Well, we reconvene as our Plenary this afternoon, and the next item on our agenda is a statement by the Minister for Health and Social Services on coronavirus, COVID-19, and I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Prynhawn da. Good afternoon.

Today’s statement will focus on providing Members with an update on restarting more NHS activity here in Wales. I am pleased to report that, while we are still supporting those that have coronavirus, the number of confirmed cases is falling, as are the numbers of people that have lost their lives in the pandemic. Yesterday, there were still 67 new confirmed cases reported by Public Health Wales, and the death figures were in single figures. However, each number was a person, and a tragic reminder of the need for care and caution from all of us, now and in the foreseeable future if we are to reduce the spread of the virus.

No-one should underestimate the importance of continuing to maintain our state of readiness if we are to see and cope with any future peaks of the virus. We still need to support people in our communities that need our health service for other reasons that are not COVID related. I approved the NHS Wales operating framework that was issued on 6 May. It describes four types of harm: direct harm from COVID itself; harm from an overwhelmed NHS and social care system, as we saw in Italy, for example; harm from reduction in non-COVID activity; and harm from wider societal actions, including the lockdown.

I recognise that we need to move slowly and cautiously. So, shorter term planning on quarterly cycles is important for our organisations to demonstrate that they can be agile and flexible. Being able to divert resources easily and quickly to adjust to the demand, between both COVID-19 and non-COVID essential service areas is crucial. While recognising all four potential harms, the quarter 1 plans are particularly aimed at progressively scaling up essential NHS activity, whilst also addressing the current demands of COVID-19. We all recognise that it's important to get essential services operating efficiently for those that need them, but in a safe and effective manner. The fact is that the threat of COVID-19 will be with us for some time to come.

The quarter 1 plans were all received as required on 18 May. They set out how our health boards and trusts are planning to deliver the range of essential services, including cancer, cardiac, ophthalmology and other services, often in new and innovative ways. Many organisations are working to re-zone their estate, to provide areas where staff and patients feel safe to undertake diagnostic tests and receive treatment. The use of additional independent sector hospitals has been helpful for some of those treatments. Health boards are currently reviewing the use of the available facilities to see how they might be used going forward. Our aim is for our healthcare system to rebalance within a more usual hospital environment. This work with the independent sector has been helpful, but we will of course need to review its use, which is being explored in the plans.

The majority of health boards have made arrangements to create additional field hospital capacity. It is a real positive that we should not lose sight of that we have not had to make significant use of field hospitals during the first peak of the virus. The plans reflect the need to review and re-assess as we move forward. A national review of field hospitals facilities during June will support this work.

There are still issues to be overcome as we move to upscale our essential services. Ensuring sufficient PPE, medicines, testing, staff and training will all be required, and this is what the plans outline. In addition, I have asked the NHS to continue to look at where it can make greater use of regional solutions, pooling resources and expertise to ensure patients receive the best care.

However, out of this crisis, we have also been able to embrace innovation. There's much greater use of technology that has been deployed over the past 10 weeks. In the two-week period from 19 to 26 May there were 977 more remote consultations across the NHS using the new NHS Wales video consultation service. Using these new ways of working to the NHS, we can still do much more, with a growing proportion of consultations being able to be conducted virtually. Equally importantly, 97 per cent of patients and 85 per cent of clinicians rated this new way of working as 'excellent', 'really good', or 'good'. We've also seen a rise in the number of out-patient follow-ups that have been able to be conducted by telephone. That shows how, in our response to the pandemic, we're using existing tools and services to deliver care in more efficient ways. So, we're changing the way in which we're delivering services, and using our resources differently.

For example, Swansea Bay University Health Board established a health-board-wide centre to co-ordinate the flow of patients, including rapid discharge, community step-up, and any additional surge or super-surge capacity within their field hospitals. They also have an out-patient modernisation group planning the re-activation of services. And these are developing new models of care and ways of working that have been taken in response to COVID.

My officials will be meeting with each of the organisations over the next weeks to review their plans and support them to ensure implementation. The operating framework contained a number of commitments for the Welsh Government as enablers to support implementation. Examples of some of that action being taken forward include the digital priorities investment fund that I announced last September. It's been used to accelerate new digital programmes and initiatives. This includes the acceleration of video consultation across the whole of Wales, infrastructure and devices to enable remote working, and a new digital system for contact tracing, all of which have been rolled out in weeks. A programme to make Microsoft Teams and Office 365 available to all NHS staff, which started last autumn, has been compressed from three years to one. I will also bring forward a new digital system for use in intensive care units, a new digital platform for eye care, and accelerating an upgrade to our digital pathology services. The pace at which organisations have worked together to deploy new digital technologies has been impressive. 

The Wales Critical Care and Trauma Network has developed draft advice on critical care during the next phase of the pandemic and restarting NHS services, alongside newly published guidance. There's an ongoing communications campaign being developed to encourage patients to access those essential services, and funding has been provided for the establishment of field hospitals, private sector capacity, and, indeed, our student workforce.

Using the feedback and review of quarter 1, we will move towards a continuing framework approach for quarter 2. This will include understanding the next steps in planning over the summer months and for winter contingency into quarter 3. I will of course keep Members updated on progress. I have also provided Members with more detail on quarter 1 plans in a written statement that I issued earlier today.

Monday this week saw the launch of our national NHS Wales test, trace and protect service. Contact tracing is an essential next step in our fight against COVID-19. It will help us to prevent transmission of the virus, protect the public, and quickly identify and take action to control clusters and outbreaks. The new national service began, as planned, on Monday 1 June. So, anyone who has tested positive for coronavirus in Wales will now be contacted and asked for the details of all the people they have had contact with while they have had symptoms.

As I have previously said, our approach is to build and grow our local contact tracing capacity. The reality is that a national plan will only work if we make full use of the existing local knowledge, skills and expertise that has been built up over many years within health protection teams in our local authorities and health boards. This partnership approach has enabled us to quickly bring together a Wales-wide workforce of over 600 contact tracers to start the new national service. Regional plans, jointly agreed by local government and health board partners, will enable us to rapidly scale up the workforce, if and when necessary. This follows a successful two-week pilot exercise across four health board regions in Wales. A key focus of the pilots was to ensure that staff received the high-quality training, guidance and support that they need to be able to do this highly important and challenging role effectively.

Since Sunday, Public Health Wales have reported 208 positive cases, all of which have been transferred to our contact tracing teams. Where appropriate, people have been interviewed and, on average, this is identifying a further three to four follow-up contacts per positive case. The early feedback also indicates that individuals contacted by our tracing teams are engaging positively. So far, the signs are encouraging, but we should not, and must never take the public support for granted. So, for now, the focus is on the next few weeks, within which we can make a difference, and to strike the right balance between all four areas of harm as we try and aim to help keep Wales safe.

Thank you. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for your statement, Minister. You'll be aware that the tragic situation in Welsh care homes has triggered the older people's commissioner to refer the Welsh Government to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. She has highlighted delays to testing as a key concern. 

On 16 May, you announced the expansion of testing to everybody in care homes. However, according to one local authority, there's a hope that their care homes, within the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board area, will be tested by 8 June. However, it has been described as an ambitious target. Why has it taken over three weeks since your announcement to test all care homes, to include our residents and care workers there? Do you also agree that this is made even more scandalous by the fact that patients were initially discharged from hospitals to care homes without any tests, putting many at risk?

And finally, Minister, will you explain why there is no COVID-19 monitoring or data being collected on those receiving social care in their own homes? This appears to me to be a forgotten part of our society, placing them and our own social care workers and domiciliary care workers at risk.

I thank the Member for the three questions, I think, but I'll start with the first point. It's really clear that we're not loose and misleading with our language: the older person's commissioner did not refer the Welsh Government to the human rights commission—she's had a conversation and she's clarified that she wants there to be a UK-wide look-back at the position in care homes across the UK, and, as the First Minister has indicated, and indeed as have I, we expect that there will be look-back inquiries and we'll be happy to co-operate with each of those official inquiries. And this Parliament, I would expect, will want its own exercise in looking back on lessons learned and decisions taken at the time. 

So, on domiciliary care, on your final question, it's of particular concern to me and to the Deputy Minister. It's an area where we've already had access in terms of testing of key workers. And it's an area that is, I know, a regular concern to the Welsh Local Government Association as well, because we do recognise that there's an issue about transmission and how we protect people and that's often from people coming into that person's home. So, the staff themselves want the assurance that they're not, effectively, acting to provide coronavirus to the vulnerable people who they are helping to care for, and that's why they were always one of the key workers within our system, and, of course, there's now expanded access in terms of online bookings for the system of testing that we have available in Wales.

All care homes will be tested within the next two weeks. Some health boards think they may have that test within the next week to 10 days. Others will be slightly later, but, within the next two weeks, I expect all care homes, residents and staff to have been tested. That's a deliberate policy choice we made, and I actually think that the time that it will have taken to do so compares well with every other UK nation, including, of course, England just over the border, where I understand that about six in 10 care homes are yet to be tested. But, as I say, our expectation is that, within two weeks, all care homes in Wales will have been tested. 

Another thing, on the final point that you made, that I need to respond to, is that symptomatic people should always have been tested before discharge from a hospital. There should always have been a current test for people to have left hospital. We moved to a position—which we acknowledged at the time was beyond the scientific advice and the advice of our chief medical officer about whether there was a scientific basis to do so—to test every person discharged into a care home, symptomatic or not, but that was specifically about making sure that there was confidence within the system, because we recognised that more harm could be caused if the whole system clogged up. In regular times, we discuss the harm that is caused to people who are not discharged effectively and quickly, and so this, I think, was a pragmatic measure and the right one to take. And I'm sure I'll have more time to re-discuss the past on other occasions, but I'm content that we are doing the right thing on the right evidence base in the here and now for the people of Wales. 

Thank you, Minister. I have to say, whilst you say this testing will take place within two weeks, you know the high figures that have been recorded here in north Wales, it's my opinion that if you were to suddenly test all homes, say within two or three days, we wouldn't just see our figures spike, we would see them skyrocket here. 

Now, the testing centre here in Llandudno was opened on 29 April. According to an FOI that I submitted to the Betsi Cadwaladr board, only 258 nursing home and local authority workers were tested at the Llandudno site by 28 May. This actually works out, on average, as eight workers a day. There are criticisms about the testing centre not having much traffic going through it when there is mass testing still required here in the north. So, I would like your opinion on that. Why were so few critical workers seen in this centre last month? And what steps are you taking to monitor testing levels at all drive-through centres across Wales? I would like to see those figures reported.

Testing does remain troublesome here. As of 27 May, testing capacity was over 9,000 a day. On Monday, only 2,492 tests were undertaken. Why is all the testing capacity not being used, when we know out in our communities we have these people—vulnerable people—who need these tests? How can we therefore have confidence in test, trace and protect if the number of daily tests are only around 10 per cent of the 20,000 tests a day the Welsh Government has previously stated that contact tracing could require?

I will deal with the final point first. Contact tracing could require up to 20,000 tests depending on where we are in terms of coming out of lockdown and the rate of the transmission spread. Trying to compare where we are now with what might happen months in the future is a pretty foolish place to get yourself into and it's not at all an honest way of describing where we are. And I just think, at a time when people are worried, to try to put out ideas and figures that are openly and undeniably misleading is incredibly irresponsible. 

You're doing that. 

On your figures on north Wales and care home testing, we're actually going through and seeing that north Wales has the highest per head testing ratio of any of the health board areas in the country. So, it's already got a higher testing level than anywhere else. But the good news about that is that whilst there are more people who are identified as having COVID-19, we're actually recognising that when it comes to the harm that's caused, in terms of hospital admissions and, indeed, then in terms of mortality rates, in mortality rates its the second lowest of the seven health boards in Wales, and that's good news for people in north Wales.  

On the Llandudno testing centre, I regularly have feedback from local resilience fora and other partners, including people representing staff and employers in the social care sector, and they've indicated for some time a significant improvement in access to testing and making use of the referral arrangements. They have been improved now further, with greater ease of access for the public as well as critical workers, who can all now book online to book their own test at a drive-through centre. So, we've made not just improvements in the lab capacity to undertake more tests, but access to those has improved. 

Thank you. Rhun ap Iorwerth.

I'd like to return to something that—[Interruption].  

Sorry, Minister, I thought you'd finished.  

No, I was talking then. A message came up saying my internet connection was unstable. I may have faded out for a second. I was just making the point—

Right. Sorry, Rhun, I'll come back to you. Do you want to briefly finish, then, Minister?

I was on my final point. The two to three thousand tests a day that we're undertaking now is a measure of the current need and demand that exists within our system, but we anticipate that that will increase as we move further out of lockdown, and, as there is more contact between people and greater need, we can actually follow up and test more people. It goes back to what I've said consistently—our test, trace and protect system requires a bigger infrastructure, and we're in a place now where we've got a much more significant capacity to be able to do so.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Thank you. We'll try again now then. Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Now, Welsh Government has so far refused to recommend that people should wear face masks when out in public. The latest advice I could find from Welsh Government is that people could wear them if they want to, which isn't particularly useful, because people look to Government for leadership at times like this.

I must say, the evidence that I am seeing is getting much, much stronger on this. A major report in The Lancet this week found that the wearing of face masks could be a very useful contribution towards keeping infection rates low. The World Health Organization is absolutely saying that the use of masks isn't enough on its own, but saying wearing a mask can limit the spread of certain respiratory viral diseases, including coronavirus. The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States recommends them. There was an interesting study from California and Taiwan at the end of May saying that the virus can remain infectious indoors for hours, and that

'measures designed to reduce aerosol transmission must be implemented,'— and I'm quoting here—

'including universal masking'.

Some 50 countries, I think, now insist that people have to wear masks, at least in some situations—just on public transport in some countries, far more widespread in others. Now, they don't have the physical side effects, potentially, of a new drug say, or the mental health implications of lockdown, so surely, the burden of proof should be lower on this. And if it makes a contribution, then why not? Even if only part of a marginal-gains approach. So, will Government listen to that growing evidence and introduce clear guidelines actively encouraging the use of face covering?

Well, the guidance and decision making of the Government that you referred to, of course, relies on the advice of the Chief Medical Officer for Wales, Dr Frank Atherton. He has reviewed the evidence, and the advice that is current in Wales comes from his advice and recommendations to us, and that is that there is limited benefit and that he is not in a position where the evidence is strong enough to recommend that people do wear masks in particular situations outside, of course, front-line care work as part of PPE.

When it comes to what might happen in the future, as I've said and will say on a number of occasions, where the evidence changes, we'll be happy to shift our position. And indeed, the chief medical officer will, of course, continue to review the evidence. In each of these—as we've seen on testing policy—it's possible that that evidence changes fairly rapidly.

We made three different choices on policy over a six-week period on care home testing because the evidence base had changed at a really rapid pace. And that's pretty disconcerting for the public, I know, but it's pretty disconcerting for decision makers as well. But if we're not prepared to be agile in decision making and being prepared to reconsider where we are as that evidence base firms up, then we won't be in the right position.

So, it is possible that there will be a change in the future, but the current advice from our chief medical officer is not to do so. But as I say, I wouldn't want to close off the reality that that advice could change and the chief medical officer's advice could change. At which point in time, of course, you would expect Ministers to make a different decision.

And I'd urge you to ask the chief medical officer to look at this. You say it might be something for the future, but when we're fighting coronavirus, the future is now in a way. What's going to happen with the pattern of the disease in Wales over the coming months can be affected by decisions that are taken now.

I've spent much of the past three months pushing for the best possible protection for front-line staff. You mentioned them, of course. I still need to do that. Maybe you could comment on reports of out-of-date PPE still being in use—masks expired in 2008 being seen by nurses with stickers underneath saying 'expiry 2016'. I'd be grateful for a copy of guidance on the process that's followed to decide when expired PPE is fit for re-issue.

Again, to finish, on that issue of the public wearing of masks—a homemade mask is much better than nothing. Of course, it means there's no impact then on PPE stock for key workers. No real cost either, so issues of equality are addressed in that. Worldwide, there are community schemes making masks, including groups in Wales. This is my mask, actually. This has travelled across the world. It was made by a friend in the United States—part of a community group making masks to give to others. Will you support a mask Cymru initiative urging more people to get involved in making masks, sharing simple templates and so on? This is something we can all do, bonding us as communities. We can even have competitions: who can make the best looking masks and that kind of thing. It contributes to the normalisation of the wearing of face coverings, and just perhaps, if the growing evidence is right, as I believe it is, it could save lives, too.

On your point about PPE, all of our PPE that is issued goes through a quality control process, including if the initial expiry dates mean that that PPE can still, no less, be used and used safely, because that is the test that we apply: have we got adequate PPE—adequate in terms of the protection that it provides, making sure that it's in date and appropriate for staff to use? And as you know, we're in the position where we have not just managed to resolve our own current PPE challenges for our front-line health and social care staff, but we've provided mutual aid in significant numbers to other UK countries, including England, and that's been the right thing to do.

So, we're in a good position on PPE compared to where we were just a matter of a few weeks ago. There's got to be a warning note on that, because as we move forward with the peak of the disease, it's entirely possible that there'll be more pressure on where we are as we ease and come out of lockdown and what might happen in the winter, and equally, demand in other parts of the world might mean that there's again greater competition for PPE supplies that we're acquiring, but again, I want to put on record my thanks to those Welsh companies that have created PPE for our front-line staff. There has been a tremendous response right across the country.

On your point about mask and face coverings, I think it's important because when people talk about masks, I think there's a lot of confusion about those being things that are the sort of grade you expect front-line health and care workers or others to raise, but I recognise you're making a point about face coverings, which are different. If the advice changed, then we'd of course need to think about how that would be, because I don't think the Government will be in a position to provide face coverings to every member of the public, but these are things that people can provide themselves. And it's actually important to remember that this is about protecting other people in case you have coronavirus. But the starting point is, if you're symptomatic, you shouldn't be out in public anyway: you should be self-isolating and getting tested.

If the advice changes, we'll of course need to consider what that means in terms of how those face coverings are provided and in what settings. So, like I say, going back to my first answer, if the evidence changes, if the advice changes, then the Government will be happy to explain that and to change our position because our aim, as ever, is to keep Wales safe. 

Thank you for your statement, Minister. Despite your assertion, what we saw this week was not a significant easing of lockdown. In reality, it is a minor change, because for the vast majority of people living in Wales, family will live more than 5 miles away. When announcing the changes, the First Minister said the decision to impose a general principle of not travelling more than 5 miles was based upon scientific evidence. So, Minister, will you publish that evidence? Has that evidence been peer reviewed? Minister, can you explain to my constituents unable to visit loved ones why it is perfectly okay for them to travel more than 5 miles to queue with strangers in a garden centre, but they can't travel to stand 2 metres apart from a family member or friend? 

On Monday, you launched the young person's mental health toolkit, which recognises the enormous impact this pandemic is having on everybody's mental health, and the longer the restrictions last, the greater the impact they will have. I know that tackling this disease is a balancing act between the direct harms of COVID-19 versus the indirect harms. Minister, do you believe that you have struck the right balance in this instance?

Our path out of lockdown is contingent on track, trace and protect. However, it is currently taking too long for tests to be conducted. Minister, what steps are you taking to speed up the process and expand our testing capacity? Many activities will require a much wider, more streamlined testing regime, and we know that routine dental treatments can't start until next year, but surely, if we were to test dentists and patients and certify them COVID-free, then treatment could be undertaken. Without such a system in place, how will my constituent, the owner of a wedding dress shop, Elin Baker, conduct her business? She's using her spare time now and her facilities and her knowledge to make PPE for the NHS, so she's using her time wisely, but we must understand that wedding dresses have to be fitted, and they can't be fumigated, so does she have to wait until there is a vaccine before she can reopen?

And finally, Minister, the First Minister said on Monday that you can only make one change to measures every three weeks due to the scientific advice from SAGE and the World Health Organization. So, please can you confirm that this is the approach you are taking and will you outline how long you anticipate it will be before most lockdown measures are relaxed? Thank you.

Perhaps I can start with that final point, because we've consistently said—and it's been in some of the papers that we've already published on the scientific evidence—I think we've been as open if not more open than any other Government in the UK on making available that evidence that we're receiving as Ministers—that advice—and then actually going out and making our decisions and taking accountability for them. I think it's really important that our advisers understand that we're taking responsibility as Ministers and really are taking their advice seriously. That includes this point about there being one significant intervention, and I want to be able to assess and understand its impact before including a further significant intervention as well. And that's why it would be entirely cavalier and wholly wrong for me to try to forecast when lockdown will end and life will return to normal as we knew it in February this year. I think the public are wise to that and recognise that those sorts of artificial deadlines don't provide the sort of reassurance that they are looking for and it's much better to be honest and honest about the level of uncertainty that we are dealing with.

Within each review, when we conduct a review of our lockdown regulations, we'll consider what we're doing, we'll then confirm we're doing that and as I say, the regular publications and advice that we're receiving will continue to be made available to help inform the public, to maintain the essential trust that we need as well. And I do think one significant change that we made this time around in—. People can go out and meet as long as they adhere to social distancing, expanding that and giving some shape to travel, because in the previous period, we had quite a lot of criticism from a range of people, in particular those representing valleys and rural areas, that telling people to simply exercise their judgment on what was local wasn't really working. And in providing a 5 mile default as a rule of thumb, as the First Minister set out from the moment he introduced the new easements, I think it's given some shape to that without it being a hard rule, because that would not have taken account of the different circumstances that some people live within, so I think we have done the right thing, and the rationale for staying local is about containing and not spreading the virus. If we removed restrictions for people to travel around the country, then I think there would be enough people in Wales who would act in such a way that you would start to see parts of the country—beauty spots and others—having larger numbers of people in a way that none of us should want to see or encourage. So, I think we're doing the right thing in maintaining a 'stay local' message and you'll see that that's not inconsistent with the messages from Scotland and Northern Ireland and, indeed, the leader of Bournemouth council herself has said that she wants the same approach in England.

On our testing speed, that's improving all the time; on the reopening of dentistry, the letter to the chief dental officer will be published; I'll provide a short written statement so that Members are notified on when that is available. I don't think that you're suggesting that you just certifying people as COVID free is necessarily as simple as that sounds. It tells you what the position is at the time someone has had the test, and so I don't think that's necessarily a helpful way forward.

On your constituent, who is a wedding dress maker, as we know, most weddings aren't taking place, and so actually, there isn't business for her in her normal business and that's because of the reality that people go to weddings and mix with other people. I had a great time on my wedding day, but you certainly couldn't have a wedding like that at this point in time.

Then finally, on the balance of harms, you'll have seen that balance of harms in the difficult decision that the education Minister's made today. Balancing the harm that lockdown causes by schools being closed, needing and wanting to return in a way that is as safe as possible and not just in doing that, but thinking about an entirely different way of managing the school day, and recognising that not providing education to more children until the start of September would cause harm to those children for their future educational prospects, and the greatest harm would be to our most vulnerable children and their families. So, we're always having to balance the different harms that come from coronavirus, that come from the lockdown, and we'll continue to see the difficult balance being struck by Welsh Ministers as we continue to keep Wales safe.

Thank you. Dawn Bowden.

Okay, thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Sorry, I had to unmute.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. One of the things I'd like to say was that I'm very grateful for the continued briefings and updates that we get—Members of the Senedd and the Members of Parliament across my area—for meeting both the health boards and getting the regular information from them. I think it probably is worth placing on record again our thanks to everybody that's working in the NHS and doing absolutely amazing, amazing things during this pandemic. Without in any way being complacent, I've been really pleased to see the number of people actually being discharged from hospital having fully recovered from COVID, and seeing that the capacity in hospitals across my area, including in ICUs—actually coping quite well. However, what does remain a concern for me is the high levels of infections across Merthyr Tydfil and RCT, and that seems to be in direct contrast to what's happening across the rest of Wales. Now, we know that in Merthyr and RCT we have lots of terraced streets and families living close to each other, and that may well be considered as one of the reasons for the high levels of infections, as I think the First Minister alluded to in response to questions on his statement this morning. But it's also true that other Valleys communities and some of our inner city areas also have terraced houses and families living close together and don't seem to have the same levels of infections there. Now, anecdotally we've heard reports—

Can you come to your question, please? Thank you.

We've heard reports of people not respecting social distancing in some areas, but I'd like to know if there is something more that's going on in these communities? And I'd be grateful if you could advise what work the Government's epidemiologists are doing to try to establish if, in fact, there is anything other than behaviours going on in these communities which is keeping infection levels so relatively high.

Thank you for the question, Dawn, and it is a matter of fact—to put this in some context—that whilst the peak of the epidemic is different in different parts of Wales, it is a fact that the Aneurin Bevan, Cardiff and Vale and Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board areas have had a higher incidence in terms of per-head infections, and the harm that has been caused and, in turn, the mortality rates—Cwm Taf Morgannwg area has a higher mortality rate than any other health board area in Wales. So, it is a matter of obvious concern. But you're right to point out that there are other communities with similar physical and geographical characteristics, and we don't fully understand yet from our epidemiologists the exact reasons why this is different within RCT and Merthyr, because even the points about the physical health and well-being of the communities that are served—well, they're not so radically different from lots of other Valleys communities, but we do see a materially different level of an infection. So, we are still looking at that as we're looking and learning across the whole pandemic.

I do want to provide more information, not just on where we are, but what we think we need to advise people to do. But I think the starting point is that everyone should take seriously the social distancing messages. The guidance is there to help people to stick to the rules, to make clear what is allowed and within the rules and the spirit of the rules that we've created, and they'll also help people understand what isn't, and to recognise that this is about preventing harm to those people and their families and their communities and people they may never meet. If people don't follow the guidance that we've provided and don't—. In the overwhelming majority of Wales, we had really high levels of agreement with and support for those rules, and we all need to stick with it because the ONS figures this week show over 2,100 deaths in Wales, and there are still deaths every day. So, no-one should think that we can go back to normal and behave as if this never happened. We'll have months and months of difficult behaviour when we'll ask people to be self-disciplined, because if we don't, if we see coronavirus take off again, we'll see many thousands more people being harmed by coronavirus. And, again, the fantastic commitment we've had from our whole NHS and the people recovered now—we're going to need to call on those people even more, and I don't think we should press their commitment beyond that. It's up to us to make our own choices, each one of us, as to how will we all play our part in keeping Wales safe.

Thank you. Mark Isherwood.

I can't hear him.

We need to unmute Mark's mike.

I've done it. Can you hear me?

Yes, go on, you can speak now.

Thank you. I thought it was automatic, apologies.

Nursing homes are receiving a temporary fee increase for adult social care placements, but this excludes health board-funded placements. With regard to continuing healthcare funding, Care Forum Wales has highlighted that nursing homes in north Wales are disadvantaged by comparison with elsewhere. How do you, therefore, respond to sector concern that although continuing healthcare-funded residents have even more complex needs, there's been no mention of an uplift related to COVID-19?

In England dental practices are allowed to reopen from 8 June, provided strict criteria have been met before aerosol generating procedures can be performed. In Wales no provision has been made for dental practices to be allowed to do this. How, therefore, do you respond to the north Wales dental surgeons who tell me that unless you change tack, dental services and the livelihoods of thousands of hard-working and committed professionals in Wales will be destroyed?

Thank you. On the two questions—on nursing home fees, we have regular dialogue, as a Government, with Care Forum Wales. We've had that dialogue in the regular engagement that I and officials have had about improving testing, and that's now in a much better place for the residential care sector in particular. And the Deputy Minister, Julie Morgan, meets with Care Forum Wales on a regular basis each week. So, there is regular dialogue and opportunities for Care Forum Wales to raise concerns they have, in addition to not just the Deputy Minister but, of course, in the regular dialogue they have with officials as well. So, we'll continue to review—[Interruption.]

Sorry, could somebody put Mr Isherwood's mike off? We're not having heckling or intervening on questions, sorry. Vaughan Gething.

We'll continue to talk with them about what's possible as we continue to review what we're able to do across the whole of our response to the pandemic. As I've said in answer to questions earlier, if the evidence changes, we'll be happy to change the position we're in and, of course, the way that we use the resources available to us.

On the position about dentistry in England, it's not quite as simple as reported. I think the impression was given earlier this week that there was going to be a wholesale opening of dentistry in England, and that isn't quite the case there. We've had direct advice from the chief dental officer in Wales. She's written out to every dental practice to indicate how we'll want to restart safely more dental activity.

But it is a point about safely restarting dental activity, because there is a risk to both the patient and the person working in very close proximity to them. Just as we've had to balance all of the risks, the harms and the evidence that we have in the difficult decision the education Minister has made today about a different form of schools' operation for four weeks for the end of this school year, we have to think about the balance of risks for people working in dentistry. I would not want to try to place the opportunity to make money ahead of seeing a range of our dental professionals losing their lives if we're taking a cavalier approach. That's why the professional advice of the chief dental officer is so important. As I said earlier, we'll continue to be guided by the evidence, and I will be making public her letter and her advice to dentists across Wales.

Minister, last month, you announced that care workers in Wales would receive a £500 bonus payment for their contribution during the COVID-19 pandemic. It has now become apparent that the sum will be liable for income tax and national insurance deductions, meaning the actual sum people earning over the personal allowance will receive will be £360, not £500. Plaid Cymru believes that this bonus payment should not be taxed and that it should be extended to all care home workers, including cleaning staff and kitchen staff.

Minister, the carers who heard your announcement last month may have made plans to spend that £500 already on a well-deserved holiday after all of this is over or to pay overdue bills. Does the Welsh Government regret not being open about the fact that this bonus payment would be taxed when you announced it on International Workers' Day?

I think there are two things—the first is that the Welsh Government was never in a position to give a guarantee that it would not be taxed. We made clear publicly that we wanted the UK Government to agree not to tax this so it could be treated, as Mike Hedges said earlier, as a gift, not as a taxable payment. They've done that in the past in extraordinary circumstances—for example, it was a welcome move on behalf of the UK Government not to tax the hardship payments that some councils were able to make during the recent flooding that we saw. I find it deeply disappointing that the UK Government have decided to apply tax to this payment.

The Welsh Government made direct representations, not just public statements, to the UK Government, and they've now responded by saying that they expect to make a tax deduction. That's a decision for the UK Government. I think that they should reconsider, they should think again, to make sure that what is essentially a low-paid, largely female workforce should get the full £500. But it's a matter for the UK Government to decide whether it's more important to them to take tax out of this payment or to do the right thing by our care workers. I hope they do the right thing.

Minister, we've heard some reference today to the health service increasingly addressing non-COVID conditions, and the quarter 1 plans, I know, are to be submitted shortly. But I know that the cancer charities, for example, remain very concerned that we're not seeing the consultations, the diagnosis, the detection and early treatment of these very serious cancer conditions, which are all too prevalent, that should be taking place. So, I just wonder exactly how Welsh Government is working with the cancer charities, the health boards, the health sector generally, to make sure that that return to dealing with these non-COVID conditions, as would have taken place prior to the pandemic, is taking place comprehensively and consistently across Wales, while at the same time, obviously, balancing the treatment of the ongoing pandemic, as has to happen.

Thank you for the question. It's one of the concerns that I've had and expressed for a number of weeks now, that a range of our urgent care services that have remained open haven't seen people going into them, partly because people have been more frightened of going into a healthcare facility than the symptoms or concerns they would have had. Six months previously, people would have been more likely to go and seek help or advice from a health professional. It's also the case that we discover a range of cancers when people attend for a different reason. For all of those appointments and attendances that are not taking place, there's a risk not just of the direct harm someone understands may well be taking place but other harm that gets discovered.

We are now starting to see a recovery in those numbers of people attending. I indicated some of this yesterday in the press conference and I've referred to it in the written statement as well. However, we've also seen a welcome change in referring behaviour as well, so the more people that are attending, the more people are being referred, for example, through primary care. We saw a fall off in the referrals, we're now starting to see a recovery. 

In the statements that have been made on the quarter 1 plans, we're also in the position where we're seeing diagnostic services recovering. We're looking to see a return to endoscopy services. That's going to be difficult because there's going to be large amount of demand going into those services, but we are starting to see a staid recovery.

And in the regional plans I referred to, cancer services are a very obvious area where there'd need to be co-operation over more than one health board area. We already deliver cancer services over more than one health board area on a regular basis. We'll need to see more of that in terms of planning our recovery. And in terms of working with the cancer charities, I'm due to see the cancer alliance before the end of this month, I believe.

But this is part of our broader programme, and if I could just make a separate point, which is that in a range of areas we're having to think about how we do things differently. A good example outside the cancer ward of having to do things differently because there's still a risk is the way that we've re-engineered our diabetic retinopathy service for people who are pregnant. So, pregnant women who are diabetic are at a particular risk of suffering harm to their sight. We've now got a new pathway that's been rolled out to make sure that we're able to provide that service, otherwise significant and permanent harm could have been caused to their sight. So, we're already going through this, and in each area of activity, not just in cancer services, having to redesign our services and aim that at how we do the greatest good to avoid the greatest amount of harm being caused. 

Minister, I've suffered a dental abscess during the lockdown. I'm told that it could well return; it happens frequently after people have had the antibiotics. It's non-urgent, so I'm just keeping my fingers crossed. So, the fact that it may not be properly treated until January 2021 obviously directly affects me, but we're being written to by many patients and many, many dentists—and I'm sure all Members would agree with this—and I do urge further consideration of the plan. And I do completely accept that it needs to be considered very carefully, but the British Dental Association, in response to the recent hints, has said—I quote—there's 'great, growing demand' for swifter action before January 2021. That's non-emergency treatments. And it has also said, and I quote:

'There are very good, robust policies in place to make sure patients and the team are protected.'

So, can we look at this with great care? Because I think the initial plan has come under a lot of comment and probably does need some careful review, and I hope the British Dental Association will be fully involved in that.

Well, I'd be very happy to make sure that the Government and the professional leadership provided by our chief dental officer maintains the regular dialogue that we do have with the British Dental Association here in Wales. I think we should, again, accelerate the reform of the way we deliver dental services to have a greater focus on doing the greatest amount of good with the resource we have available. I would, as would the chief dental officer, want to return to having a greater amount of dental activity sooner rather than later, but it's got to be in a safe manner, and that's where we are. So, whilst I will be clear and transparent in publishing her current advice to dental professionals in Wales, if there's a further update in that ongoing dialogue, then I'll be happy to keep Members updated and to give that undertaking. And if there's any further change in the way we're able to do that and the pace that we're able to do that in keeping patients and dental professionals safe, then I'll happily make sure that all Members are informed of that at the same time.

Minister, just two points: I'm very pleased that the Welsh Government made the announcement that it would test all residents and staff in care homes. My own health board indicates that they expect to complete theirs in this area by the end of this week.

However, I am concerned about the retesting scenario, because there are situations where some tests have come back positive, because they were asymptomatic, and therefore there are residents and staff who did not demonstrate signs or symptoms of COVID-19 but have proved positive through the testing. And there could be a situation where other Members of staff, therefore, could also, as a consequence, prove positive in the future and therefore put more residents at risk. So, can you provide a detailed update as to when retesting for care home staff in particular would be available to ensure that, as they go in and out of the homes, they're not taking the virus back in with them, being asymptomatic?

Can I also concur on the situation with dentists? I'm sure, as David Melding highlighted, we all have received correspondence regarding dentistry. I know, under Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, that the dentists took very special measures, so they're already well-versed in safe practices in relation to dealing with patients. But I also accept the responsibilities you have to ensure the safety of the staff in the dentist practices as well.

Well, the point on dentistry is understood and, of course, from my own position as a constituency Member, I've got people who will want to access dental services. Actually, we have struggled in the past to get people to take up those services in the way that we would want them to, and it's another point about the way that children and young people actually behave together and our ability to intervene earlier to actually inculcate good habits about dental hygiene. So, I do take seriously the points that Members from a range of parties have made, both here but also outside this setting, about the desire and the benefit from restarting dental services. So, I'm not ignoring or brushing that to one side; I am genuinely taking it seriously.

On your point about retesting in care homes: I expect, before the end of the completion of the initial phase, to have advice about the period of time within which retesting will take place and what that retesting programme will look like, so we don't end up with a position when, in three months' time, there's another head of steam to retest people in the care home sector, but we have a regular and understandable programme. And I then have to balance that with the need that we'll need to maintain and protect capacity within our testing programme to do that, and still to make sure that we have sufficient capacity to make sure that contact tracing isn't compromised as well. Because I certainly wouldn't want our new NHS Wales test, trace, protect service to be compromised in some way. But, equally, we need to make sure we're balancing the risks that are run in all parts of the service. That's why the increase in lab capacity to more than 9,500 we've seen take place is such good news; it allows us to have those choices, to not be constrained by capacity. But I need to see the evidence, to see the advice, and, as soon as that's available, I'll be happy to inform not just the Member but all Members of what that means and what our expectation is for retesting to take place for staff and residents in the care home sector.

Helen Mary Jones. No.

Helen Mary is silenced.

Can we—can somebody help Helen Mary? We can't hear her. Can somebody help her to unmute the mike, please? No. Can I leave Helen? I will come back to you, Helen, unless—have you got your mike open now? No. Okay, I'll come back to you. Jack Sargeant.

Diolch yn fawr, Deputy Llywydd. Minister, coronavirus, the need for isolation and the financial toll that residents across Wales are paying will, of course, have a huge impact on their mental health. Now, news that 1,700 patients were wrongly discharged in north Wales fills nobody with the confidence that services in north Wales are all that they should be. Now, I understand that there are currently huge pressures on our NHS, but this is obviously not good enough. Residents in north Wales need to have the confidence in services.

Minister, we have all been suffering a mental health pandemic long before COVID-19. So, not just as parliamentarians and Governments, but as human beings, we need to do more. Minister, what can you say to my constituents to reassure them that the lessons are being learned and that those affected are given the support they need as a matter of urgency?

I think it's a point I've dealt with before, but it's entirely a fair point for the Member to raise in this setting as well, about the mistake, and it was a mistake, that was made in discharging people when they should not have been. The health board in north Wales are recovering that, because the guidance that we provided to every health board I thought was very clear that mental health services are essential services and should continue throughout the pandemic.

And there's this broader point—and it's part, again, of the point that was raised earlier in questions about the different harms that are caused by coronavirus, and one of the harms, in keeping us physically alive and in saving lives, is that we will undoubtedly have seen harm caused to people's mental health and well-being. So, there'll be more demand coming into each tier of our services, so the tier 0 and tier 1 services, where they're relatively low level, will undoubtedly see more demand, just as will other areas where there's more significant demand.

That's why myself and the education Minister made our announcement on providing more resource for children and young people, and it's why I'll continue to keep on looking at the mental health issues being raised not just in the children and young people committee, and may get raised in the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee tomorrow, but to make sure that the extra infrastructure we've put in place to test and to check that mental health services are still functioning and dealing with need continues in place. We bought more beds at the start of this pandemic for the highest level of need; I have made more money available through the budget. So, I can assure Jack Sargeant that not just the treatment end, but the point about the conversation we have about mental health in this country, going back to, 'It's okay to say you're not okay'—it's really important that we do that as well in the way we live our own lives with the people around us, and what we say and how we act in public as well.

Thank you. We'll try Helen Mary Jones again.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. So, I'm very sorry, Minister, but I am unsilenced again. [Laughter.] If I may take you back to the issue with regard to shielding that was raised earlier with the First Minister by my colleague Delyth Jewell, I hope that the Welsh Government will be able to provide the 32 organisations that have written to you concerned about the way that announcement was made and asking for more clarity—I hope that you'll be able to provide them with a fuller answer than the First Minister was able to provide to Delyth Jewell this afternoon.

But, very specifically—and I hope you'll take this opportunity to reassure people—is it the case, Minister, that those people who have been advised to shield will continue to receive the support services that they currently receive? I'm thinking of things like the food boxes, the supermarket slots. I don't know if other Members have been, but I've certainly been contacted by constituents who've been left a little bit confused as to whether they will continue to get those services and for how long. So, I hope, Minister, you'll take the opportunity to reassure them this afternoon.

It may be worth me putting on record that the announcement about shielding came on the back of advice from the chief medical officer. So, this wasn't a case where I decided that I wanted to change the category and so I made a choice to do that without any evidence or advice. We did think we were going to be in a position to make a unified announcement with other UK countries, and then the time frame for that shifted. The announcement in England was made on a Saturday night, when I had expected that it might have been made later. We certainly would have been able to make it on a Sunday afternoon. That was my expectation, and we'd have had not just Saturday getting ready, but then the whole of Sunday to speak with stakeholders, including people in local government—not just local government, of course, but the healthcare professions caring for people, and a range of others—to indicate that a change was on its way and to set out what it was.

When the English announcement was, effectively, made through a newspaper article that went online on Saturday night, and I had an unusual and unexpected telephone call on my Saturday evening to tell me that that had gone out, I then had a pretty straight choice to make, both of which are messy. The first was to try to go as planned and to make an announcement in the second half of the Sunday, which would have meant that inevitably we'd have had questions about what we were doing through the first half of the Sunday, and I think that would have put us in a farcical position where, despite us telling stakeholders to get ready for an announcement, we'd be telling the press, 'No comment. We haven't got anything to say', and that would have been ridiculous. By that point there already would have been uncertainty from shielded people, their families and friends, as well as people providing care and support for them in Wales, as to whether or not we were going to make an announcement in Wales. So, I made the decision—and, again, it was my decision to do this—that we should make our announcement on the Sunday morning. It's not ideal to make that announcement by press release when the written statement wasn't available and completed until later in the day. As I say, it was messy, but it was my judgment that that was the right thing to do, rather than to spend the morning explaining why we weren't going to do anything or avoiding questions.

I'd prefer it, as we review the shielding category and the support provided to them across the UK, not just in Wales, that we're able to do that by open conversation between chief medical officers and indeed the four health departments, and I know that's a view shared by colleagues in other parts of the UK. For shielded people in Wales, the chief medical officer will be writing directly. There are letters being printed that will start to go out from tomorrow. They'll hear directly from him about the future of the shielded category. People can expect that shielding to take place for at least a further couple of months. He'll set out the details of that, and he'll also be taking the press conference tomorrow to speak directly to the public, but Members can expect to see a copy of the letter that will be going out to your constituents as well. I'll make sure that's provided to you as it's ready and signed off. We did that previously. You can expect to see that again, because Members in constituencies and regions of all parties can expect there to be contact from your constituents asking what is happening. So, I think it's important that you see the text of that letter.

To your point about the support, as I have made clear on a number of occasions, and I'm happy to do so now on the record in the Senedd, the only change made is that shielded people are now advised they can go out, if they wish to, to exercise and to see one other household at a social distance. That is the only change that we're making—so, seeing people outside, being able to go outside for exercise. All other measures are in place, so we're saying to shielded people, 'Do not go and do your own shopping. Don't go into a shop to do that.' We're saying to shielded people, 'If you can't work from home, don't go into a workplace with other people, because the risks in terms of being in an indoor environment are still significant'. That means, of course, that we continue to provide that additional support in terms of food, so, both priorities for supermarket deliveries, those people that are taking the food boxes, that support is still available, and including other things like medicines delivery as well. So, all that support remains in place, but, for shielded people, the ability to go outside now, whereas the advice had previously been not to go outside for exercise outside your own home, that's changed, and I think that's a significant matter for shielded people. But we may need to revisit that. If we get into winter months, into the autumn, we may be in a position where that advice needs to change again, and it reinforces my point that we're a long way from being at the end of coronavirus.

Minister, I listened to that answer to Helen Mary and I have to say it always seems to be someone else's communication problem, doesn’t it? Let's go back to the £500 for the carers. I heard the First Minister's response to Mike Hedges, which I thought was disingenuous, and I heard your response to Delyth Jewell. So, are you telling me that either the Welsh Government did not know that, under UK law, wages are taxed in accordance with earning levels and therefore that £500 would be taxed, or are you telling me that the Welsh Government wanted the Chancellor to give it as a gift but you hadn't bothered to ask him before you made the announcement? 

Finally, can you clarify to everybody who will get this payment? Because, on 28 May, you told me that all care home workers who work in a privately funded care home—i.e. a care home that does not take any state-aided people—would not get that £500. So, when we say that all care workers in Wales will get it, that is actually, technically, as my understanding is from my conversation with you on 28 May, incorrect, and I would be very grateful for your clarification because when we use the words 'privately funded', we have to remember that this is a lot of Welsh people who are just scraping by on the last of their savings to get into a private care home. They don't have a lot of money, their staff won't have much money.

Well, the final details of who is going to receive the payment will be announced when we've finalised the negotiations with employers and trade unions, which I understand are near final, so you will hear that in the coming days, and I think it'll provide the clarity that you're looking for, Angela. 

In terms of the tax on the £500, it's always been a UK decision. We did make representations through officials in advance about the taxable treatment of it, and we wrote directly to make representations. It was also raised by the finance Minister in conversation as well. So it's a matter for the UK Government to decide whether or not this money should be given as a gift, and it was their choice to apply tax to it. I still think it's the right thing for them to reconsider and to not apply tax to the £500 for social care workers. I'll be disappointed, as I'm sure other Members across other parties will be, if the UK Government don't reconsider taking tax from this money so it doesn't go directly into the pockets of relatively low-paid women workers and instead goes into the Treasury. I think that would—. Frankly, it wouldn't be a good look for the UK Government, and they're not expecting to have this money, so it essentially would be a tax windfall for the Treasury, and I just think that a windfall from social care workers to the Treasury is absolutely not the place where the UK Treasury should be. It's within their gift to make sure that tax isn't applied and again I urge them to do so. 

In terms of the shielding, well, it's a matter of fact what happened with shielding. It's not a matter of saying it's someone else's—. It's a matter of fact that that is what happened. I've been able to work really constructively with health Ministers across other Governments, with the unionist health Minister in the multiparty Government in Northern Ireland, the SNP health Minister in Scotland and, indeed, the Conservative Cabinet health Minister in England, but there are times where we don't always agree. We're grown up about that. There are times where what each of us does affects the other; this was one of those occasions. So it's simply a matter of fact. We were not expecting an announcement on shielding in England to be made through a newspaper column on Saturday night, but that is what happened.

Mick Antoniw.

I can't hear Mick. I can't lip read, either. 

No. We're not getting—. Can somebody assist Mr Antoniw? There we are. 

How's that? Is that okay?

There we are. Start again. 

Minister, there are many consequences of coronavirus, not just the disease. We've discussed the associated consequences of lockdown, such as mental health. The one I want to raise, though, is the increased risk in respect of gambling addiction. You will be familiar, Minister, I would have thought, with the case of Chris Bruney, who was a 25-year-old who lost £119,000 in five days. He was then offered by the gambling company a bonus of £400. He took his own life, and the company has just been fined. Now that was just one of the examples pre-coronavirus.

Of course, what we have now is a captive market in respect of online gambling, and the March data alone for 2020 indicates that virtual betting increased by 40 per cent, poker by 38 per cent and, of those who placed more than one bet, online betting increased by 88 per cent, online poker 53 per cent and, of course, there are many other similar data as well. I suspect the April figures will show even higher levels of online gambling participation, leading to the public health risks that had been identified before the lockdown. I'm wondering, Minister, if you could let us know whether this is something that you've discussed with the chief medical officer. If not, will you discuss it with the chief medical officer to see what we can actually do to prepare for what I suspect is going to be a significant increase in problems associated with online gambling addiction, and it will be a legacy that we will have to deal with as we come out of coronavirus? 

I think it's a point well made, actually, by the Member, and I recognise his longstanding and continuing interest in the real public health harms caused by gambling. I don't think now is the time to go into the division of powers that exist, but we do still need to understand what that means and we do understand that there has been a significant increase in online gambling, as the Member sets out. So, I will definitely take it up specifically with the chief medical officer about where we are and what that means in terms of not just our understanding of the harms caused now, but what that means for the future. If more people are spending more time on online gambling, there's no guarantee—in fact, we'd expect that it would be not the case that those people will disappear and stop online gambling in exactly the same numbers as we progress out of the lockdown. We could be talking about longer term challenges in terms of the addiction that gambling sadly is for some people. So, I'll happily take it up with the chief medical officer, and I'm happy to undertake to write to the Member in due course. 

Thank you. And finally, Neil McEvoy. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Minister, in terms of COVID, you say that you've followed scientific advice continuously. I wouldn't agree with that, actually, but you say that you've relied on science. So, there's a proposal to dump 780,000 tonnes of mud from outside Hinkley Point nuclear power station into the waters just outside Cardiff, 1 mile off the coast. Now, scientists tell us that they're convinced—and they've said it on the record—they are convinced that the mud contains plutonium. So, in terms of you being the health Minister and also the AM for southern Cardiff, will you support the scientists' call to test the mud for plutonium, because it has never been tested for that? Diolch. 

As the Member knows, I'm here to answer questions as the health Minister in the Welsh Government. I'm very well aware of my responsibilities for the constituency that I've had the privilege to be directly elected to represent twice to this Parliament. And as the Member knows, there is plenty of scientific evidence and advice around the removal and transfer of mud within an estuary environment, and I recall the spiky conversation the Member had in the Chamber with Alun Davies, who actually had spent some time looking at this during his time before the Assembly, as it then was, and indeed during his time as the environment Minister. And the Member is taking the view of some scientists rather than the accepted scientific consensus.

So, Lesley Griffiths, as the Minister with some responsibility in this area, will be guided by the scientific advice that she receives. It's a matter for Natural Resources Wales, though, of course, as you know, to understand that science and decide what to do in the granting of licences. And I think trying to return to a scare story over nuclear mud at a time when we're dealing with a pandemic that is far from finished is entirely the wrong thing to do when it comes to questions to the health Minister about where we are with this once-in-a-century event. But, no doubt, Mr McEvoy will continue to make his own choices.

That's an outrageous comment, Minister—outrageous. 

Thank you. Thank you, Minister, for that.