Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 6:51 pm on 13 October 2020.
It would be grossly irresponsible of any Member of this Senedd to support the imposition of significant restrictions on our constituents when we have not been provided with sufficient evidence to be able to justify them. The Welsh Government has a legal duty, as we heard earlier, to demonstrate that any restrictions that it imposes on the people of Wales are proportionate and necessary, and yet they have failed to provide the data to support their position.
Now, as a person representing a constituency that straddles two local authority areas, Conwy and Denbighshire, I regret that in spite of asking repeatedly for this information and this data from Ministers and, indeed, from Public Health Wales and, indeed, from my own local health board, the Welsh Government and all of those other bodies have failed to provide it. The publicly available data does not show me the coronavirus case rates on a community-by-community basis. It may actually put communities in very low-risk parts of Conwy and Denbighshire at higher risk because we're encouraging people from high-risk parts of the counties to travel to those lower risk parts of the counties, if the Welsh Government's line on travel is to be believed. So, on that basis, it's absolutely impossible for me to be able to justify a county-wide approach to these local restrictions. There's no data being published on the likely place of transmission or the activity to which transmission is likely to have been associated, so how on earth can we determine whether the restrictions on matters such as travel can be justified?
Now, I will say this sort of data is available in other parts of the UK, so why is the Welsh Government choosing not to publish it or share it with Members of this Senedd? We can only draw the conclusion that it's because the data doesn't support your position, it doesn't support your policy and it doesn't support the restrictions that you are seeking and already have imposed. And it's these travel restrictions in particular that are hitting people hard in the Conwy and Denbighshire areas.
In fact, First Minister, I heard what you had to say during the debate, or the exchange in FMQs earlier on, yet it's completely at odds with what you've previously told this Chamber. You said in response to a question from me on 23 September, on the issue of tourism, which I presume we can use as a proxy for travel, that the good news is, and I quote:
'The good news is that we've had tourists coming to Wales from other parts of the United Kingdom since the first part of July now, and there isn't evidence that that has led to spikes of infection in those parts of Wales that people most often visit. Indeed, the coronavirus continues to be at its lowest ebb in those places that tourists most often visit.'
That sort of undermines completely the argument that you're making on introducing these draconian travel restrictions on my constituents and other people across Wales. You know, it was absolutely heartbreaking to watch the tv over this weekend to see people being interviewed in the tourism queen of resorts, Llandudno, on the north Wales coast. We had a shopkeeper there telling reporters that, on one day last week, they took just £6.50 over the counter in takings. A local restaurateur said that usually on a Saturday, the previous week before the restrictions, they had 184 diners; that was down to 18 on the Saturday following the restrictions being introduced. And unless you act quickly, I can tell you that these businesses will be going down the pan. And when they go down the pan, all of those people who rely on their livelihoods from those businesses will see a significant impact on their quality of life, because it's not just those businesses, it's every single person they employ, every single family that relies on the pay packets that come in through that employment, and every single supplier that these businesses buy their goods from. The ripple effects will be absolutely huge.
And, of course, these travel restrictions pay absolutely no regard to the regular patterns of travel that people enjoy, particularly for those living in those border parts of these local authority areas. My constituents, for example, in Kinmel Bay can't nip a few hundred yards into Rhyl to their local supermarket. Instead, they can, of course, travel an hour in the opposite direction all the way down into the Snowdonia national park where, no doubt, there are very low levels of coronavirus infection, yet they can't go a few hundred yards to their nearest supermarket. It's absolutely bonkers.
The evidence is lacking. I will not be voting for the restrictions in terms of regulations No. 16 on coronavirus. There's very little evidence as well to suggest that these restrictions are actually working. Where they have been imposed, the reality is that the rates have actually been going up in some cases. So, Rhondda Cynon Taf went into lockdown a month ago. Now, remember the incubation period is 14 days, okay? So, they should have had an impact by now. It went into lockdown a month ago when it had 82.1 cases per 100,000 over seven days. Today, that figure is 178.2, almost double what it was. Caerphilly's been in lockdown since 8 September. On 26 September, it had 36.4 cases—it had been travelling in the right direction—per 100,000, but as of today that figure is 92.2. So, if the evidence suggests that these may not be working, if there's no information on a community-by-community basis, if there's insufficient data and evidence to demonstrate that the travel restrictions work, why on earth should anybody in this Chamber vote for this particular set of restrictions? I urge everybody to vote against them.