But there are concerns we Welsh Conservatives have with some of these regulations. If I go through them: regulation 12, about curfew restrictions and in particular the settings of social activities—we fully subscribe to the table-service only and wearing of masks within such a setting, but where we do have difficulties is we have not been able to see the evidence that says that the curfew at 10 o'clock—or 10.20 p.m. in the Welsh context—actually has a material effect in suppressing the spread of the virus and not stopping people taking their social activities into a house setting, which I know is an illegal activity, but we heard in First Minister's questions today from one of our colleagues that it is going on in Wales and people are continuing that social setting within house parties or street parties. And so we'll be abstaining on that regulation, because, as I said, we fully support the table-only rule within the social setting of a pub or such a like venue, but we do have reservations as to whether the effectiveness of the curfew is actually helping and not hindering making sure that social activity is in a regulated environment, such as a pub or similar sort of setting.

On amendment 13, which deals with the restrictions that were laid in Llanelli, we very much support these regulations on the basis that this is very much what we've been calling for. Where the local evidence clearly shows that there is a need, rather than a county-wide or region-wide enforcement of restrictions, it is done on as localised a basis as possible. And we welcome the Government using that information, but we would wish them to share that information more widely and actually use that localised data when they bring forward other restrictions.

Restriction No. 8 and restriction No. 9 on the order paper, items 14 and 15, which relate to Cardiff and Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, Torfaen and the Vale of Glamorgan—we will be voting against these restrictions on the basis that we do not believe that the Welsh Government actually deployed the same criteria as they used in setting the restrictions for the Llanelli town setting, as opposed to the county of Carmarthenshire, and we would very much welcome the Minister giving us confidence that, as he goes forward, he will start to use this localised data in a more targeted way, so that we don't have county-wide lockdowns or regional lockdowns.

And I would just seek some clarification from the Minister: when you look at the figures that are out today, we are talking about the Vale of Glamorgan—. I declare an interest as a resident of the Vale of Glamorgan and also a councillor for the local authority there, but people have been talking—obviously, we welcome the progress in Caerphilly; well, if you look at the target figures today, the Vale of Glamorgan is in a better position than Caerphilly, and I'd like to understand when the Vale of Glamorgan, for example, will be up for review, so that, hopefully, some of these restrictions can be lifted. If that is the journey that the Welsh Government is going on in the Caerphilly county borough area, then, surely, on the numbers, the Vale of Glamorgan warrants such measures as well.

And I just want to end on this note, if I may: I do think it was unfortunate for the First Minister to take Conservative colleagues to task, whether they were Members of the Senedd or whether they were Members of Parliament, when they are genuinely having constituents either running businesses or just residents of the area—. Looking at the numbers, if you look at Conwy, for example, that had county-wide restrictions inflicted on it—placed on it, should I say—the other day, on the last reporting day, 8.5 per 100,000; on the seven-day rolling average, 64 per 100,000; and in the last reporting week, the twenty-eighth to the fourth, 60.6 per 100,000 cases. Gwynedd, just across the border, where no restrictions exist at all—on the last reporting day, 16.9 cases per 100,000; seven-day average, 73.1; and the last reporting week, 72.3.

Now, I'm not wishing to place restrictions on any area that doesn't need those restrictions, but, when you're a representative of a community, whether you're a member of this institution or Westminster or a councillor, then you are not doing your job if you're not conveying the views of those constituents. And when people are seeing their livelihoods going down the Swanee because of certain restrictions that have been placed on those businesses from functioning in an environment that they have created that is safe, then they're not unreasonable in asking their representatives to convey those views to the Government here or the Government in Westminster or the local authority, and I would seek clarity from the Minister on how he and his officials are interpreting the data when one county, as I've just identified, is in restriction, and then the county next door, with a higher infection rate, is not under restriction.