The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Rebecca Evans, amendments 2, 3 and 5 in the name of Siân Gwenllian. In accordance with Standing Order 12.23(iii) amendment 4 tabled to the motion has not been selected. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2  and 5 will be deselected.

The next item on our agenda this afternoon is the Welsh Conservatives debate on the impact of local coronavirus restrictions on employers. I call on Russell George to move the motion. Russell George.

Motion NDM7428 Darren Millar

To propose that the Senedd:

1. Welcomes the £4 billion of extra funding made available to the Welsh Government by Her Majesty’s Government to address the impact of the coronavirus pandemic in Wales.

2. Recognises the significant adverse impact of local coronavirus restrictions on businesses and other employers.

3. Notes the need to ensure that coronavirus restrictions that impact upon employers are proportionate.

4. Calls upon the Welsh Government to:

a) remove the expectation for employers to have a unionised workplace in order to access Welsh Government funding and grants;

b) extend business rate relief to businesses with a rateable value in excess of £500,000 and to landlords who are unable to let vacant commercial properties;

c) waive the 10 per cent investment requirement to access grants under phase 3 of the economic resilience fund; and

d) publish, in the public domain, data on the number of positive COVID-19 tests on a local authority ward basis.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to formally move the motion in the name of my colleague Darren Millar, and I can also indicate today that we will be supporting the amendment in the name of Caroline Jones this afternoon as well.

Presiding Officer, the UK Government has provided in excess of £4 billion to the Welsh Government to combat the virus. To date, the Welsh Government, I'm afraid, has not been open and transparent about how they have spent that money. Small and medium-sized businesses are, of course, the backbone of our economy, and we need to fully support them. Wales has previously, I'm afraid, not been a very friendly environment to do business in, with owners paying higher business rates, and lower thresholds for business rate relief. This has been compounded by COVID-19 restrictions, and a lack of urgency in ensuring that much-needed support is delivered to the front line, rather than sitting, unfortunately, in Welsh Government coffers.

I welcome the announcement of the £60 million additional funding from the Welsh Government to support businesses that are affected by local lockdowns. But, following today's announcement, I would be interested to know if areas that are not lockdown areas but will be affected by the wider restrictions announced will also be able to tap into those funds as well. In fact, I think that perhaps we do need more enhanced funding as a result of the announcement today. In contrast, with the coronavirus job retention scheme and the self-employment support scheme, the UK Government has provided support for around 30 per cent of the working population in Wales, protecting hundreds of thousands of livelihoods in Wales, while the self-employment income support scheme is providing support for over 100,000 people with a share of nearly £300 million. This is without, of course, taking into account the wider winter economy plan, which will allow businesses to access a range of loan schemes and extends the temporary VAT cuts to tourism and hospitality, as well as deferring repayments of VAT to support businesses up until March 2022.

We welcome Caroline Jones's amendment, as it's clear that blanket local lockdowns to combat coronavirus, such as the ones that the Welsh Government is implementing, I believe, are damaging to the Welsh economy and are preventing businesses, especially in the tourism and hospitality sector, from recovering from a disappointing period—and summer period as well. It's vital that the Welsh Government's decisions to implement local lockdowns are proportionate and minimise damage to any hopes of business recovery, and this is why we on these benches have repeatedly called for the Welsh Government to introduce smart hyperlocal lockdowns to reduce the spread of COVID-19 whilst minimising the economic and social impact of restrictions.

Furthermore, the introduction of targeted hyperlocal lockdowns may prevent the need for wider county-based lockdowns, helping to ensure proportionality in the response to local outbreaks, as well as reducing the risk of clusters spreading to wider parts of local areas. The First Minister has previously said that hyperlocal restrictions are a very sensible approach. So, we would encourage the Welsh Government to protect lives and livelihoods by ensuring that restrictions are as proportionate a response and as targeted a response as possible to those areas that require intervention, as opposed to its current blanket approach. To help an ailing Welsh economy, we therefore are calling on the Welsh Government to publish ward-level if not postcode-level data in order to distinguish the biggest causes of the transmission to those areas affected. This would allow other parts of our economy to still function whilst ensuring that that transmission does not spiral out of control.

I will now talk about the Conservative approach—what we would propose—and I'm happy to outline our approach. We would introduce at least a £250 million COVID-19 community support scheme to help towns and cities across Wales, business-rate-free zones where all businesses would be free from paying any business rates at all, and scrapping business rates completely where the rateable value is under £15,000 outside of those zones. That's what we would propose from next April onwards. Businesses need security now in what's going to happen next April onwards. Going forward, Presiding Officer, it is also important that the Welsh Government, I think, waives the 10 per cent investment required by businesses in order to access the third phase of the economic resilience fund. Many businesses, especially in the tourism and hospitality sector, have faced dramatic losses in revenue over the summer. They're bare to the bone; there's nothing left in the cupboard, and we're asking them to contribute 10 per cent in order to receive any kind of economic support. Surely, that's not acceptable and that has got to change.

Whilst the Welsh Government has provided financial support for businesses, those that have a rateable value of £500,000 will not receive any business support at all, despite employing thousands of people. Now, in stark contrast, the UK Government has granted a rates holiday to all retail, leisure and hospitality firms for a year, irrespective of size. And that's exactly what the Welsh Government should be doing here. It's also important that the Welsh Government extends business rates relief to landlords who are unable to let vacant commercial properties. With the closure of many businesses, it's important that landlords are supported by the Welsh Government.

So, I believe that what I've set out today is a plan that will provide targeted local interventions and earlier interventions. We need to have a more sustainable and effective way of tackling local outbreaks whilst at the same time stimulating and helping the wider economy to recover. Ultimately, we need to protect lives and livelihoods, Presiding Officer. So, I look forward to contributions from Members this afternoon. 

I have selected four amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 5 will be deselected. In accordance with Standing Order 12.23(iii), I have not selected amendment 4. I call the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans.

Amendment 1—Rebecca Evans

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the Senedd:

1. Notes the Welsh Government is dedicating more than £4 billion to its response to COVID-19, a sum greater than the Barnett consequentials received from the UK Government.

2. Recognises the Welsh Government’s £1.7 billion package of COVID-19 support for business is the best anywhere in the UK, including a £500 million economic resilience fund which is helping to protect in excess of 100,000 jobs.

3. Notes that fair work is at the heart of the Welsh Government’s response and that every recipient of business support has agreed to the principles of the economic contract.

4. Recognises the early, proportionate and transparent measures the Welsh Government is taking to tackle the virus and its public health and economic impacts.

5. Welcomes the Welsh Government’s £140 million plans for the third phase of the economic resilience fund (ERF3), including £20 million dedicated for tourism and hospitality.

6. Notes that Welsh businesses continuing to trade are able to receive support under the ERF3 rapid reaction fund, which is not the case in relation to business support in restricted local areas in England

7. Regrets the decision of the UK Government to terminate the job retention scheme and believes that the job support scheme gives insufficient incentive for employers in the most vulnerable sectors to retain employees through the crisis, including tourism and hospitality.

8. Calls on the UK Government to make available a comprehensive package of funding for local areas subject to additional restrictions to tackle the virus.

Amendment 1 moved.

Move.

I now call on Helen Mary Jones to move amendments 2, 3 and 5, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Amendment 2—Siân Gwenllian

Delete point 1 and replace with:

Calls for the enhancement of borrowing powers at the Welsh level to respond to the impact of the pandemic in line with the needs and priorities of Wales.

Amendment 3—Siân Gwenllian

Insert as new point after point 1 and renumber accordingly:

Regrets that the UK Government's job support scheme is of no help to a large number of Welsh businesses, particularly small businesses and businesses in the service sector such as hospitality and hair and beauty.

Amendment 5—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new sub-point at end of point 4:

re-evaluate COVID-19 business support to ensure that it effectively fills the gaps left by the UK Government's schemes.

Amendments 2, 3 and 5 moved.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I am grateful to the Conservatives for, once again, tabling an opportunity for us to discuss the economy. There are two things, I think, that are worrying our constituents across Wales at the moment. One of them is their health and the other is future prosperity and jobs, and I think it's really valuable for us to have these discussions.

Of course, we don't disagree with everything in the Conservative motion by any means. That any effects of measures to do with the virus should be proportionate on businesses is obviously essential. I think Russell George's points about ward-level data are well made—people need to know what the situation is. It has been put to me that it's difficult for that to be published because individuals could be identified. Well, to be quite honest, if the sample is small enough that individuals might be identified, the ward probably doesn't need to be in lockdown. So, I really think that that's something—and it could, of course, help with compliance. If people understand why they're being asked to stay at home, they're more likely to do it.

However, where we can't agree is the perspective about what the UK Government has done so far. Now, the furlough scheme was good, though there were people who were left out, there were people who were not helped. Those people are still campaigning, and I'd ask Members to look at the ExcludedUK campaign's website to see how those people being left out—how it has affected them. But, on the whole, it was a very powerful scheme and it did work very well. And one of the reasons why it worked very well is that it worked for smaller companies as well as for larger ones.

I want to talk about amendments 2 and 3 in one breath, Llywydd, because they support each other. In terms of the UK Government's support, we know that the job support scheme, as it's now being brought forward, does not work for many Welsh companies. It doesn't work for hospitality; it doesn't work for food wholesale; it doesn't work for health and beauty; it doesn't work for tourism; it doesn't work for small businesses. And those are just people who've spoken to me this week about support that they can't access. Now, one could argue, Llywydd, that this is understandable. You know, if the UK Government is acting as the Government of England, we must acknowledge that the Welsh economy is very different from the English economy, and it may be appropriate for them to bring that forward. But it doesn't work very well for many of our businesses.

So, hence our amendment 2, pressing again the point about the Welsh Government needing to have the borrowing powers to be able to act on some of this themselves. The Welsh Government keep saying that they lack firepower. Well, I think what they need is a bit of backbone to demand that firepower. They should ask for the borrowing powers instead of complaining, as they do in their amendment, about what the UK Government has not done. Why are they not asking for the power to get the money to do it themselves? Because, of course, this is how the UK Government is funding it. They haven't got a magic money tree; they're borrowing on the international markets, which is a perfectly sensible way to proceed. The Welsh Government should be demanding the right to do the same.

Now, with regard to our amendment 5—and to a certain extent, I agree with Russell George here—the Welsh Government does need to look again at elements of the new phase of the economic resilience fund. There's a lot of emphasis, in the new scheme, on calls for development bids for companies to be able to move on, and perhaps that was the appropriate thing to do, given the position of the virus when this scheme was being devised late in the summer. But time has changed. As more and more areas are going into local restrictions, I believe we need more emergency support. And I do agree with the point that Russell George has made about companies not having money in their back pockets to contribute to this kind of thing, especially not small and medium-sized businesses. As the gaps in UK Government become clearer, Welsh Government must stand ready to respond, and that must mean responding to changed circumstances.

The Government amendment—oh dear, here we go again. Of course, we agree with some of it; it would be difficult to disagree, and we obviously agree with point 4 about the UK Government job support scheme. But we heard this afternoon the Minister for local government and housing saying very clearly, as I've heard her say before, 'We don't know it all as a Government; we're not the fount of all wisdom'. Well you'd never know that, Llywydd, from their habit of 'delete all' amendments. I would submit to this Senedd that that is not a respectful way to proceed, and, at the very least, if we're going to spend our time on these opposition debates, the very least the Government ought to do is to give us the courtesy of line-by-line amendments.

And to be here.

I'm not able to respond to that intervention since we're not allowed to have interventions, but I don't care where Ministers are, I care what they do.

I stress again the need for the Government to reconsider the economic resilience fund. We can't support this amendment, because if you support this amendment, you're assuming that they are the fount of all wisdom and they've got it all right. And I would say that when it comes to the economy Minister dealing with opposition people, that is not how he conducts himself. You would never know how co-operative he has been through this crisis with Members of the opposition if you looked at this rather self-congratulatory amendment from the Government. With that said, I would commend to the Senedd, Llywydd, amendments 2, 3 and 5. I so move.

I thought it was a bit uncharitable, actually, some parts of the comments that were just made by the Plaid Cymru spokesperson in respect of the UK Government's action, because, of course, we started this decade with no idea, frankly, of the significant changes that we were going to encounter in the early part of the year. And since the start of the pandemic, I have to say Her Majesty's Government, I believe, have really delivered for Wales. They've delivered for Welsh businesses, they've delivered for families and they've delivered for our communities, in a way that UK Governments, frankly, haven't done before. The Welsh Government complains it doesn't have the firepower—it's been given £4 billion-worth of firepower by the United Kingdom Government in order to assist Wales to get through this crisis and this difficult time.

But the crisis has also, of course, brought to the forefront the importance of our relationship as a union of the United Kingdom, and the pace of the announcements from the UK Government, the financial support, the business support—all of those measures demonstrate the importance that has been placed on dealing with the impact of this crisis in all parts of the UK. We saw a UK Government that, frankly, acted at incredible speed in order to put programmes in place, taking difficult decisions in terms of restricting people's freedoms, whilst at the same time trying to make sure that the impact on businesses, the impact on employers, the impact on people's pay packets was as small as possible.

And I have to take my hat off to Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. What an amazing guy that we've got in the Treasury at the moment, making sure that Wales has the firepower to be able to deal with the problems ahead and to weather this storm—not just the storm that's already been, but the big storm that, of course, is brewing across Wales and the whole of the UK at the moment.

Now, of course, we have seen different approaches in different parts of the UK as a result of devolution, and that's absolutely fine as far as the devolution settlement is concerned. But there have been things that UK Government has done across the UK as a whole that I think have been very beneficial. Let's just remind ourselves of some of these things. We've had help for employers with their wages as a result of the coronavirus job retention scheme. We've seen help for businesses to stay afloat with VAT cuts. We've seen tax deferrals, support for the self-employed, bounce-back loans. We've seen important support for the hospitality sector through the Eat Out to Help Out scheme, and, of course, we've seen this new economic plan for the winter that provides even further support for our businesses and for the public sector as well. So, without the UK as a whole being able to step up to the plate, I think Wales would have really struggled to meet the challenges that we are currently facing.

And what's the Welsh Government been doing? Well, it was commendable that it established an economic resilience fund. I think that that was absolutely the right thing to do. We must remember, of course, that Wales gets proportionately, for each consequential, an extra 20p on every pound, so it's got the ability to be able to do that, and I'm pleased that it did it. But it had its drawbacks. There were criteria set with the economic resilience fund that meant that some people have lost out, and I think that when you've got extra firepower in your back pocket, as the Welsh Government has, it's important that you use that firepower and target it at those gaps that Helen Mary Jones and others have spoken about. The threshold, for example, of £50,000 turnover before you can apply is an unacceptably high threshold, particularly for those many smaller businesses that we've got in Wales, including many, frankly, in the Minister's own constituency. I'm surprised he's not listening to them and adapting the scheme to make sure that those businesses can apply. And I have to say, strongarming businesses to unionise their workforce in order to qualify for grants is completely and totally unacceptable. It's an insult to those businesses, many of whom are perfectly decent employers who are fair with their members of staff, encourage their workforce and have been supporting them through thick and thin during this crisis. To have a Minister who, instead of being preoccupied with saving the economy and saving those businesses and saving those jobs, is more preoccupied with bolstering the ranks of the unions, the biggest supporters of the Labour Party, is totally unacceptable. So, I hope that he will reflect and apologise for issuing a letter that suggested that those businesses should have to unionise. I hope that people will support our motion unamended today, because I think there's a great deal of merit in it.

Llywydd, I want to broaden this debate today, because the interventions by both the Welsh Government and the UK Government not only have implications for Wales and the UK, but have worldwide implications. The World Health Organization are now advocating that national lockdowns should be the last resort in combating COVID-19, so why are both the UK and the Welsh Governments still pursuing this disastrous policy?

We in the developed world owe it to those in the third world to keep our economies strong and open for trade. Only by maintaining a strong western economy are we able to purchase vital goods from some of the poorest countries on earth. The imports from these countries literally mean life and death, because only by maintaining these exports are they able to—and I use this term in the strongest possible sense—feed themselves. We are literally protecting lives in the world's richest economies at the expense of lives in the poorest countries on earth. What is even more appalling about the west's lockdown strategies is that they say it is to protect the old, many of whom—or, I should say, many of us—have had long and fulfilled lives, and for most of our lives enjoyed all the luxuries of a rich, modern economy. Yet this sort of protection is at the expense of the young and the very young in these poorest countries of the world.

This does not mean we abandon our old and vulnerable to the virus and its consequences, but simply we change our strategies. Perhaps we ought to examine some of the latest statements from the guru of the COVID crisis, chief medical adviser to the UK Government, Chris Whitty. I quote: the vast majority of the British public will not contract the virus at all. Of those who do, a significant proportion will not know they have had it. They will be asymptomatic. Of those who do show symptoms, 80 per cent—and remember, I'm quoting the chief medical officer of the UK—will have a moderate reaction, and a small proportion of these may have to go to bed for a few days. An unfortunate minority will have to be hospitalised and may need oxygen treatment before returning home. Of this minority, a small minority will require critical care, and a tiny minority of these will unfortunately die. And this, again: overall death rates will be less than 1 per cent; even in the very highest of the high-risk groups, if they contract the virus, they will not die. All the words of the chief medical officer advising the UK Government.

All the statistics show that COVID-19 is little or no threat to the young and healthy in the western world. So, the lockdowns are there to protect the sick and the vulnerable. But surely the strategy should be to make sure that those who are in this category are adequately protected, either by self-isolation at home or with the strictest anti-COVID regimes in our care homes and hospitals.

We have no right to carry on protecting ourselves at the expense of the world's poor. Unless we catch the virus and fall desperately ill, we in this establishment will suffer little from this pandemic. Our salaries are guaranteed, our stomachs will always be full. We must end this selfish madness, reopen our economies and ensure we're strong enough to carry on bringing in those imports from the world's poorest nations, so they can carry on protecting their vulnerable, their old and their young, simply by ensuring they are adequately fed. Thank you, Llywydd.

Mark Isherwood. You need to be unmuted, Mark Isherwood, before you start.

As our motion states, we must recognise the significant adverse impact of local coronavirus restrictions on businesses and other employers, and note the need to ensure that coronavirus restrictions that impact upon employers are proportionate. To help keep our economy functioning whilst protecting against COVID transmission, you need localised data, and unless the Welsh Government provides this, obvious conclusions will be drawn. Instead, this First Minister's decision on lockdowns in Wales appear to be based on a paper that has not been peer reviewed sufficiently to be published. Just to be clear, scientific peer review is the cornerstone of science.

The following statements have been received from constituents in Flintshire, Wrexham, Denbighshire and Conwy: 'I would like to question the validity of the local travel restrictions imposed on councils in north Wales. If I travel outside my own county, it is to go hiking, where I keep my own company, to help with my mental health issues. I wonder if you'd be able to point this out to the health and First Ministers on my behalf. I feel as though I'm living under a dictatorship here in Wales in comparison to other parts of the UK'; 'I'm writing as a concerned citizen to express my thanks for the way a number of Senedd Members have spoken out against the appalling and ridiculous restrictions imposed on north Wales by the Welsh Government. I live in Prestatyn, which means I can travel 30-plus miles but only 2 miles east and 3 miles west'; 'We can't have a drink in a socially distanced bar with our neighbours or other close friends, yet we can wander around a crowded supermarket, where we can pick up and put back items on the shelves'; 'We were the only people at the bar and we feel for the staff as, if this continues, they will close with the loss of many jobs. It's almost as if the Welsh Government are intentionally targeting tourism and the hospitality sector'; 'I'm writing to you with great concern to express my continued dismay and anger at the way the Welsh Government is handling the ongoing coronavirus crisis. It feels like we're living in a dictatorship'; 'I live half a mile from the English border, so most of my life is lived in England: dentist, chiropody, leisure et cetera. I can travel 30 miles in the opposite direction and stay in county, but not half a mile across the border. It makes no sense whatsoever'; 'I wholly support the fight against COVID, but it must be viewed in context. The COVID restrictions are riven with inconsistencies and illogicalities. Added to that, the disparity in the regulations between Wales and England is confusing and are unhelpful, particularly for those of us who live on the border. Many businesses are trapped in impossible no-win situations and will fail as a result of Welsh Government policy'; 'I'm concerned about the COVID-19 infection rates but fear the Welsh Government are on some sort of crusade and seem hellbent on using restrictive lockdowns as the main solution. I must confess to being a loyal member of the Labour Party, but in all consciousness, I cannot support that direction here'; 'I find it alarming and preposterous that the Welsh Government can openly state that you have to agree with their social policies before you can receive Government funding'. This quote really is an insult to pluralist democracy and the first step on the road, quote, to a fascist dictatorship.

Hospitality representatives wrote: 'It is deeply concerning that such blunt instruments are being considered again, given the significant damage inflicted on our sector during the national lockdown earlier this year; and, 'I have a number of clients operating hospitality businesses, all of whom have struggled to stay viable economically but also have always placed employee and customer safety first. We're still being driven by risk-avoidance, when we should be in risk-management mode—an accredited and monitored licence to trade grading system, with a clear message to consumers and providing some solace during this pandemic.'

It's also incomprehensible that the Welsh Government has excluded small bed and breakfast businesses from grant support again. Yesterday, the finance Minister told me that they should speak to Business Wales, but having tried this many times, they state that any loan agreements would push them into unmanageable debt and restate that they support the local economy and should be entitled to help. Just what have this Welsh Government got against bed and breakfasts in Wales? These decisions are being taken in Cardiff, and this Welsh Government must be held to public account. I hope that the media take note of that also. Thank you. 

One of the big employers that we have in Wales is, of course, the Royal Mail, and we have all sung, and quite rightly so, the praises of our postmen during the COVID pandemic. And, of course, many speakers have also talked about the importance of the safety and well-being of those people who work within businesses. Can I say, then, how surprised I am that the Royal Mail, an organisation that, certainly in Cardiff, has had an outbreak of COVID, at this moment in time is looking at the introduction of multi-occupancy vehicles? All the more surprising, because in their guidelines, when they're looking at the safety provisions, they say, 'Do we need to take any different approaches to the Public Health England advice in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?', and they say, 'No, we will continue to be led by the Government and Public Health England.'

I've raised this with the Royal Mail. They have now actually changed that guidance, but isn't it quite incredible that, when we have laws in Wales to protect workers, we have the Royal Mail basically saying, 'No, we're going to disregard Welsh law and we're going to apply the English criteria'? Because in Wales we quite rightly have laws to protect workers by regulating social distancing. I hope this is a matter, Minister, that Welsh Government will take up, because there is obviously a concern about the way in which the Royal Mail is operating and the introduction, at this particular moment in time, of multi-occupancy vehicles.

Can I also say, then, in terms of other businesses, we have some great businesses in Wales who have worked with their trade unions constructively, collectively, to deliver for those businesses and for safety for workers? And that's why we have within Wales a social partnership, because we recognise that that partnership and that role of trade unions in terms of safety, in terms of in-work poverty, in terms of ethical employment and giving a voice for workers, is something that actually works, in a way that the UK Government in England has approached trade unions very, very differently.

So, it is of absolutely no surprise that we see this clause within this motion that just really reveals what the Tories really are about: anti-union, anti a voice for working people at a particular time when it is their safety, it is their livelihood, it is their risk as a result of COVID that is so, so important. And it is, I think, absolutely shameful that you put that in, because it is misleading. You know absolutely that there is no requirement in receipt of Welsh funding to recognise a trade union, but it is absolutely proper and right that Welsh Government should say, 'If you want public money, you can be expected to apply ethical standards of employment', and ethical standards of employment—we know that those who are in trade unions have higher standards, higher safety and less in-work poverty.

Can I also say how disgraceful it is that the Tories, when they talk about business—there's not been a single Welsh Tory I've heard that's come up that has spoken up in terms of the British Airways workers in south Wales, those that have been fired and then re-hired on lower terms and conditions by an organisation that has received public money and now seeks to use COVID to its own advantage? Where were the Tories then, when there was an opportunity to speak up in terms of those particular Welsh workers?

Llywydd, what was not acceptable during this COVID pandemic, and all the difficulties that exist for businesses and workers and their common interest, was that austerity is reintroduced and our public sector workers are made to pay the price of this COVID pandemic. Already, we see Tory discussions taking place about how to restrict pay in the public sector, how to cut the public purse burden, and this is not acceptable. I think one thing that comes out of this COVID crisis is that, yes, we support our businesses, we support ethical employment, we support those who work in those businesses, we support social partnership, but there must be no going back to how things were before when we come out of COVID. And it is a great pity that the Tory party in Wales has shown itself yet again just to be anti-trade union and anti-working class. Thank you.

I thank the Welsh Conservatives for bringing forward this debate, and for acknowledging that my amendment would have added to the debate. As I've said previously, lockdowns were a necessary evil at the start of this pandemic whilst we built up capacity to deal with the outbreak. However, we have had seven months to build up that capacity, and it is getting harder and harder to justify the damages to business, the economy and the health of our constituents that result from such measures. And although I acknowledge that many businesses have been helped during the previous lockdown, there were many grey areas where many businesses fell between the cracks, and we could soon be entering the territory where the cure is worse than the disease. How many businesses have to close, how many people have to lose their jobs, before we realise that we are doing more harm than good? We need assurance now that no business will be left to stand alone.

I am not one of those that say we shouldn't take any action—far from it—and to let this disease run its course. We definitely should be taking measures to combat COVID-19, but we now have proof that an immune response doesn't last long with a SARS-CoV-2 virus. We're already seeing people in America catch the disease for a second time, and, in a report out yesterday, it seems that the second infection can be even more severe. So, we can't rely on natural immunity and we have no idea when a vaccine will be available. It could be another one or two years before we have a vaccine and can get it to everyone in Wales, and until then we have to learn to try and live with the disease, and that means us all wearing masks in public, keeping 2 metres apart, regularly washing our hands for a minimum of 20 seconds. And what it doesn't mean is locking everyone down. We have to keep on top of outbreaks, but that means containing the infected, not locking away the healthy.

So, when a COVID case is identified, everyone who has been in contact with that person should be tested, regardless of symptoms, and everyone should be placed in strict quarantine until it's clear that they are no longer contagious. Country-wide or even county-wide lockdowns are not always the answer and neither is closing businesses. We have to have targeted, hyperlocal measures—a surgical approach, as opposed to the scorched earth one we appear to be set on.

For example, in my region, we have three counties locked down, effectively the entire region of over 0.5 million people locked down because of 600 cases. We restrict the liberties of 0.5 million people, shutting businesses, causing people to lose their livelihoods, because 0.1 per cent of the people in that region caught COVID-19, the majority of whom caught the disease because they didn't always obey social distancing—that's not always the case, but it is in a lot of the cases—and, as a result of the selfishness of some people, businesses in my region are suffering.

I've had a pet-grooming business contact me in the last couple of days because restrictions have massively impacted their business. They may be forced to go out of business altogether because there's no support available to them. This business is far from unique. Businesses have complied with social distancing regulations, they have implemented COVID hygiene measures, but yet they're still suffering because of the actions of a small minority of individuals.

So, this disease is here to stay, and I'm afraid we have to find a way of learning to live with it, otherwise we could end up doing irreparable damage to our economy and our society. And I appreciate it's a balancing act, and a very difficult one at that, and nobody knows all the answers. Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd.

Minister, this is not the first time that I've had to raise with you the negative impact that your county-wide economic lockdown is having on my constituents in Aberconwy: retailers taking as little as £6.50 a day despite overheads of thousands; hoteliers desperately worrying about their business and, indeed, their own mental health. Our local authority's extremely vulnerable to serious damage because this economy and people's livelihoods are so heavily reliant on tourism; the sector worth £904 million to the county. A report published by the Centre for Towns found that Llandudno has nearly 41 per cent of employees in shut-down sectors—the highest rate in north Wales. Criticisms are already levied against you from elected politicians and the industry itself, simply requesting that scientific evidence that tourists are carrying COVID-19 into north Wales—prove it. Even the First Minister has repeatedly said that there is no such evidence, and yet, today, talk about further restrictions, now already known as 'Drakeford's Welsh wall'. And I said wall, not wool. [Laughter.] How can you justify not including coming on holiday as a reasonable excuse in the regulations? Now I, more than anyone, with an older demographic and vulnerable people, know that there is a exponential rise of active COVID cases, and we're not stupid; we know that measures have to be taken. However, have you stopped to think of the long-term mental health impact on these business owners trying to fight for their own existence? And I don't just mean the buildings; I'm talking about the existence of their employees and indeed themselves. Information released by Business Wales today relating to the £1,000 or £1,500 local lockdown fund grant will simply not go anywhere near to help these businesses, and I'm actually very furious—and I think it's underhand—that you've included a 21-day rule. I don't think many of my businesses even know that yet, but they have to be locked down for 21 days before they're even entitled to a penny. I think that's disgraceful. And you have made matters even worse by making funds a first-come, first-served basis. We know how chaotic, when applying for this grant funding, it can be, and many will be left far behind. This fund needs opening up so that all businesses affected by the lockdown have some financial support. And to add insult to injury, you have the audacity to suggest to my hoteliers that—you know, there was an expectation on any businesses to join a trade union, thereby you creating a socialist utopia. Will you withdraw that innuendo, because that has really, really caused concerns?

At this time of crisis, the best action employers can do to support employees is to try and save their jobs. That is only possible if proportionate support is given by the Welsh Government and this ridiculous economic lockdown is lifted. Similarly, the constituents of Aberconwy deserve an answer as to the reasoning behind this economic lockdown. These people are incredibly intelligent, and you are treating them not so. How have we reached the point in which you have local data for Bangor, Bridgend, Llanelli, Merthyr Tydfil, Rhondda Cynon Taf, but not wards in Conway county? We've repeatedly called for smart, hyperlocal lockdowns, which even Dr Atherton has noted as being a more democratic way of introducing restrictions. Communities like Betws-y-Coed deserve to know if there is a record of COVID-19 in their village, and, if so, whether it is proportionate to have the gateway to Snowdonia crippled by the economic lockdown.

And indeed it is not just the coast that is being hard hit, but it's rural Wales too. Llanrwst has seen Glasdir close its doors for good; as of August, 1,200 individuals in the agricultural, forestry and fishing sector have been furloughed. For Aberconwy and rural Wales, the pandemic has gone to highlight the huge reliance on agriculture and tourism. We need to champion diversification and grow other sectors in rural Wales. The potential is clear, with exciting developments such as Aberystwyth University's brand new Aber innovation campus, and the development company in Trawsfynydd, Cwmni Egino. However, such developments and strengthening of new sectors in rural and along the coast in north-west and west Wales will only be achieved if, in response to the pandemic, the Welsh Government listen to the dramatic calls to make not only Wrexham and Deeside the primary focus for north Wales in the national development framework, but Caernarfon, Bangor and the Menai strait area too.

Whilst I repeat the importance of backing our existing tourism sector, the pandemic really has shone a light on the need for your response to COVID-19 to include seeing the whole of west Wales, from Penmaenmawr to Pembrokeshire, supported in developing other sectors too. Minister, First Minister, Welsh Government: you are failing the people of Wales. You are failing our businesses. You are failing their employees. Please rethink this, and let's demolish Drakeford's Welsh wall.

I thank the Conservatives for tabling this debate today. It's a welcome focus on the impact of coronavirus on employers, though I do note with regret that there isn't a single mention in the whole of the motion of employees whatsoever. In fact, the only tangential mention is an attack on unions and on unionised workplaces. Now, this is perhaps to be expected, even though it's very disappointing, but it does allow me, as a lifelong and proud union member myself, to urge all employees to always join a union, because they are your lifebelt when the economic seas are choppy.

Now, there are bits of the Conservative motion that are pretty hard to disagree with: for example,

'that coronavirus restrictions that impact upon employers are proportionate.'

Well, of course, the contrary would be to urge that the restrictions were disproportionate, which makes no sense. But I ask Conservative Members of this Senedd: proportionate to what? Proportionate to the scale of the pandemic challenge, I assume, whilst balancing that against the need to protect jobs; the balance between protecting lives and protecting livelihoods. Now, I agree, it goes without saying, you can't disagree with that, but that is why I will be supporting the Labour amendment, which notes that

'the Welsh Government is dedicating more than £4 billion to its response to COVID-19, a sum greater than the Barnett consequentials received from the UK Government.'

The Conservative motion mentioned the UK Government contribution of course, but somehow forgot to mention the added Welsh Government contribution. The Labour motion also accurately recognises the Welsh Government's £1.7 billion package of COVID-19 support for business, which is the best anywhere in the UK, including a £500 million economic resilience fund, which is helping to protect in excess of 100,000 jobs. The Conservative motion failed to mention this; it's a regrettable error.

Somehow, they also forgot to mention, let alone welcome, the Welsh Government's £140 million plans for the third phase of the economic resilience fund, including £20 million dedicated for tourism and hospitality, or to note that Welsh businesses continuing to trade are able to receive support under the ERF3 rapid reaction fund, which is not the case in relation to business support in restricted local areas in England. So, thank goodness, therefore, that the Labour motion corrects these additional Conservative oversights, and that Darren, and his colleagues, will be able to vote with the Labour benches as we provide an accurate record of the full support for businesses in Wales in extremely difficult times.

But, I do still have businesses and employers who are not able to gain support from any of the schemes available at national, UK, Wales or local level, and that's why I want the UK Government—because surely this is what the UK Government is for at times of UK-wide crises like these—to reach deeper into the pockets of the Treasury to provide additional support for those who've fallen between the cracks, and that would include those who fall just outside the criteria of current UK and Welsh schemes. So, Minister, I will continue to bring individual cases to you to seek adjustments here and at UK level. For example, my constituent Chris who runs a gym, a small gym, he's seen three iterations of the ERF scheme pass by with frustration, because every time he works his way through the computer form, he gets to the bit that says he has to have a £50,000 turnover and he's actually got a £46,000 turnover, and computer says 'no'. So, I would look for extending the reach of these schemes with funding for people like Chris.

So, in this, I have some sympathy, actually, with some of the amendments of Siân Gwenllian, but I ask the Minister for assurance that these criteria in Wales will be constantly reviewed to match Welsh needs and feedback from Members of the Senedd of all parties. And I would join the cause on the UK Government, from Welsh Government and from the UK Labour Party, to make available a comprehensive package of funding for local areas subject to additional restrictions to tackle the virus. And even at this very late stage, I would join this Welsh Government and UK Labour in urging Boris Johnson and Chancellor Rishi Sunak to reconsider their decision to terminate the job retention scheme, because the replacement job support scheme does not give enough incentive to employers in the most vulnerable sectors to retain employees through this crisis, including, by the way, for north Wales colleagues, those in tourism and hospitality, which affects us as well. And on that basis, and on the basis that the Government's motion supports an ethical approach to partnership in business, putting fair work at the heart of Welsh Government's response with every recipient of business support signing up to the principles of the economic contract, I support the Government amendment to this debate, and would urge others to do so.

The Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales—Ken Skates.

Diolch, Llywydd. I should begin by thanking all Members for their contributions this afternoon and saying that I am proud of what the Welsh Government, working with social partners, with local government, with the Development Bank of Wales, has done to support businesses, to support communities and to support working people through these tremendously difficult times.

As Huw Irranca-Davies said, our £1.7 billion package of support for businesses and for jobs in Wales is the most comprehensive and generous package of support for businesses anywhere in the United Kingdom. Our economic resilience fund has so far helped more than 13,000 businesses, safeguarding more than 100,000 jobs—jobs that could have been lost if those businesses had been across the border in England, where such support does not exist.

We've also supported 2,000 start-ups in Wales—start-ups that would have gone to the wall potentially had they been located in England. And we've put in place a range of other measures, Llywydd, including repayment holidays to the Development Bank of Wales, protections against evictions for businesses, and support for creative professionals—all of this support unavailable across the border in England.

Now, Llywydd, the virus continues to pose a major threat. When it comes to restrictions on businesses, the evidence suggests that the later you act, the longer the restrictions then have to remain in place, and, consequently, the greater the damage to businesses, to the economy, to people's lives, with more deaths and more suffering. And I have to say today that comparing our actions as a democratically elected Government, responsible in saving lives, and comparing us to the behaviour of fascist dictatorships is about as ignorant as it is offensive. We will keep current measures under constant review and we will continue to work closely with our partners, as well as with public health experts, local authority leaders and the NHS to assess the latest position.

Let me just remind those Conservative Members in the north today that local authority leaders in the north agreed to those local restrictions. So, will they criticise those local authority leaders as they criticise Welsh Government? Will they criticise police leaders? Will they criticise health leaders who also agreed? I doubt it, but the invitation, Llywydd, is there for them to do so in their response.

Llywydd, we are continuing to prepare for next week's opening of the third phase of the Wales-only economic resilience fund. This includes £80 million for business development grants, as well as the £60 million local lockdown business fund. Let me stress, Llywydd, that, with regard to the business development grants, £20 million is being ring-fenced for tourism and hospitality businesses, with discretion for 100 per cent grant awards requiring no match funding. So, we are already doing what one of the points in the Conservatives' motion this afternoon calls for. Let's be absolutely clear again: this is grant funding that is unavailable to tourism and hospitality businesses across the border in England.

The local lockdown fund will open for applications in Caerphilly county borough by the end of this week. Unlike in England, businesses continuing to trade are able to receive support. I know that businesses in Wales have appreciated this extra support that is not available over the border in England, but it comes, of course, with responsibilities. This is taxpayers' money that is being used. This is working people's money that is being used to support businesses.

Every business receiving support from our economic resilience fund has signed up to the principles of the economic contract. That reflects our commitment to public investment with social purpose, even in the hardest of times; to promote fair work, which, I'm afraid, it seems that the Conservatives today so clearly oppose; as well as promoting better mental health, promoting skills, and promoting clean, green growth. We make no apology for this, or for our social partnership approach, which during the pandemic has been invaluable.

Llywydd, we've already had more than 18,000 inquiries for support from the third phase of the economic resilience fund, but I'd also like to highlight just how effective another of our institutions has been during this pandemic. Since the start of this crisis, the Development Bank of Wales has made 1,335 COVID-19 Wales business loans to firms in Wales. In comparison, all of the high-street banks in Wales—all of them; every single one of them combined—have administered, on behalf of the UK Government, 1,391 loans as at last week. It means that our Development Bank of Wales has been as important as all of the loan power offered by all of the high-street banks and the UK Government. So, I am incredibly proud of what the Development Bank of Wales has done through these last few months, by both the speed of their actions and their creativity.

But as I've repeatedly said, the UK Government must bring more support to the table in supporting businesses and jobs as we enter these difficult winter months. That's why I regret the decision of the UK Government to terminate the job retention scheme. Its replacement, the job support scheme, clearly offers insufficient incentive for employers in the most vulnerable sectors to retain employees through the crisis, including, crucially, businesses in the tourism and hospitality sector.

We also remain disappointed that the UK Government has not responded to our continued requests to provide the flexibility we need to respond and invest in Wales's recovery, specifically the switching of capital resources into revenue, thereby increasing the Wales reserve and our borrowing power to do as Helen Mary Jones outlined. And as for the shared prosperity fund, well, negligible progress has been made with that particular fund according to a leading Welsh Conservative Member of the UK Parliament, in spite of the obvious urgency to bring forward plans for replacement EU funding.

Llywydd, as I've said, this is a time like no other. Coronavirus and the increasing risk of the UK reaching the end of the European Union transition period without a deal have placed incredible pressure on everybody—businesses, individuals and families. We need UK Government and we need colleagues across the Chamber to support us, the Welsh Government, in providing the resources and the reassurance that our businesses and communities need at a time when they need it most.

I call on Suzy Davies to reply to the debate. Suzy Davies.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Thank you, everyone who has taken part in the debate today. Shall we just begin by welcoming the assistance provided by both our Governments? Just to make it clear that the Welsh Conservatives here do appreciate some of the things that the Welsh Government has done here, but we have some questions to ask you.

I just want to start with a point that Russell George made about more than £4 billion being brought to the Welsh Government for COVID response on top of the additional UK support through the tax and benefit system that Darren Millar referred to in his contribution. I think it would be a shame, wouldn't it, if we didn't acknowledge what the UK Chancellor has managed to do in what has been called 'unprecedented times' a number of times today, and the response that came from what he was able to do as a result of being caught completely unawares by something that has affected countries across the world.

When you say, Minister, in the motion that you're spending extra above the £4 billion consequential, I'm wondering quite how straight you're being with us there because, of course, it's not extra, is it, really? This is money taken from existing Welsh Government budgets in order to plonk into the pot being run by the star chamber, resulting in some of your departments having to beg to have it back. And while we would, of course, welcome the ERF, I think you'd have to acknowledge as well that you wouldn't be able to have an ERF to the extent that you do were it not for the money that was coming in, at least in part, from UK Government. 

As we heard earlier, this supplementary budget doesn't really reflect the use of the consequentials that we are talking about. Certainly, there was £2.2 billion coming from UK Government at the time the supplementary budget was done, and that was just—I think it was a £1.8 billion budget. Really, as opaque as ever when we're talking about budget scrutiny. And that's why I'm disappointed in the response from the finance Minister to the debate before this one, calling for legislation in order to introduce budgets.

But I think my main objection to your amendment is point 8. It's your Government that has chosen to lock down what you call local areas; it's your Government that has closed the market for our COVID-compliant tourism and hospitality sectors in much of Wales—and if Plaid had their way, they'd close it down altogether. This debate is about your disproportionate response to a threat that we all want to control, so you pay for it. Or better still, listen to what Wales is telling you and make it proportionate, which, of course, the law requires. Earlier today, the leader of my group was referred to as making amateur interpretations of a document that was made available earlier. Well, I think if you listened to Janet Finch-Saunders today and if you listened to Mark Isherwood today, you will have heard evidence of the damage that your decision is doing to our industries.

Going back to the ERF just for a minute, as the chair of the cross-party group on tourism, actually, I will welcome the £20 million earmarked in the latest round of the ERF. But I don't accept Helen Mary Jones's implication that this sector's not important in England too, any more than I accept the assertion, or implication, made by Mick Antoniw that the non-unionised workforces are, by definition, unfair workforces. Let's remember, of course, that the UK Government has cut VAT on tourism businesses and they're not planning to introduce a tourism tax. Minister, you didn't say very much about the tourism-related businesses—the tourism chain, if you like. These are events management businesses, for example, exhibition organisers, arts and entertainment businesses, which are still wondering what you've done with the missing consequentials from the UK Government there, single director limited companies who operate in the media, arts and entertainment, which seem to have slipped from view in the latest iteration of ERF, as have, or should say 'still are', the small businesses, the small B&Bs, in particular, that need support from the ERF. The very businesses that need cash flow support, they just don't have the 10 per cent to bring to the table at this stage. And I think, Huw Irranca-Davies, I might mention that the word 'businesses' means employers and employees—of course this is about employees. I think we should mention, as well, that some of the funding, despite agreeing with the Minister about the good work of the development bank, that some of the ERF 2.0 money was a bit slow coming to the table, and if I heard right, despite the fact that Caerphilly's been in lockdown for a month now, it's only now that they're able to access the additional funding aimed at those lockdown areas.

I just want to talk briefly about those maps that Bridgend County Borough Council are producing at the moment—those ward-based data maps. That data is available, and I think Welsh Government, as a whole, should expect to be able to refer to these as evidence for the need to lockdown in the way that you want to do that. I don't think it would be fair to say that Blaengarw and Newton, both within the Bridgend County Borough Council area, are communities that mix an awful lot and are likely to transmit this disease to each other. Not so long ago, you were arguing that no-one should travel further than 5 miles from where they lived; now you're insisting that they do if they want to shop and can't do that without crossing a county boundary to get to those nearest shops, those salons, those restaurants, and, yes, those COVID-compliant tourism destinations.

David Rowlands made the point that we don't, with the way that things are going at the moment, distinguish between our most vulnerable and our least vulnerable, and how to protect them—it's more of a sort of one-size-fits-all approach that isn't working. So, I repeat the call made by the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and other Members, actually, to show your workings, Minister. And that doesn't mean sending a short statement out 20 minutes before we sit down here in the Chamber; it's a statement that refers to SAGE, which the health Minister, on television this morning, said was mainly about England and that's why we need a separate technical advisory group for Wales—to get the science right—moments before lamenting that this wasn't being dealt with on a four-nations basis via COBRA. To that, I just say: well, Boris doesn't agree with you; Nicola Sturgeon doesn't agree with what you're doing, apart from that very politically expedient nation boundary; and, of course, Keir Starmer is asking for you to do different things as well. So, if you're talking about a four-nation approach, please be careful what you wish for.

And then, finally, Llywydd, I just want to finish this and reference something that Caroline Jones was talking about. A total lockdown, which was hugely expensive in terms of mental health, physical health and the economy, didn't suppress COVID once it started to be relaxed. But we can't remain in permanent lockdown for many, many reasons, and while I don't agree with everything she said, the essential point she was making is that this should be about the rapier, not the bludgeon. And that's what I want Welsh Government to start demonstrating now, particularly as what's not coming through at the moment is the Government response to that bigger forward look—none of the things that Russell George mentioned, as policies that we would introduce, which may be of interest to you, and I certainly hope they are. Because Helen Mary was right when she said we shouldn't really be making decisions based on health or the economy; these are interconnected decisions, and we will need, as David Rowlands was indicating, really, a prosperous and healthy Wales in order to function in the future. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree the emotion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections, and I will, therefore, defer voting until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

In accordance with Standing Order 34.14D, there will be a break of five minutes now before we move to voting time.

Plenary was suspended at 18:05.

The Senedd reconvened at 18:13, with the Llywydd in the Chair.