not. In normal times, we wouldn't be doing that, so it's another marker of the extraordinary times that we're in—the fact that the Government is providing that care to employers who have legal responsibilities for PPE. But it's the only way to make sure that adequate PPE reaches our front-line members of staff where they're actually providing care for our constituents.

On the £500 payment, there are ongoing conversations and negotiations about the terms of how that payment is made to people delivering front-line social care. And I welcome the fact that the Member wants to see people have that in their pockets; I hope she'll join with us in asking the UK Government to make sure that's provided free of tax. That would be a welcome bonus for these relatively low-paid members of staff. And I hope that her and her group will lobby the Chancellor and the UK Government to make sure that happens, rather than seeing some of that money snatched away in the form of tax and national insurance. But it's an active conversation between employers, trade unions and the Government about how the detail of that should be worked through, for example, to make sure that a one-shot payment doesn't compromise in-work benefit payments to some of these members of staff. I wouldn't want to see these people penalised for a real gesture of recognition of the extraordinary times that these members of staff are living with, and the care that they're providing in each and every one of our communities.

Minister, local government workers and national Government workers are clearly designated as key workers by the Welsh Government for the Government's testing programme. However, we have heard examples of workers within the Department for Work and Pensions in Wales being refused testing for COVID. There are reports that the DWP itself is telling its staff who are working here in Wales to go to Bristol to access testing. So, can the Minister confirm that he will ensure that key workers who need a COVID test can access that test here in Wales, including those here in Wales working for departments of Government that have yet to be devolved to this Senedd?

Well I won't draw up the invitation that the Member has given to get involved in the wider constitutional debate about which departments are and aren't devolved, but I'm aware of the issue at both the DWP and also the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, and those issues are being addressed. If the Member still has people coming to him towards the end of this week who are saying the issue hasn't been resolved, then I'd ask him to write to me, because it's a matter, like I said, that I'm aware of and is being addressed with both the local health board and indeed Public Health Wales.

In my discussions with public health bodies, a figure of 3,000 staff has been identified to make the trace system work. The latest figures I've been given is that, for every one person who is identified with the virus during the tracing process, a further 20 to 30 people would need to be traced. You've said that staff doing that tracing will come primarily from local authorities. So can I ask, from what kinds of jobs should the staff doing this work be deployed? What training and expertise will they require, and who will design and deliver this training? And are you confident the staff can be found in sufficient number?

Okay. Thank you. In terms of the numbers, we've updated the numbers from the initial draft that Public Health Wales provided. That's why we get to the figure of 1,000 that we published today; that's the reason. But as I explained earlier, you can expect the number to move around. And that's part of the challenge here, because when we start—if we're going to start from 1 June, for the sake of argument—we may not need everyone and that full 1,000 at that point in time. We need to have enough people trained though so the system is robust. And, actually, Public Health Wales are working with the rest of the system on the training for what people will need to be able to do, how they run through that and the scripts they'll have to use, and then how they will need to record that information. That's all being worked through. And you'll see the trial of that—some of the trial of that, at least—next week, which will help to inform and I think further advance that work.

In terms of not just the numbers, but where they're coming from, local government have been really keen to play an active part in this, because they already have people who have got IT skills, who are used to using IT as a regular part of their job, who are keen to have work to do. They're really committed public servants, even in their specific area of work they were doing before lockdown, and because of lockdown, some of those activities aren't taking place as well. So, there are people who want to be redeployed, who want to work in this area. Now, that means that we've got a group of staff. The Welsh Local Government Association, again across all different political leaderships, in different parts of the country, say that there are enough staff to meet the need that we'll have for, if you like, that contact tracing team. So, we're relying on the detailed conversations that are taking place there.

But there will then be a challenge, if we are able to successfully unlock further areas of activity over a period of months, as to what that will mean in terms of the financial pressures, but also then, if other areas of activity are returning, it's about how we make sure that we don't suddenly lose staff who are working in this way, but to make sure that the whole system is still robust and can effectively work. And those are things we're continuing to work through with local government. But I really do think that, for the first stage of contact tracing, it'll be essentially a local government resource that will do that, in partnership with their local health boards. I do have a good measure of confidence that we'll have enough staff to make this work and we will of course need to address a range of challenges to make sure those staff are still in place in the right number in the months ahead, because we're talking about many, many months of a contact tracing system in place when the test, trace, protect model will need to be active right across Wales.

Minister, could you tell me what testing is being done in Wales of prisoners before they're released back into the community, please?

That would depend on the referrals made from the prison service. It's difficult, because when they're within the prison service, they're in a non-devolved service and then, if they're going to leave, they'll very quickly come into contact with, in the great majority of cases, devolved services, whether it's housing support or whether indeed it's social care needs that a number of people have. If you think about the prison in Usk, a lot of people there are actually quite old and they have a range of care and support needs. But the testing should be in accordance with our broader testing policy, whether people are unsymptomatic, and, of course, that goes for staff as well.

Can I ask you, Minister, one of the issues that we went into before this pandemic was that on the agenda of many local health boards was the prospect of significant reorganisation of some of their services? Now obviously, because of this particular crisis, many health boards have frozen their plans and aren't progressing with them, understandably, but you may be aware that the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board is due to look at its vascular services—it was due to receive a paper at its health board meeting this week. I'm pleased that they have deferred consideration of that paper, because it was not published within sufficient time to meet the Government's requirements of the board—i.e. before seven days in advance of the meeting. But can you tell us: will you reassure the public that there will not be significant reorganisations of services done in the background while we're dealing with this crisis, in order that all of the energy of the health service can be focused absolutely on dealing with what is the major challenge at the moment, which is COVID-19?

Well, the health service has been reorganised, effectively, to deal with this major challenge. We were talking earlier about some of the challenges of non-COVID harm that had taken place because we've had to refocus our whole service in the way we scale up different parts of the service, from creating a field hospital to the extra critical care capacity that we've got. So, the broader reform agenda that 'A Healthier Wales' set out has obviously had to be largely paused.

But as we return to having more activity, we're still going to need to consider how we operate effective services in this changed environment and what it means for the future. But I would not expect that there would be a new and radically different proposal that we introduced—it's rather difficult to engage our own staff in those or indeed the public. The caveat that I think we do need though, and we all need to be grown up about this, is that there could be changes to services that have to take place from a patient safety point of view, and what I wouldn't want to do is for us to be saying that that could not take place because of the wider pandemic. But if there's any idea that change will be sneaked through or pushed through under the radar, that isn't going to happen. But more than that, though, we will need to think about how we take forward some of the things that have happened, so, for example, the changes in greater use of technology and the opportunity to reform out-patients. There'll be a range of things that we will want to do and not simply go back, in every aspect, to the way things were before. But on vascular services, for example, I certainly don't anticipate there being a major change, but that would be a matter for the board, with the paper that they consider and the review that they've already instituted and have put in place.

Research published this week from the Office for National Statistics shows that people living in poverty are more susceptible to catching COVID-19, no doubt for a variety of reasons relating to poor housing and the likelihood of them being in jobs where social distancing is not possible. People living in poverty are also more likely to have medical conditions that make the virus more severe. Now, I represent an area where poverty is particularly rife, so these numbers were really sobering.

Minister, none of the factors that have led to this poverty were inevitable; they're the product of political choices of Governments that have condemned some sections of society to an increased risk. If poverty were treated with the seriousness of a national security threat, it would not have been allowed to proliferate. But it does undermine our biosecurity, so I'd ask you, Minister, what assessment you make of this link between poverty and the deaths from the virus, and what steps the Government will take to counter this scourge of poverty that's risen over the past 20 years? What measures will you take to reduce the R rate in poorer areas? 

Thank you. Well, it's no surprise to me that people who are the least well-off in our country run the greatest risks in terms of their health. There is a direct relationship between poor health and poor economic outcomes as well that don't match the talent that exists in those communities, and I see that within my own constituency that I'm proud and privileged to represent. It's a picture that many of us in the Assembly will recognise.

The challenge of where you have poorer ill-health outcomes to start off with and then having widespread communal spread of COVID-19 and then you have the overlay of how closely people live together, people's inability, potentially, to travel to work in their own car—. I represent one of the parts of the country that has one of the lowest levels of car ownerships; there are different challenges that people face in how they live their lives. But it also reiterates the importance of the test, trace and protect scheme that we're going to be introducing across the country. It's about protecting people from that harm that would otherwise take place. It's the importance of the social distancing rules. The further people adhere to that guidance and those rules, the more likely we are to prevent harm taking place in any family or any community.

And I can honestly and absolutely say that, for this Government, the achievement of social justice drove us and Government-supporting backbenchers into politics in the first place. It's the reason I gave up my other job to stand for election; it's the reason I joined my political party; and it's right at the centre the reason for being of this Welsh Labour-led Government. I'm proud that it is.

We'll have a great deal more to do at the end of the coronavirus pandemic, though, because we will see harm that will have been unequally distributed across our country, and that's why the path to recovery has to take account of that and think about how we rebuild and remodel, not just our economy, but the values that drive our choices. For example, the value we place on social care workers, who we'll all applaud on a Thursday evening, but then to consider how much we are prepared to pay them, what we expect them to do in caring for some of our vulnerable citizens and what sort of society we want to build around that to make those choices possible. 

Minister, earlier this week, BBC One Wales aired the programme Critical: Coronavirus in Intensive Care. It was filmed by staff themselves in the Royal Gwent Hospital in my constituency showing them working together in extreme circumstances with dedication, kindness and humour, expertly caring for patients with compassion. The struggles and challenges were there for all to see: working long shifts in full PPE, not being able to see facial expressions of those you're working with and seeing so many people not able to pull through. It's difficult to watch, but the camaraderie and spirit shown by the incredible NHS staff is nothing short of amazing and we owe them our deepest gratitude. The staff are under no illusions in these difficult times that it will end anytime soon.

While in the Royal Gwent Hospital and Aneurin Bevan University Health Board more generally, the numbers on ICU are back within their normal capacity, the concern over any further waves is most certainly there. What support and guidance can the Welsh Government give for those who've been at the front line of this pandemic for over three months to ensure that they have time to recover and are prepared for whatever comes next? And what assessments have you made of the needs of the workforce over the coming weeks and months ahead? And how can workforce planning reflect this?  

Thank you. I think it's—[Inaudible.] I've obviously visited the Royal Gwent with Jayne Bryant in her constituency on a number of occasions, and there are people who I know and have met on several occasions who work there, and I'm not surprised at all to see compassion, care and camaraderie reflected in the programme that went out.

In terms of what we're doing, we're working with the Welsh Partnership Forum that brings together the employers and indeed the staff side within the health service to look at what happens in the future. It's a regular feature, one I'm really proud of. We invest lots of time, energy and effort in those workplace relationships here in Wales, and in particular in our health service.

I've actually agreed to further fund the health for health professionals service. We've trialled that and we've rolled that out more consistently so there's more practical support for staff who I know are finding some of the challenges that they have gone through on behalf of all of us difficult. And we shouldn’t try to pretend that these people are able to simply carry on and on and on working the length of time they work for with all of the challenges and the real difficulties that they see as well. So, the scaling up of critical care capacity doesn’t come cost-free—there is a cost for our staff that they have paid as well.

And for me, in so many ways, it reiterates the importance of our 'stay at home, stay safe, stay local' message, because the best thing that we can do to support those staff is to follow the rules. These aren’t silly rules that have been thought up capriciously by a Government that is doing something because it can do; these are serious rules to help protect the public and to keep more of us alive. And it's why we're in this position now, with a peak that we reached earlier than initially expected, and fewer people having suffered real and unavoidable and permanent harm, including mortality, because of the rules that the public have followed.

And that will be really important as we phase out of lockdown—that people continue to remember that, because those staff need a break. And when we get into more stages of reaching past lockdown, people should not behave as if the world can be normal again and ignore social distancing rules when they’re in place. Because that will see more people going into those intensive care units and more pressure on our staff. And I hope that people consider that, not just on a Thursday when we're out applauding and cheering the NHS and key workers, but when we go about our day-to-day business as well.   

What additional support can you offer scientists at Bangor University who are carrying out research into levels of the virus in the sewerage network? Although it isn't infectious at that point, this approach can be used to measure how much COVID-19 exists within a city or a town environment. And do you agree that this approach and this research in measuring COVID levels could be very useful in monitoring the spread of the virus at a local level, thereby assisting in creating a local response as circumstances change?

Yes, which is why I highlighted it in my press conference yesterday. I made specific mention of the research that scientists at Bangor University are leading on. And whilst we don't necessarily like to think about what happens with our sewerage every day of the week, it is a really interesting and useful way to find out—and potentially at a much earlier stage, as you mention—what is happening within each local community, within each local system, both to give an early warning of where coronavirus is on the rise, but also to give us a better idea, crucially as well, of if there's been a sustained fall-off as well. So, you wouldn’t normally get excited about testing sewerage, but this is a really crucial area of research for us, and if we're able to understand it at scale, then it can be really useful, not just in Wales, but across the UK, and I'm very proud of the work that Bangor scientists are doing with Welsh Water and the United Utilities.

Minister, a couple of points. In your document, 'Test Trace Protect', it highlights the 10,000 that have already been mentioned and possibly up to 20,000, but there's anticipation in that document that some of the gap will be filled by UK Government-type testing. It's been previously mentioned that the testing in England is two swabs and testing in Wales is one swab, and therefore, they're not necessarily compatible in how they get the data into the Welsh NHS system. Are you now confident that that difference has been resolved and that, if you are using the UK test base, the data will be able to come into Wales and work with the Welsh NHS? That's one issue.

On care homes, can you please ensure that the advice from Public Health Wales is consistent with the guidance from Welsh Government? I have seen evidence from Public Health Wales telling a care home that, even though they've had COVID-19 in their home, that's an old situation and not current, and therefore, they would not be tested. Now, after some arguments, effectively, we managed to get that home tested and the staff tested, but they have a sister home in the same town that is not being tested and there are staff that'll transfer between the two. Again, the guidance from Welsh Government says that that's possible. Can you please ensure that Public Health Wales follows Welsh Government guidance and gives that information out to the care homes? Because it is confusing for the care homes when we're telling them your guidance and Public Health Wales is not, and it's important, therefore, that staff get tested. 

Thank you. On both points, if I deal with—I think there are three points, if I may. Because on the data transfer, as I said earlier, that first point, that's been a key factor in being able to unlock that UK testing capacity and that system to come into Wales, because previously, it would have been of much more limited value, but now I think we can make proper use of it.

The difference between the two-swab and the one-swab test is the capacity that we've created here in Wales using the one-swab test we'll still make use of, but we'll also now be able to make use of the UK testing capacity. We just need to make sure that it goes to the right lab. So, for example, the home delivery service will be taking advantage of and taking part in the UK-wide arrangements. That means that those people will only get a two-swab test to self-administer, to return, and then that will be tested in the appropriate lab to make sure that we get the right result. So, I'm positive about the fact that we're not going to see a significant problem in the way that that's administered, but it's a fair point, and like I said, for me, the bigger issue is the data transfer.

On your point about care homes, I spoke today with NHS chairs and chief executives and I went through each of the health board areas the position they're in with care home testing specifically, and I've asked each health board to make sure that, within their local area, together with local government and the care home sector, that they provide a singular message within that local system about what testing is available and how to get hold of it and who to contact so that there's clarity within each part of the country. Because it's not a matter that gives me any great pleasure to understand that there are anecdotal differences in different parts of the country.

I know that Members are raising them because they're concerns that are being raised with them, but I'm more positive, as we sit down now, that real progress has been made over the last week and that the wrinkles that I recognise do still exist in other parts of the country are going to be resolved. And I could not have been clearer about my expectations, but the clarity in that message, should, I think, give reassurance to yourself and other Members across parties who want to hear that consistent message, and then, of course, the consistent implementation of it as well.

Minister, I was very pleased to see the strong focus on mental health in your statement. You'll be aware that organisations like Hafal, Mind, and, indeed, the Government's own suicide prevention adviser, Professor Ann John, have raised concerns about the impact of the pandemic on mental health.

I'm pleased to see that there is to be a COVID mental health monitoring tool. Can I ask you for some more detail on that? How, for example, will action be taken if there are any deficits or particular problems identified? What assurances can you give that support for those who are self-harming, at risk of suicide or in mental health crisis will be prioritised? And as we come out of this pandemic, I am confident that the mental health implications are going to be significant, and on that basis, mental health really must have priority with physical health, as we plan to come through this pandemic. What assurances can you give that mental health will be just as much a central consideration as we look to make those exit plans?

Okay, perhaps on the specifics, I think it might be helpful—. Because I think you'll want more detail than a 30-second answer, so perhaps if the Member writes to me, I'll happily write back to the Member and share that correspondence with other Members as well on the details you have. I know that also means I'm asking for something because I wouldn't be surprised if you managed to add more questions into the letter, but to give something in writing, to give the level of clarity and detail that I know you want to look for, because to be fair, when we went through some of this at the children and young people committee in terms of in particular children and young people's mental health, I know it's a consistent area of interest for you and the whole committee. So, I'd like to be able to give you a more comprehensive answer that can be shared and put into the public domain.

And that must then lead to the continued work that we've done over a period of years in making sure that mental health is a priority. That's not just about the budget settlement, where we put more more money in, but the unfinished business of continuing to both deal with the stigma that still exists within the country about mental health, mental illness, but also then about the work we do in terms of parity of esteem in the way that the health service sees it as well and then recognising how mental health and physical health are sometimes linked as well. So, I'm really determined that, when we come out of this, when we know there'll be more physical harm to deal with, that isn't seen as the priority over and above mental health, but, actually, there's got to be genuine parity and understanding of how we address those very real concerns. As I say, all of us can probably point to areas in our own experience where we have concerns about people that we know, and that is very much the case in the constituents that we represent as well, so I'm more than happy to give that assurance and I look forward to receiving your letter.

Finally, Dawn Bowden.

Can I just follow on from a question asked earlier by Angela Burns? Because this week I had reason to use an NHS facility myself, on a matter that was non-COVID related, and, following a remote consultation with my GP, I was able to promptly get an x-ray, a service that in my area has been transferred now from Prince Charles Hospital to Ysbyty Cwm Cynon for non-COVID related matters, and perhaps I should just take this opportunity to say a big thank you to all the staff there, who welcomed me, and they treated me with the dignity and respect that I think has become the trademark of our NHS workforce. However, I have to say that what surprised me was how empty the hospital was. And I'm sure there were people on the wards, but I expected to see a range of people in waiting areas who needed x-rays and other standard procedures, but that wasn't the case. And I know that you've stressed the need to resume a range of routine services, and you dealt with the issues around cancer in your answers to Angela Burns, but can I ask what practical progress is being made to get patients routinely back into the Welsh NHS so that we don't see this backlog of illness and disease? Because, despite the messages that the NHS is open, if my experience at YCC is anything to go by this week, it certainly doesn't seem to be getting through.

Minister. Minister's microphone. Yes.

In a reversal of fortune. Excellent. [Laughter.] I share the concerns you have, because, when I look at the figures, and when I can see the fall-off in activity for areas that are still open for business, we're still not at normal activity, even in our front-door services like A&E. We're still seeing people opting not to come in, and that concern that is leading to those choices being made is something that—in response to both Lynne Neagle's questions about recognising the mental health harm that can be caused by lockdown, there is of course physical harm potentially where people are not coming in for those urgent care needs. I don't believe the number of people who would have had strokes in the last two months has fallen off, but, actually, our activity over the last two months isn't what we would normally expect at this time of year; the same with other harms as well.

So, I'm really keen—which is why I want to come back with a further statement that we'll set up when I've had those operational plans for the quarter from health boards—to be able set out what 'more normal' could and should look like, to help rebuild the confidence of the public to make use of those services, because I think, without a regular restating of that, that we're not going to see a return to confidence on the sort of treatment that all of us would want for our constituents and, indeed, ourselves.

And if I may, just at the end, Llywydd, I hope that the Member didn't just have a good experience, but I hope the Member is now fit and well again following her recent appearance as a not-so-secret shopper in the national health service.

Thank you, Minister, and thank you, Members. We'll be taking a short, 10-minute break now, and we will pause the broadcast, therefore.

Plenary was suspended at 16:04.

The Senedd reconvened at 16:16, with the Deputy Presiding Officer (Ann Jones) in the Chair.