4. Will the Minister make a statement on deaths due to COVID-19 in hospitals in north Wales? OQ55618

Thank you for the question. Data produced by the Office for National Statistics report that there were 460 deaths involving COVID-19 registered in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board residents in hospitals by 29 September. Those are the most up-to-date figures I have available to me. 

As large parts of the north move into local restrictions tomorrow, of course, we need assurances now from this Government that lessons have been learnt from this summer's outbreak in hospitals, such as Wrexham Maelor. Thirty two COVID-related deaths in six weeks—now, that isn't a criticism of front-line staff who have worked tirelessly throughout this pandemic, but it does raise serious questions about the Welsh Government and senior management's handling of the issue. People need to know why staff on COVID wards were sent back to work on other wards without being tested, why patients admitted to A&E were placed on wards before their COVID test results were back, why patients were released back to the community before their test results were known, why COVID-positive and COVID-negative patients were placed on the same ward. You go into hospital to get better, Minister, but that certainly wasn't the case for some people in Wrexham Maelor over the summer. So, given that Betsi Cadwaladr health board has been under your Government's direct control for the past five years, will you accept your part in this failure, and what steps are you now taking to make sure that that isn't repeated?

Well of course I have responsibility for the national health service here in Wales, and I'm proud to do so. When the health service gets things wrong, I'm the Minister responsible for the health service, just as when the health service makes a huge difference in saving lives and caring for people in the compassionate way that we've come to expect as a normal everyday reality of what our health service does the overwhelming majority of the time.

As I indicated in answer to Andrew R.T. Davies's questions earlier, we definitely have learned from the outbreak in Wrexham Maelor earlier in the summer, and those lessons are being applied in the Royal Glamorgan at present. It's important we continue to learn as the coronavirus pandemic continues. So, the leadership from Gill Harris in particular, as the nurse director, now acting chief executive until the new chief executive arrives later in the year, was particularly important, as was the way that stakeholders were brought together—not just the leadership team, but also the staff and trade union representatives—and the communications with families.

The risks for this particular virus are real and significant, and every one of these particular outbreaks—whether in a care home, a hospital or in community transmission—highlights the risks and why it's important for our healthcare professionals to adhere to the best infection prevention and control advice, and also why members of the public need to help them in doing so. So, there are, of course, lessons to learn, and I think it may be helpful, in terms of not just the Member's question, but, potentially, in dealing with the committee, to set out and highlight what we think some of those lessons learnt are as we go through the Cwm Taf Morgannwg challenges in the Royal Glamorgan at present, and to understand where we think there is room for improvement and what that means. You'll already see, though, that the chief medical officer's department has already written to all health boards reiterating a range of guidance and advice, and indeed the chief nursing officer has also reiterated the advice and expectations on infection prevention and control across the whole service.

I've been contacted by ambulance staff in north-east Wales concerned that the lack of ambulance staff testing could contribute to deaths due to COVID-19 in hospitals in north Wales. When I pursued this with the Welsh ambulance NHS trust, the chief executive stated that for asymptomatic ambulance personnel, testing is deemed neither appropriate nor reliable. Their deputy chief executive said, 'If and when the scientific evidence supports repeated testing of asymptomatic individuals, then it will become Welsh Government policy and will be adopted by us at that point'. How, therefore, do you respond to the statement to me by these ambulance staff that although it's of paramount importance that ambulance crews are protected from the transmission of the COVID-19 virus, most ambulance crews have not once been routinely tested, and only symptomatic staff have been given tests? Surely the scientific evidence that necessitates testing for care home staff would apply to ambulance crews, who also work in close proximity to the elderly, the vulnerable and patients with serious underlying health issues who could die in hospital?

The statements of the chief exec and the deputy chief exec are correct. The current scientific and medical evidence does not support the wholesale testing of asymptomatic ambulance staff. If it did, we would shift our position and make sure that we have the capacity deployed in accordance with that advice. The surveillance testing of care home staff has been something that has provided confidence in the sector, and meant that we have been able to deliver not just the testing for people that go into residential care, in particular when discharged from hospital, but that the staff themselves feel protected and we've been able to understand where outbreaks are taking place. The special vulnerability of care home residents is a different factor to the way that paramedics undertake their jobs and the range of people they come into contact with. It’s also a fact that we don't see the same level of staff change within direct contact when it comes to the ambulance service and dealing with people within the community. That isn't really a comparable position to the regular teams of people that need to care for people in care homes. It is the case that if the evidence changes, we will, of course, be happy to shift our position. There's nothing inconsistent with the current policy decision and the best, most up-to-date scientific evidence and advice.