I thank the Minister for his statement and the Chair of the committee for the procedural background I might have expected to have had from the Minister. We haven't had an explanation as to why having, since the original set on 26 March, had a series of amendments to those regulations—. Now that approach has been changed and the initial overall set of regulations and all the amendments are then revoked and then largely reinstated before a new set of amendments. What's the purpose of that procedural approach? 

I'm disappointed that, again, it's over three weeks since these amendments were made, on 10 July, before we debate them. We're therefore debating and voting on something when it's already been amended twice. We were told by the First Minister there are going to be further amendments that are going to be made on 7 August. It's 5 August today. Why couldn't that be done two days earlier so we could have proper scrutiny by the Senedd? 

The original set of regulations, while we would have been happy to support a degree of restriction in order to protect NHS capacity from being overwhelmed, by the time we even got to vote on the first set of regulations, that issue was, we felt, under control. We've opposed all the regulations to date. Because these No. 2 regulations reinstate that panoply of regulations, we also propose to vote against these. Again, we think it's wrong, the scale of the restrictions and closures, and the putting in law the huge inflexibility of that, the 2m distancing, we think is wrong.

I also consider that these regulations are unnecessary and disproportionate, and that applies even more strongly given how low the level of prevalence of COVID-19 now is—this level of extraordinary restrictions and state power, and the impact that this has on the economy, but also on people's well-being and also, frankly, health and, I fear, death rates for other diseases in the NHS. It is wholly disproportionate. We oppose it.

The two sets of amending regulations strike me as being entirely liberalising, albeit in a small way, and therefore we see no need to oppose the amendment regulations, should there be a vote. Thank you.