We'll reconvene on item 4 on our agenda this afternoon, which is a statement by the Minister for Health and Social Services: an update on the coronavirus, COVID-19. I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. A week ago I made a statement to the Senedd to inform Members about the developing situation in Rhondda Cynon Taf and the need to introduce local restrictions to control the spread of coronavirus and protect people's health. Today I want to update you about the latest action that the Welsh Government is taking, working in partnership with local authorities and public health experts. We will be introducing local restrictions in four more areas of south Wales because of a rapid increase in cases of coronavirus.

From 6 o'clock tonight, new restrictions will come into force to control the spread of the virus for everyone living in Blaenau Gwent, Bridgend, Merthyr Tydfil and Newport local authorities. This will mean people will not be allowed to enter or leave these four local authority areas without a reasonable excuse, such as travel for work or education. People will only be able to meet people they do not live with outdoors for the time being. They will not be able to form an extended household for the time being. All licensed premises in these areas will have to close at 11 p.m. Everyone over the age of 11 must continue to wear face coverings in indoor public places, as is the case throughout Wales. We're also extending the 11 p.m. licensing restriction to Caerphilly county borough area.

These restrictions are the same as those introduced in Rhondda Cynon Taf last week: from 6 o'clock tonight, the same local restrictions will be in place in all six local authority areas in south Wales. This will mean a large proportion of the population of south Wales will be living under local restrictions to help control the spread of coronavirus. We will hold a meeting later today with local authority leaders, health boards and the police throughout the wider south Wales region to discuss the developing coronavirus situation, particularly for those areas where rates are lower. We'll discuss whether further measures are needed to protect the wider population as we prepare to see students start, and return to, university. A similar meeting will be held in north Wales to bring together leaders of the local authority, health board and police to discuss the situation if we see rates rising rapidly across the region.

We've had to take the difficult but necessary decision to introduce these restrictions because we have seen a sharp and swift rise in cases in these areas since the end of August. There are many similarities between the cases in each of these six areas. We've seen a rise and spread of coronavirus cases associated with people socialising without social distancing, meeting indoors in other people's homes, and people returning from holidays overseas.

In Rhondda Cynon Taf, the number of positive cases and the incidence rate has continued to increase. This is to be expected and follows the pattern we saw in the Caerphilly borough in the days immediately after restrictions were introduced. We're seeing many small clusters throughout the local authority area, which, because of a lack of social distancing, have led to community transmission. Initially, most of the cases were in younger age groups, but we're now seeing infections in all age groups, and, particularly worrying, we have 34 cases of coronavirus in people in the Royal Glamorgan Hospital. Bridgend is a growing concern for us because there has been a sharp rise in cases in a short space of time. We've identified a small number of clusters in the borough, but we are worried that the pattern is similar to what we've already seen in Rhondda Cynon Taf. Mobile testing will be introduced in Bridgend this week.

In Blaenau Gwent, we've seen cases linked to pubs and a lack of social distancing, but there have also been cases in care home staff and in secondary schools in the area. In Newport, the rise in cases appeared to start with a house party at the end of August and was subsequently linked to a number of pubs, but we're now seeing a wide spread of cases across the city that are not linked to a particular cluster or showing links with existing cases.

But there are also some differences. In Merthyr Tydfil, the incidence rate is very high but the cases appear to be mainly focused around two distinct clusters. One is linked to a large employer and the other a pub. Two new smaller clusters have also been identified. The restrictions will be kept under close review in each of these areas and will be formally reviewed in two weeks' time.

Later this week, we'll carry out the first formal review of the restrictions in the Caerphilly borough. I'm cautiously optimistic that they are having a positive impact on cases of coronavirus in the area. We have seen a significant fall over a couple of days in the incidence rate. From being the highest rate in Wales, at 119 cases per 100,000 people in the last seven days, the latest figures show this rate has fallen to 77.9 cases per 100,000. This is still high, but provides, again, some cautiously optimistic evidence that the restrictions are helping to control the spread of the virus.

I want to thank residents and businesses in the Caerphilly borough for their help, co-operation and patience. This shows what we can do when we work together. I hope that we will see similar reductions in the other five local authority areas in south Wales that are subject to local restrictions, and, working together, we can keep Wales safe.

Thank you. Andrew R.T. Davies. You need to unmute, Mr Davies, please. There you go.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you, Minister, for your statement this afternoon, although it doesn't tell us anything that isn't already in the press, I fear.

Could you confirm, Minister, what the end goal is from these measures? I'm assuming it is to suppress the virus and, ultimately, allow our health service and other public functions not to become overwhelmed. But, for many people, looking at the new measures, is this the new norm now, that, every so often, we will end up having to interact with some form of lockdown until a vaccine is available? Because many people are trying to understand how things will pan out through the next winter months that we face. Could you also confirm that these localised measures that you are taking are being put in place to avert a national lockdown, which I hope you will agree must be averted at all costs, given the economic and social costs that that would have on communities the length and breadth of Wales?

In your statement, you touch on extra measures—and I think the wording that you use is—as students return to university, to protect local populations. I'd be grateful to understand what measures you are considering might be instigated to protect, in your words, local populations from the return of students to communities that host large student populations.

Could you also confirm that the NHS, despite these local measures, is very much open for business? I highlighted yesterday that there's been a 60 per cent loss of operations within the NHS since lockdown in March, and whilst, thankfully, we've seen procedures increase ever so slowly through the summer months, it is the case that, despite these local measures, the NHS is still very much open for business.

And finally, given your comments last night, and the First Minister's comments in First Minister's questions, can you categorically rule out that you would not support mandatory vaccination under any circumstances? I have to say, when I saw your interview last night, it did send a shudder down my spine that, in a democracy, a democratically elected Minister could say such a statement that he would not rule out such a measure. I, as someone who believes in the power of vaccination to control illnesses and eradicate illness within our community, will promote vaccination to the hilt, but I do not believe it is the role of the state to instigate legislation that ultimately would sanction mandatory vaccination in any shape or form. And I do note that you have put something up on social media this afternoon. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Yes, thank you for the series of questions. The end goal, in terms of the restrictions we've introduced, is to reduce and suppress the virus and to avoid harm. And you'll have seen the UK Government's chief scientific adviser and the Chief Medical Officer for England yesterday indicating that, unless measures are taken to arrest the spread of the virus, we can expect, by mid October, on current growth rates across the UK, to see 50,000 cases a day, with the attendant increase in hospitalisations that would produce, and, unfortunately, the attendant increase in deaths.

So, the measures we are taking now are to avoid that harm taking place. There's both the responsibility of Governments across the UK, of our health service, to prepare for the potential increase in cases, but, equally, the personal responsibility that we share and our own role as leaders, not just within our particular political parties, but within our communities, for the sort of conduct that we all need to reconsider about how we reduce our contacts, how we understand and follow the rules, and, in particular, the rules around household contact.

I think one of the more difficult things we've had to do is to change the extended household arrangements and to move to single households in those areas with local restrictions. That's because the evidence is that household contact is the primary driver. And so it's really important that people understand you should have an exclusive group of four households, and the same four households. It doesn't mean you each choose four different households. Four households, in other areas of Wales, for indoor contact, including if you're going out to a pub or a restaurant together—to only be with those people when you're making your booking. If that doesn't happen, then we're likely to see a further increase in the spread of the virus, with all of its harm.

And we are doing this to avoid harm and to avoid a national lockdown. Now, I appreciate it's a turn of phrase, but the phrase 'to avoid a national lockdown at all costs', well, that can't be right, because, potentially, 'all costs' is the significant exponential increase in cases and harm that we're trying to avoid. We have been very clear, though, that a national lockdown is the last resort to avoid that significant scale of harm. That remains the case for this Government, and, indeed, others across the UK. And we've already set out our stall: we'll take other measures, and the closure of schools being the last point, before we take any other action. The very last thing we want to do is to close schools, for reasons that Members understand. 

The new normal will depend on how successful we are in actually following that guidance on social distancing and in reducing our contacts, and not having large amounts of indoor contact with significantly different groups of people. That's why we have the extended household rules in place. If we do that, then it is possible we can go through the winter without needing to take even more significant measures. You will have seen the Prime Minister announcing, both through the media and then today in his statement in the House of Commons, significant national measures that are being taken across the whole of England. We are meeting to discuss what we will do in Wales, and, as soon as we're able to, as the First Minister indicated earlier, we'll come to this place. And that really does depend on how we land with the conversations that are still taking place as I'm in the Chamber, and when I leave later on to join those conversations.

In universities, I'm very pleased to say that the challenges about the large amounts of mixing that normally happen at university time at the start of the year—well, I actually want to praise universities and the National Union of Students in Wales and their members for the very responsible approach they're taking at leadership level. The education Minister will have more to say this week on the measures that are being taken in university towns and cities. 

On the reduction in elective care, I've been very upfront about the fact there has been a reduction in elective care throughout the pandemic—partly driven by the measures we've needed to take in ending elective activity at one point largely, partly driven by the reluctance of people to come into a hospital setting for their treatment, and now partly driven by the reality that, with more people in need because of that slowing down of our ability to process, that comes up against a service that isn't able to see the same number of people at the same time as it would previously have done because of the COVID security requirements, including significant personal protective equipment requirements for our staff. So, that is going to be a real challenge here in Wales and across the rest of the UK. 

We have no plans for mandatory vaccination; we do not intend to take primary law-making powers to do so. Every year, we have a conversation about the flu vaccine, and your predecessor in the shadow health spokesperson role would, every year, ask me about whether we would mandate staff in our health service to have the flu vaccine. And, every year, we decided not to, and that's still the position we're in now. And I said last night mandation would be the most extreme and most unlikely action, and we are not planning to do so. It is not what we intend to do.

So, our plan for vaccination, if and when we have a COVID vaccine, is to do so on a basis where we explain the benefits and understand that, and I think we'll have very high levels of public uptake. And I just don't think I haven't been clear this is not something that Government is planning to do. And that is the clear and, I think, unambiguous position of the Government here.

Thank you for that statement, Minister. Before I ask a few questions on the statement itself, I have a few comments on the responses that we've just heard. People will have been shocked to hear that schools could close again—as a final step, as you said. I, for one, am looking forward to a very clear statement from the Government—the education Minister, not yourself—that education will remain open unambiguously even if schools have to close, and I think parents would expect to hear that.

But I also welcome your clarity on mandatory vaccinations—it's not your plan. That's why choice of words is so important from our leaders at this point. And you still say that you're not planning to do this, but you need to be very clear that the Government will not do this, because this is the kind of thing that will raise grave doubts in the minds of constituents across Wales, rather than encouraging them to follow the advice and direction of Government. 

Just a few questions. I welcome the expansion of the restrictions—clearly the pattern in Wales is moving in the wrong direction. We certainly welcome this pattern of local restrictions. One thing you're doing, of course, is to ask people to remain within their own areas, but there's an anomaly here across Britain. Can I ask you whether it's your intention to speak to the Government in England, and to local authorities in England, to ask them to do the same? Because, at the moment, although people in Wales have to remain in their own areas, if they are high-risk areas or areas under restrictions, there is nothing to prevent people from travelling to Wales from other areas. I think that's something that needs to be discussed at the highest level between Governments. 

Does the Minister believe that we need the plan B to be ready? For me, there are clear areas where you're not going far enough. There is no restriction, apart from closing at 11 in the evening, on pubs, although people, I think, would wish to see that. We're certainly behind England on this now. So, are you considering taking a step further and asking people to close earlier at least, and only open outdoors, and even closing pubs and restaurants if, and only if, you're able to provide additional support to them?

And to conclude, I again want to highlight the problem here. We support the additional restrictions, we're asking whether they're going far enough, but we do need to address the issue on testing. You've issued a statement today saying that it will be weeks before the lighthouse labs issues will have been resolved. That's not good enough. You say that 28,000 additional tests are in Wales now, referring to Public Health Wales in relation to that. Can you explain where exactly those 28,000 tests come from, and when will we see their impact in Wales? 

And in terms of the statement to be made by the First Minister this evening, please bring it forward so that we can discuss it in the Senedd this afternoon. Thank you.

Thank you for the comments. I don't think I've shifted the Government's position at all on school closures. I've been very, very clear that it's the Government's priority to keep schools open as far as possible, and we will prioritise schools above other sectors. So, we'll close other parts of public services, or indeed the economy, to protect the ability for our schools. There's a direct impact on the mental health and well-being of children and young people. There is evidence that they are less susceptible to harm, less likely to be infectious for adults, and, equally, there is good evidence about the fact that not every child has thrived during remote schooling. It's a reality that has a longer term impact on the prospects of children and young people. So, the Government's position hasn't shifted at all in that.

And I can't be clearer: there is absolutely no plan for mandatory vaccination. I'm not going to get lost in a red herring. We have a significant job of work to do to plan for this year's flu vaccination campaign. We need to persuade people to take up their entitlement to a flu jab, to protect themselves and people around them, and the same will come whenever we do get a COVID vaccine. We are already planning about how to deliver that, and mandation does not form any part of this Government's plans.

On local travel, with the restrictions we've already introduced in the six areas of south Wales, we of course already have restrictions that prevent travel into those areas. So, if you go back to where we were previously with the stay local message we had during the first phase, we know that there were penalty notices issued to people who travelled from outside the area. And we may get to that point again, but we're not there. And, actually, the primary focus has to be on each of us reducing our contacts, to be clear about what the rules say about how we keep social distance, and how we follow the rules in particular on mixing indoors with other people.

Part of the challenge with the significant movement of people around the UK with universities reopening is that there will be people moving from one part of the country to another, potentially from a higher incidence area to a lower and vice versa. We do know that, as we've seen in RCT, in community settings the virus doesn't stay within one distinct age group, and so there's a concern about making sure that our universities don't see harm done, in relatively lower levels, to the student population, but we shouldn't expect that that will stay uniquely kept within one block of the population.

On the challenges about licensed premises, we are already considering what to do; it's part of what we're deliberately doing. We've already had a debate about earlier closing hours and the restrictions we've got at 11 o'clock, we're considering whether to move to 10 o'clock. There is something about consistency there that may help with the message, and part of the welcome meeting today at COBRA was a recognition by the UK Government that it would help to have a conversation between the four Governments of the UK, both in terms of discussing and agreeing decisions wherever possible, but it would also help in communication terms. There was, at least, a partial recognition that not having four-nation meetings had not been helpful when it comes to clarity in the communication. That matters for people who do want to follow the rules and recognise that it's important to behave in line with the guidance. So, we're not just considering the 10 o'clock issue; we're also considering whether to have the same movement on table service. Other restrictions are potentially possible before we get to closure. As I have mentioned before, it is a possibility, but not a plan, that you could potentially do what Ireland have done, where they've kept pubs open, but only if they're serving a substantial food offering as well. So there are different ways to move before getting to the point of entirely closing pubs, because if we did do that we can be confident that we'll displace some drinking activity into people's homes, which as we know is where the most significant vectors of spreading the virus have taken place.

We raised issues of testing at this morning's COBRA meeting. In the presentation with Dido Harding, which the First Minister referenced, there was again an acknowledgment that there has been a need to improve the position, with the well-advertised challenges not just in terms of the numbers of tests, but actually in the speed of the turnaround of those tests as well. Because we have a very good contact tracing service here in Wales—highly effective, materially more so than the service in England. But if people are, on a regular basis, waiting three days for their tests, then there's a challenge in whether those people and their contacts are circulating within the community unknown. So that is part of the challenge that we want to get through.

And on the use of the additional capacity we are releasing into the system, we're going to have extra lanes and extra availability in every drive-through centre. We're also creating an additional number of mobile testing units. They're currently going to be deployed in the highest incidence areas—in Aneurin Bevan University Health Board and Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board areas. But we will continue to look to understand how long we expect to have to wait for the lighthouse labs programme to get back on track. And we may need to make further steps to switch over more of our testing, to make sure it's more reliable and robust, to the capacity that we have taken the time and the resource to build up here in Wales, in addition of course to the £32 million I've previously announced to strengthen our testing infrastructure here in Wales through the autumn and the winter.

Thank you. Just before we go on, we're half way through the allotted time for this statement and we've had two sets of questions. I have something like 10 speakers, so if we can have shorter contributions, that would be helpful. David Rowlands.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon? Minister, whilst we must all acknowledge that you have, to a certain extent, to follow what the UK Government, and indeed much of the world, is doing with regard to COVID-19, it is incumbent upon us as politicians to question these draconian actions, for draconian they are, because they are having far-reaching consequences for almost every person living in Wales. We have to ask whether these actions are justified by the figures.

At the present time, COVID-19 accounts for an average of 11 of the 1,687 deaths that occur in Britain every day. By comparison, the week ending 4 September, 124 people died each day from endemic flu and pneumonia. Heart disease, Britain's biggest killer, accounted for 460 deaths every day last year, while cancer kills an average of 450 people per day. We have all been made aware that people are not seeking treatments for these killers because they are very much afraid of catching the disease in our hospitals. And given the increasing evidence that the statistics on deaths directly as a result of coronavirus are hugely flawed, can the Government really justify locking down the whole of the population because of the behaviour of a very small number of people, as the First Minister himself expressed earlier in this Plenary session? Surely, Minister, the correct action is to penalise those who are breaking the regulations, not seek to incarcerate those of us who are obeying the law.

I also wanted to point out some of the anomalies inherent in the present course of action, where we are seeing travelling funfairs allowed, but properly organised equestrian events being prevented, and where people cannot travel from closed-down areas, but where large numbers are allowed to for so-called work processes. Surely such lockdown strategies, which leak so comprehensively, only serve to cause consternation to those of us who do obey the regulations, whilst having limited effectiveness on containing the virus.

Thank you for the series of comments, and I'll try to respond to the points with questions attached to them. The Senedd, of course, votes on regulations and the significant restrictions that have been introduced and the interruptions to people's liberty, and I recognise that; it's not an easy or straightforward decision to take. What we are trying to do though is to avoid harm, not wait until significant harm has been caused. In the first wave, we have, compared to England, seen materially fewer excess deaths in Wales. So, that's a positive, and yet we still see more than 2,500 people have lost their lives to coronavirus. That is despite the significant measures that we have taken. We can be confident, I'm afraid, that without any measures being taken we would have seen a much, much greater loss of life and that is why we need to act.

In terms of the challenge about whether we should have a big stick for those people who are not following the rules, actually we need to both persuade, encourage and support people to follow the rules. And, in particular, that's why the financial measures to support self-isolation are so important. Clarity on the consequentials for that rapidly would be most welcome in each of the four nations, and it was a point that was raised in today's COBRA meeting that we need clarity for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales on the moneys that will be available to help people in self-isolation. Because if you're on statutory sick pay, and you need to go into self-isolation for 14 days, you may find that you're not able to feed your family or pay your bills. That's not a position that we want to put people in, so it could put people off taking a test in the first place. So, as soon as we get clarity on the finance, we'll happily come back with a scheme to make sure that is in place.

Minister, can I thank you for the statement and welcome very much the fact that the four-nation conversations have started, but just to ask him is he sure and confident that there will indeed be regular, reliable rhythm to these meetings now, that it is not a one-off? And can I also thank him for the incredibly intense engagement that he's had, not only with Members of the Senedd, but also with local authority leaders throughout south Wales? If people knew the half of what was going on in the level of engagement and planning and co-ordination, I think they'd be amazed, and I doubt this is going on to the same extent, I have to say, within England. 

Could I ask him to tell us—? He mentioned that a mobile testing unit now will be introduced in Bridgend, possibly some time during this week. Could he give us a bit more detail on that? And thank you for that, because you know that's an issue that I and the local authority leader, Huw David, have raised with you. So, that's really fast work on that. And could I ask you to keep an open mind in the discussions with council leaders on going further with the pubs, as you have just said—in pubs and clubs? I think there are ways, not only lowering the time limit on pubs, but actually the sitting down for service and the face coverings, which are worth exploring. And we can see in Scotland and Northern Ireland where they have been working, and it imposes some discipline. Because the two things, Minister, that don't go together are inebriation, late hours and social distancing.

I welcome the comment. I thank the Member for his constructive engagement, not just in this place, but outside it as well. I have spent lots of time speaking to local authority leaders and I expect to join a call with 10 different local authority leaders after this session is finished. 

When it comes to the four-nation engagement, we have again made the point this morning that a regular and reliable rhythm to our engagement is in all of our interests. As we're approaching another phase, where coronavirus is increasing, the value of the consistency of our message becomes ever greater. We think it would have been helpful through the summer as well. But we're in a better place now, we welcome the fact that a COBRA meeting has taken place and I want to see more of these on a regular basis, so we don't need to wonder about what is happening or see things being briefed to the newspapers before we have meetings about them. That is in all of our interests to make sure that happens on a regular basis. 

I'll come back to you later this week with confirmed details. I'm waiting for not just the site but all the arrangements to be in place, and I'll make sure that constituency and regional Members are aware of when the Bridgend testing site is available and where it will be. And that is about having local testing for local people. Part of the challenge this morning for the UK programme was they've actually tried to introduce a fix to make sure that you can't book a test more than 50 miles away from where you live. We need to make sure that's 50 miles by travel, not as the crow flies, because, as we've seen, people living in Weston-super-Mare have been directed to testing centres in south Wales and that's particularly unhelpful.

On pub restrictions, I'm considering the point you raise, and I mentioned earlier about table service and a 10 o'clock finish time, and we're also reviewing the evidence on face coverings. Just a warning about that though: obviously you can't drink while you're wearing a face covering or eat, but the challenge about putting on and taking off the face covering is part of the concern. Taking off a face covering and putting it on are times when you may actually be shedding part of the virus, so we need to consider whether the evidence supports that being more likely to spread the coronavirus rather than lead to a benefit. But that review is being undertaken.

Thank you for your response to Huw Irranca-Davies about the mobile testing centre for Bridgend. I just wanted to ask you, bearing in mind that these regulations are likely to come before us next week and then won't be reviewed for another three weeks from this week, how long do you expect the lockdowns to last? Do you have a time frame in mind, or is it very much predicated on, well, effectively the R number? Thank you.

In the coronavirus control plan, we've set out—and I think it's the legal requirement as well—to review these individual restrictions every 14 days initially, but then to review them every week. In reality, we're looking at the daily picture of what's happening. So, we look at the rates each day and what they tell us about the trend. And, because of the challenges in getting test results through, that means that our figures change as we backtrack to understand how many positive cases have taken place on a day.

So, for example, we know that, on the figures we have got for the last couple of days, we'll get more of those filled in in the next few days. There's a lag of up to about three to four days, typically, in current lighthouse labs testing. Now, that's part of a blind spot that we have in the middle of what we are able to do. We have much more information than we had in February or March or April, with a much bigger testing programme, but the time lag introduces some difficulty about the reliability of the trend. That's why the seven-day trend is important for us, and the data over the last 48 to 72 hours.

So, we are looking at that on a regular basis, and my ambition is that, when we understand if we have managed to suppress coronavirus again in those areas, we need to think then again about releasing some of the restrictions, but doing that in a way that is manageable and in a way that we can sustain through the autumn and the winter. As I said in answer to previous questions, these are significant restrictions upon people's liberty that, in any other time—and even in this one—are truly extraordinary. I don't want them to be in place for any longer than is necessary to protect public health.  

Carwyn Jones.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for your—

No, sorry. Carwyn Jones. Sorry, Caroline.

Sorry.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I know that Caroline and myself had the same problem at the time of the last election, when we were perhaps sometimes confused for each other, certainly in writing. 

Three things from me, Minister. First, you mentioned already the signposts—the review points, as it were—in the process. Could you give us some indication of what you will be looking for in 14 days, when you take your decision as to whether or not to extend these restrictions in this form or not, so that we can have an idea of what signs you are looking for in order to decide whether restrictions should be kept, or whether they should be made more restrictive or, indeed, loosened?

Secondly, I have a concern, as public houses and bars shut after 11 p.m., that there will be a temptation for some people, especially young people, to just go on to house parties. Now, we know, of course, that house parties are a particular risk as we see people mixing very closely with each other. Alcohol is involved, so we know that social distancing tends to break down. What messages are you preparing to give out about the dangers of house parties replacing pubs in that regard?

Thirdly, just a plea to make sure that, when an announcement is made, the guidance is made available as soon as possible. My colleague the Member for Ogmore and myself were lucky in the sense that, when we had enquiries from constituents, we were able to point or signpost them to the RCT guidance. But, just a plea to make sure that the guidance is made available as quickly as possible, so that those of us who are affected as Members are able to provide the right level of advice to constituents.   

Thank you for the questions. On your final point, I recognise that there is a need to provide as much clarity as quickly as possible on what the restrictions mean for people. Most people want to follow the rules, and so it's about how we help them to do so. That's got to be balanced against the speed of decision making that is necessary to keep people safe. But, it's a point well made, and in this instance, it has been helpful that there are essentially the same restrictions as are already in place within Rhondda Cynon Taf now across the six relevant local authorities in south Wales.

On the challenge about house parties, it's a real danger and a real concern. It's part of the rationale for keeping pubs and the hospitality trade open. There's an environment where people can drink together, where they enjoy doing that together, but also, it's an environment that is regulated and there's a line of sight. Our bigger concern is indoor contact in people's private homes. That's been the largest area of spread and infection rates rising. So, what we definitely don't want to see is house parties increasing. If you think you're safer drinking in your home with six or seven friends you don't live with, actually, you're at much greater risk than being in a pub where you have to be socially distanced. So, there's a real challenge in what we do and the messaging around hospitality, why it's being kept open, and the challenge of just substituting that for drinking and buying alcohol from an off-licence. We're looking at off-licences as a possible restriction, together with other Governments in the UK.

On what we need to see to see the current local restrictions removed, we'll be looking in particular at a reduction in the case rate and seeing the trends going in the right direction, seeing a sustained fall in those to get below our action levels. We're also going to be looking at the positivity rates, how many people in every 100 test positive. That will tell us a lot about the state of community transmission. And we'll also be looking at the intelligence we get from our test, trace and protect service about new clusters, whether we have unexplained clusters—that's again a signal that community transmission is taking place—but also evidence of mixing and how people are acquiring coronavirus in the first place. So, it'll be a range of harder data measures and that softer intelligence on what's happening in terms of behaviour within the community.

But if we're making any choices about dropping a level down, we'll have to be clear about why we're doing that and what that then means. What I don't want is people to lose sight of the collective discipline we need to rediscover on respecting and following social distancing in particular.

Minister, residents in my region in Blaenau Gwent, in Caerphilly, in Merthyr and in Newport are now facing restrictions. I note the answer that you gave a few moments ago about how you're going to be keeping the restrictions under daily review, and I welcome that. Now that so many neighbouring authorities are facing restrictions, I'd ask would it make more sense to be thinking of reintroducing, say, a five-mile rule, instead of expecting people who live on the border between authority areas to be able to travel the length and breadth of their own authority area but not, for example, visit family members outdoors who live two miles away but only just across the border between authorities. 

And finally, I'd like to ask about your Government's communications—[Interruption.] I think the previous First Minister has got—. The final question I'd like to ask is about your Government's communication of the rules that people need to follow. Given that so many people in Wales unfortunately get their news from English broadcasters, or broadcasters that are UK based, how do you suggest they keep themselves informed of the rules that will be determining their own locality? Would you expect them to find out themselves, or will the Welsh Government be considering informing them through a direct form of communication?

[Inaudible.]—challenge around travel restrictions. We had a long and vigorous discussion, you'll recall, in this Chamber when meeting entirely remotely about the five-mile guidance in respect of local travel. Now, that 'stay local' message was broadly welcomed in lots of places, including in areas of much lower prevalence of coronavirus. There is as much concern about coronavirus not coming into an area that hasn't been largely affected.

What we're doing with our current restrictions is, because we recognise community transmission is taking place within those local authority areas, we're again looking to isolate the virus within that area, to protect areas around it as well. But it goes alongside the crucial message, and in many ways the much more important message, of people needing to looking again at what they're doing to minimise the number of contacts they're having, to understand who they're having in their own home, and to remember the rules around extended households.

It should allow contact with other people, but it should be the same four households with each other, not one household choosing three others, and then one of those three households choosing a different group of people as well. That will lead to a much more significant change in transmission and not provide the protection we're looking for—but also the companionship and contact that we know is a challenge in the areas where we've had to undo those extended household arrangements. So, it's really important that people look again at how to follow the rules and stay within them, because this is actually about keeping us safe and avoiding harm.

I do think, in terms of the travel restrictions, in Caerphilly we're already seeing some evidence that people are following those. There's a reduced number of infections. And in terms of the messaging locally, I think that the council in Caerphilly, and in particular the leader Philippa Marsden, have been very clear about what's required. On the challenges in what's taking place, actually, our local media have been very responsible and very consistent in reporting in an honest way the new restrictions that are in place. That's in all of the hyperlocal media, not just in Caerphilly, but in all of the six areas where we've had to take action.

I think, though, that if we got to a point of wider restrictions, it is of course possible that there would be a message from the Government directly to the population, but that, again, is something to hold in reserve; it's not where we are now, but again, we shouldn't rule out options on the table, because we can't be confident about the path of coronavirus in the future and what we will need to do to keep the people of Wales safe. 

That intervention was not meant to be, so can I just remind people that they shouldn't have their mobile phones on? And that's if you're joining us virtually, as well. And if you are going to take a call, can you make sure that your mike is muted, please? That actually threw me. Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Minister, in addressing the issues in Blaenau Gwent, singled out pubs and care homes as part of the cause of the outbreak in the borough. I was wondering if he could make any further comment on that and describe why or how the data explains that care homes and pubs have led to the issues that we're experiencing in Blaenau Gwent, and whether he intends to take any specific action to deal with issues around pubs and care homes because of that. There is some concern in the borough that we have these additional restrictions there, whilst pubs remain open. Does the Minister believe that there need to be additional powers taken or provided to local government to enable the public houses to be subject to further and more significant regulation if they are to remain open?

I'd be grateful if the Minister could outline why he believes that shielding is not necessary in these areas. There are a number of people who've been shielding for some months this year already who feel somewhat vulnerable now that we're under additional regulations, but there is no requirement for them to shield at the moment. I'd be interested to understand the Government's thinking on that. 

There is a requirement—

Can you wind up, please?

—for additional testing in Blaenau Gwent as well. The Minister is aware that I've got very little confidence in the UK systems and in what the UK Government has been doing over some months, and I know that the Welsh Government has provided for mobile testing and additional testing resources in other parts of south Wales. I'd be grateful if the Minister could make a commitment for additional resources to enable additional testing to take place in Blaenau Gwent. 

Thank you for the questions. On care homes, we've actually picked up a number of positive cases from our regular programme of testing of care home staff, and that's allowed us to understand what's taking place there and to isolate not just the staff, but to then have some protection and additional testing around the care homes affected. It is literally a handful—less than a handful—at present, but we're taking that seriously because we know the significant harm that can be caused if there's a real outbreak within a care home—not just a closed environment, but a closed environment with very vulnerable people, vulnerable to much more significant harm from this virus.

It's also reflective of what's happening within the wider community, and so there's a challenge there about how we protect people. And again, it goes back—it still starts off with contact in the home and if people are mixing in the home in larger numbers, it's likely to come through, as it has done, in a range of pubs and people coming into those pubs and if they're not respecting the social distancing guidance and the rules in those pubs as well, well, it should be no surprise that staff and people who drink there are then going to walk away with coronavirus as well. So, businesses need to do their part in following the rules with their staff to protect their staff and their customers, but customers who want to continue to enjoy the ability to go to have a drink or go out for a meal need to follow the rules as well, because otherwise, we will need to take more significant measures than I've outlined already. It's also the case that every local authority is looking at enforcement and the number of spot checks that are taking place, and that is producing a response from the more responsible parts of the business and we're also picking up issues that do require improvement as well.

On shielding, the starting point is that people who have previously shielded should follow the advice and be particularly stringent about doing so, particularly that point about who you have within your own home, about following the advice on social distancing. Our chief medical officers across the UK are looking again at shielding. It's a particularly medical model that's been adopted in the past. Now, that doesn't mean to say that it wasn't worth having, but for the next phase, we've got to consider whether that's the right approach, because we understand now that people at the greatest risk of harm aren't all neatly packaged up in the list of medical conditions. We know that if you're of certain ethnic minority origins, if you're black African or Caribbean, if you're from a south Asian origin or if you're overweight as well, you are in a higher risk category, but that won't be picked up in a medical list, necessarily, on itself, unless you have a diagnosed condition. The same for areas where there is a higher degree of socioeconomic disadvantage—much greater risk of harm, yet not picked up in our shielding advice. We're looking for a more nuanced form of advice that will still help people to understand how they can manage their risks.

And on testing, I'm happy to confirm that I do expect there to be more testing resources from the Welsh Government and national health service provision. In particular, the testing centre in Cwm should benefit from an additional lane, where those tests will go to Public Health Wales labs to supplement the challenges that we still see within the UK-led lighthouse lab testing programme.

Thank you. Caroline Jones.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Apologies for my overeagerness to come in last time—to you and to Carwyn.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. What assessment has been made of the effectiveness of local lockdowns in driving down infection rates? Do you have any data on adherence rates to measures to tackle COVID-19 and how many people have been fined for breaking the rules? What support is being offered to tourist businesses in my region, many depending on seasonal trade, who will now have to cancel bookings as a result of this lockdown?

And finally, Minister, how do you answer the widespread criticism of the new measures? Many people wonder why it is okay to mix with people in a pub, club or gym but not be okay to visit loved ones. So, can you explain the reasoning for this so that we, in turn, can explain to our constituents and get them to support the measures? Because without widespread public support, these measures are futile.

On the challenge about when we'll understand the effectiveness of the local restrictions that are already in place, we indicated it will be at least two weeks before we've understood more definitively the pattern. We're seeing cautious evidence, just before the two-week review period in Caerphilly, but we'll need to understand that and then to see a sustained fall. The local restrictions that have been introduced in Scotland, in Northern Ireland and England are still, largely, in place. In Scotland they're seeing a slowdown in growth, but still a growth, in significant parts of the west of Scotland, and, as you know, England have significantly increased—there are about 12 million people, I think, in England who are under a form of local restriction. So, we need to see the evidence of what's happening in each of those areas to understand the pattern of infection in each individual case. When it comes to the evidence about them, as I said, we do have evidence of support for the measures, and a change in behaviour in Caerphilly, in particular when it comes to travel, and I think that's important. We'll see more evidence about a reduction in the number of contacts as we continue to see what happens with the case rate over the coming week.

When it comes to business support, this, again, was an issue that was raised by ourselves, by Scotland and Northern Ireland, in today's COBRA meeting, about the essential need to look again at business support. The furlough scheme has been widely welcomed, and this Government has been clear that it was a positive initiative from the UK Government. Our concern is, as we're moving into a different phase, with more restrictions likely to come in place, not less, through the winter, that not having a successor for business support may lead to businesses making choices about ending employment and making redundancies. There's a broad point there, as well as the challenges, of, if we're introducing local restrictions, or national restrictions, about further business support that's required, and that's a conversation we need to continue having with the UK Government to understand what the Treasury are prepared to do at a UK level to protect jobs and employment.

And when it comes to drinking and socialising in your own home, or in other groups, the challenge is, as we've said, and as we've recognised, people not respecting social distancing in their own home is the largest cause in the spread of coronavirus. If you're going out in a regulated environment, whether it's a gym, a restaurant or a pub, there should be additional restrictions in place on avoiding contact with other people. People, naturally, if they're in each other's homes, with loved ones, will have contact with them, and that's very difficult. And if people aren't following the rules on having an exclusive extended household, then that means we're likely to see more spreading within that household environment. It's what we have seen already in a number of the areas where local restrictions are now in place. So, that's the issue that we need to deal with if we are going to turn back the tide of coronavirus here in Wales.

Minister, the UK Government is talking about a six-month period now, and I guess that's one alternative approach, rather than having lockdowns, easing the lockdowns and then reimposing them, perhaps there could be a consistent level of restriction over a longer period of time, which I think would give greater understanding and certainty to communities, and probably feed through to greater compliance. So, I'm wondering whether Welsh Government is considering that sort of approach for Wales.

As far as schools are concerned, I wonder if you could say anything about Welsh Government consideration of facilitating a system where schools, pupils and staff could get tested quicker, and then the self-isolation that needs to take place if a test was negative could be shortened. That would save lost school time, which is so vitally important.

Also, I wonder if you could say anything about pubs. I know that they were significant in the Newport incidence of cases, as they have been elsewhere. So, will Welsh Government consider possibly bringing the closing time down from 11 o'clock to maybe 10 o'clock or 9 o'clock, and would there be any restrictions on off-licences to make sure that there's a level playing field?

On the final point, I think I've addressed that before, and we are considering the potential for table service and 10 o'clock closure on licensed premises. We're also considering off-licence sales as well.

On the six-month indication that the UK Government have given for England, well, the challenge is that, I guess, in planning terms, if we could predict that it would take six months to reach a different point, that would be useful for people to plan for. The challenge is we can't be certain about the course of the pandemic. What we can be clear about is that the autumn and the winter will be particularly difficult, and until we get to the point of having either a more effective antiviral treatment or a vaccine, then we're likely to have to live with a real challenge and the level of interventions we're going to need to take to keep us all safe and well. So, we'll continue to talk through this period of time, through the autumn and the winter, but I can't give a definitive guarantee about the length of time that other measures may be needed. But we're considering whether we need all-Wales not just messages, but all-Wales action, and we'll continue to review the case and report openly as soon as we're able to do so.

On school testing, this is partly about the challenge in the capacity of lighthouse labs, and it's one of the factors that have meant that lighthouse labs aren't able to cope with the capacity that was coming in and why tests have been restricted. As we saw in Scotland, there's a significant bump in the requirements for tests—people going for a test when the school year starts. That's happened with the return to school in England and Wales; that's one of the factors that have caused the problem that means that lighthouse labs aren't currently able to cope with the same volume of testing.

The challenge then, though, is about, if and when those issues are resolved, whether we want to prioritise school groups for testing, and I'm afraid the advice we've been given by our technical advisory group doesn't support testing whole school-year groups or whole school classes that are out of the school classroom. That's partly because of the time that it takes for coronavirus to develop—'If you're close enough you're going to get it' isn't as neat and as simple as, 'Take a test, you're fine to go back.' That's why there's a 14-day isolation period. It's why we needed to test people twice who have returned from hotspots from abroad as well. So, whilst the idea may sound appealing, actually the science doesn't support that being the right sort of intervention at present, but, as ever, we'll learn more about the science and the evidence, and that may well change the course of choices that we make to help keep Wales safe.

Minister, thank you for your statement. It's been reported in the media that Dr Shankar of Public Health Wales has suggested that a number of local authorities are currently being monitored and could face local restrictions. Those local authorities include both Conwy and Denbighshire, both of which straddle my constituency. I've just been looking on the Public Health Wales website and it suggests that the incidence per 100,000 of positive cases in Conwy is just 16.8 and in Denbighshire 18.4. Now, that's obviously considerably below the 25 per 100,000 threshold that generally triggers action from the Welsh Government. Can you tell us on what basis those local authorities are under special monitoring arrangements and can you also explain why there appears to be two different sets of data that are available to the Welsh Government to make their judgment?

So, I understand the Welsh Local Government Association circulated some information over the past 24 hours that took a snapshot of the situation on 19 September that suggested that in Conwy, the rate was 26.4 per 100,000, which is obviously over the 25 per 100,000 threshold, and that Denbighshire's was 25.1. Yet, on the same day, Public Health Wales published figures of just 19.6 in Conwy and 16.7 in Denbighshire. Why is there such a significant discrepancy, and on what basis does the Welsh Government make the decisions in terms of further intervention and monitoring?

That comes back to my response to Suzy Davies, I think, earlier on, about the challenge in having delayed results. So, you have the headline rate on the day you get the tests themselves, the next 24 hours, and you then get more tests, typically coming through the lighthouse lab process, in significant numbers, and they need to put those back in on the day that the tests were actually taken in order to understand at that time what the figures were. That's my understanding of the challenge with some of the figures, which is why there's been such focus not just on the amount of tests that are done, not the lab capacity, but the amount of tests that are delivered, and how quickly the results are provided.

In terms of the watch list, it's a watch list of what's happening with a shifting picture, so we're not just looking and waiting till people reach a point in time, we're looking at a change in the rates within local authorities as well. So, we know that Conwy and Denbighshire are seeing some increases, and so rather than saying we'll do nothing until they hit a particular margin, we're saying that that's something to keep an eye on rather than that we need to intervene in the here and now. We will then, if cases do continue to rise, consider what further action we need to take.

To be fair, there's a point here for local authorities across the political spectrum, because I can honestly say that during the course of this crisis and now, we've had very constructive conversations with leaders from every party, including independent leaders, the Conservatives, Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Labour leadership. There's a real feeling from leaders of local authorities about the sense of national mission we have, and their responsibility in their local communities, and that's what we want to see carry on moving forward. So, we'll share data openly and transparently with local authorities and local health boards. Our TTP teams are based in local authorities. They have ready access to the intelligence on changes within the pattern of coronavirus within their communities, and we will need that unity of purpose as we all strive to keep Wales safe through a very difficult autumn and winter.

Thank you. And finally, Dawn Bowden.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. [Inaudible.]

No, I think there's something wrong. We can't hear you.

Okay. Got me?

That's better, thank you.

Okay, sorry about that. Three quick points from me. We've got additional restrictions now on visiting people's homes, but for some people their homes, of course, are also their workplaces. So, I'm thinking of people like music instructors and so on—people come to their homes for tutoring. And other people's homes are also some people's workplaces—I'm thinking of people like mobile hairdressers. So, it would be helpful to get some clarity that these businesses can continue to operate providing protective measures are put in place.

I've also had some concerns raised with me about incidents of lack of co-operation with TTP contact tracers, and reports of some people who have tested positive not being prepared to disclose their contacts. Now, given the potential seriousness of this in undermining attempts to stop the spread of the virus, do we need to consider enforcement of the requirements to disclose contacts?

And my final point, Deputy Presiding Officer, is that I'm very conscious of the pressures on local authorities, who are working at capacity now in dealing with these new restrictions. So, can we see some flexibility on bodies like Estyn and Care Inspectorate Wales in terms of when scheduled inspections need to take place, and get agreement to delay where necessary for a few weeks to ensure that everyone in those sectors can concentrate on dealing with the issues related to the new restrictions, rather than preparing for inspections which, however important, are really not imperative at this point in time?

Thank you for the comments and questions. I think the education Minister has indicated that some of the point of the Estyn inspections was actually about addressing local authority plans to safeguard the interests of learners during this particular time in the pandemic. But I of course take on board the point that the Member makes about whether the balance is the right one, as we're moving into a different phase, so I'll happily discuss that with both the Deputy Minister, who's going to be up next, about CIW, but also with the education Minister about the pattern for inspections taking place, and the point and the purpose of those, because not having an inspection regime is something that is not consequence free. It's part of what we do to help keep people safe in all those institutions, but I think the Member raises a fair point about the current balance.

On home visits where that is someone's workplace, either their own home or if they're visiting someone else's home for work, at present that is permitted, even within the local restrictions, but reasonable measures must be taken, and so will differ for people depending on the task they're undertaking. The measures may be different, for example, for a music teacher, where social distancing should be possible, typically, compared to someone who is a mobile hairdresser. And we do recognise that, if we need to move to a phase where that can no longer take place, that would have a significant economic consequence for those people and they may not have easy recourse to alternative sources of income themselves. So, we recognise there's a real impact in every choice that we make.

When it comes to the lack of co-operation with the contact tracing service, I think whilst it's disappointing, obviously, that people aren't co-operating, I understand people's frustration. We have to consider the challenge of both, I think, the carrot, and I think the welcome ability to provide people with financial support, if the UK Treasury are clear and rapid in confirming that there are funds available to not just Wales, but Scotland and Northern Ireland too, to introduce a support scheme. That should help with co-operation, but also just the message that the primary point of this is to keep people safe.

We're not looking to catch people out so we can fine them, we're looking to understand information to keep them, their family and their community safe. And you will know, from clusters taking place within your own constituency, that the mixing, where that hasn't been properly disclosed, has gone into that wider family group, with partners, parents and others then being at risk of having coronavirus, and the risk profile changes as the age profile changes as well. So, our preference is to get the right sort of co-operation with people right across Wales, but, if not, we are considering options about whether enforcement and changing the rules around that is something that we could and should do. But all of this must come back to the primary purpose: what do we all need to do to help keep Wales safe?

Thank you very much, Minister.