The following amendments have been selected: amendment 3 in the name of Darren Millar, and amendments 4, 5 and 8 in the name of Siân Gwenllian. In accordance with Standing Order 12.23(iii), amendments 1, 2, 6 and 7 tabled to the motion have not been selected.

The next item on our agenda is the debate on coronavirus. I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to move the motion—Vaughan Gething.

Motion NNDM7441 Rebecca Evans, Siân Gwenllian

To propose that the Senedd

1. Recognises the seriousness of the position created by growing numbers of cases and of Covid-19 in Wales and the increasing number of people in hospitals and Intensive Care Units as a result;

2. Agrees that a short ‘fire break’ period as proposed by SAGE and the WG Technical Advisory Group should be introduced to bring down R, reduce chains of onward transmission, minimise clusters of infection in the community and to further strengthen the Test Trace Protect system;

3. Agrees that a firebreak must be underpinned by additional support to protect livelihoods and wellbeing and notes the provision of emergency financial support brought forward by the Welsh Government for businesses impacted by the firebreak.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move the motion before us today. I'm grateful to Members for voting to allow today's debate to take place, and to Plaid Cymru for the talks that led to the text of the Government motion before us.

The First Minister announced yesterday that a firebreak will be introduced across Wales from 6.00 p.m. this Friday. We face an incredibly serious situation. The virus is spreading rapidly in every part of Wales. The seven-day rolling incidence rate for Wales now stands at more than 130 confirmed cases per every 100,000 people. Our positivity rate is nearly 12 per cent across Wales, and there is sadly a high confidence that the virus is seeded across the country in both urban and rural Wales. This firebreak intervention is necessary to help bring coronavirus back under control. If we do not act, there is a very real risk that our NHS will be overwhelmed. The number of people being taken to hospital with coronavirus symptoms grows every day. Our critical care units are already over their normal capacity. Normal capacity in Wales is 152 critical care beds. Yesterday we had 167 critical care beds occupied. More than one in four of those beds were caring for COVID patients. Without action, our NHS will not be able to look after the increasing number of people who fall seriously ill. Many more people in Wales will die from this disease.

The technical advisory cell report published yesterday sets out that currently we're tracking the reasonable worst case, projecting 18,000 hospitalisations and 6,000 deaths due to COVID this winter. The advice from TAC is compelling, and I hope Members have had a chance to read their report. The evidence supporting that report is not weak, as some have claimed. The evidence is clear, and Ministers have acted in the face of the growing harm from coronavirus to help keep Wales safe. The firebreak will provide a short, sharp shock to help turn back the clock, slow down the virus, and to buy us more time. It will provide an invaluable opportunity to reinforce our already effective test, trace and protect system. So, we're acting now, through the half-term holiday, to minimise the impact on education, with an effective lockdown of two working weeks and three weekends.

We've decided that a short and deep firebreak is the best option for minimising harm. The longer the restrictions are in place, the greater the economic, social and well-being impacts. The restrictions are as stringent as possible to ensure the maximum public health impact. Between Friday, 23 October and 9 November, everyone in Wales will be required to stay at home. This means working from home wherever possible. The only exceptions will be critical workers and jobs where working from home is not possible. All non-essential retail, leisure, hospitality and tourism businesses will close. So, too, will community centres, libraries and recycling centres. Places of worship will be closed except for funerals or wedding ceremonies.

We have prioritised children and young people in our choices. In doing so, we've taken account of the TAC advice that keeping schools open will reduce short and long-term harm. However, that means that Ministers have had to act to close most other workplaces and restrict social visiting to reduce contact and break the chains of transmission. We have sought to minimise the disruption to children and young people's education. So, primary and special schools will return as normal after the first week of half term and childcare will stay open throughout. Secondary schools will reopen after half term for pupils in years 7 and 8 and those who need to take exams. Pupils in years 9 and above will continue their learning from home for an extra week, as will students in further education colleges. Universities will continue to provide a blend of in-person and online learning. Like everyone else in Wales, however, students will need to stay at home in their university accommodation.

As we know, coronavirus spreads when people are in close contact with each other, especially indoors. Because of this, we will not be allowed to meet people indoors that we do not live with during the two-week period. Adults living alone and single parents will still be able to join with one other household from across Wales for support. Outdoor gatherings will not be allowed; this, sadly, also applies to gatherings for bonfire night or Halloween. Prearranged events to commemorate the armistice can go ahead following the socially distanced plans that are already in place.

As you'll have heard in more detail today from the economy Minister, Ken Skates, we are providing a new nearly £300 million package of financial support to help businesses through this very challenging period. The funds will open in the first week of the firebreak and we'll work to get the money allocated as quickly as we can. All businesses required to close should also be able to access the support available from the UK Government, through the existing job retention scheme and the new job support scheme. We recognise that it will not be easy for businesses in Wales to juggle both of those schemes, and as we heard earlier today, the First Minister has written to the Chancellor to ask him to give Welsh businesses early access to the new and expanded job support scheme from Friday, and we've offered to provide finance to make that possible.

I can, though, reassure Members that our NHS and social care services will continue to treat and care for people with other conditions and needs during the firebreak. The advice of our chief medical officer is that it is not necessary for those who are clinically vulnerable to again adopt strict shielding measures during this period. The regulations themselves act to reduce the circulation of the virus, and by sticking strictly to the rules, people who are vulnerable will reduce their risk of exposure. I am aware that some argue that we could reintroduce shielding as part of a package to protect people from harm and avoid whole-community measures. That does not reflect the reality of where we are, how the virus spreads, or how we interrupt the chains of transmission. As yesterday's TAC report makes clear, no country has managed to contain their epidemic within lower risk age groups; we do not think a shielding-first approach would be as effective as a firebreak and meet the needs that we currently face.

The firebreak will end on 9 November. It's important to be clear that the positive impact in reducing transmission is not likely to be seen immediately at the end of the firebreak. The reduction in transmission that this firebreak will achieve is expected to be evident two to three weeks later. I know that we have already asked a great deal of the people of Wales. The TAC report published yesterday confirmed that the local restrictions in place have led to a significant slowdown in the current wave of the pandemic, but we still need to do more. If people, though, had not made the contribution they already have, we would be in a far worse position today. And I want to thank every person across Wales who has followed the local measures in place to protect friends, families, loved ones and their community.

Across the Government we are now looking to work to agree arrangements that will be needed in the future to secure the gains made from the firebreak, and we will set those out in the coming days. This firebreak is our best chance of regaining control of the virus and avoiding a much longer and more damaging national lockdown. We all must now play our part to keep Wales safe. I ask Members to support the motion before us today.

I have selected four of the eight amendments tabled to the motion. In accordance with Standing Order 12.23(iii), I have not selected amendment 1, tabled in the name of Caroline Jones, amendment 2, tabled in the name of Neil Hamilton, or amendments 6 and 7, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. I now call on Paul Davies to move amendment 3, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Paul Davies.

Amendment 3—Darren Millar

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the Senedd:

1. Recognises the recent trends in the number of positive COVID-19 cases in Wales and the number of people in hospitals and intensive care units with COVID-19.

2. Expresses disappointment at the failure of the Welsh Government to publish sufficient data and evidence to demonstrate that a firebreak period for all parts of Wales is either proportionate or necessary.

3. Believes that any coronavirus restrictions must be underpinned by support for those adversely affected, including support for businesses, livelihoods, and wellbeing.

4. Welcomes the unprecedented financial support from Her Majesty’s Government, including more than £4.4 billion to assist in meeting the challenges of the coronavirus pandemic.

5. Calls on the Welsh Government to rethink its coronavirus strategy and adopt a more targeted approach to intervention.

Amendment 3 moved.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move the amendment tabled in the name of my colleague Darren Millar. Can I say, from the outset, that we on this side of the Chamber continue to remain open-minded about any further lockdown measures? But, before a nationwide lockdown is implemented, there needs to be an honest appraisal of the current measures, a full picture of all the data that justifies why a lockdown is needed, and there needs to be stronger support packages in place for businesses, organisations and individuals.

Now, we supported the previous national lockdown, and, where we think the Welsh Government has been proportionate and justified, we have supported its coronavirus regulations. We would do so again if the evidence was there and it was necessary. Now, as I said earlier in this Chamber to the First Minister, in many of the 22 local authority areas cases per 100,000 are coming down. For that reason, and because we still don't have the full picture of data available, I believe we need more than a one-size-fits-all approach to tackling this virus in our communities. We need a much more targeted approach and intervention. Now, I understand that Public Health Wales has finally decided to publish community data for all parts of Wales this afternoon, which I very much welcome. As I also said earlier today, specific demographic data and transmission data should also be published, and I sincerely hope that that information will also be published.

Now, I accept the Welsh Government has referred to the modelling paper written by Professor Graham Medley and colleagues, which sets out the worst-case scenario, but the paper perhaps doesn't consider crucial factors such as levels of public support, and actually states that a circuit breaker is, and I quote,

'not a lasting control measure, but effectively buys more time to put other controls in place; it takes us "back to a time when cases were lower"'.

Unquote. Therefore, it's vital that, if this lockdown is to be effective, the Welsh Government must put in place serious measures during the lockdown period and tell us what those measures will be. Now, the First Minister has indicated that the Welsh Government would be using the lockdown period to strengthen the contact tracing system, though we've yet to hear any further details on what further steps will be taken in the lockdown period to result in any meaningful change. Recent statistics show that less than one and a half days' worth of NHS Wales capacity was used in a whole week, with just over 20,000 tests being carried out, and Members are already aware that Welsh testing is overly reliant on UK lighthouse laboratories, with just 31 per cent of tests being analysed in Welsh labs. Therefore, it's abundantly clear that nowhere near enough tests are being conducted for an effective track and trace system, with figures suggesting that Wales would need to increase testing to 36,000 per day to track infections. There's also been talk of recruiting more staff and accelerating the activation of field hospitals, but, again, with very little detail. So, I hope the First Minister, in his response, will provide some of those details this afternoon. Perhaps the First Minister can also tell us what assessment has also been made of the impact of some targeted interventions that have taken place so far in Wales.

Llywydd, Members are all aware of the significant impact that the Welsh Government's lockdown will have on all sections of society. The impact of the first lockdown is still being felt by many, and Members from all political parties in this Chamber have raised the impact of lockdown measures on people's mental health and well-being, and it's important that those voices are heard. Therefore, perhaps, in responding to this afternoon's debate, the First Minister will outline what new support measures will be put in place from Friday to ensure that anyone who needs support can access it.

Of course, the Wales-wide lockdown would have a specifically detrimental impact on livelihoods and jobs across Wales. With around 250,000 employees, Wales and Scotland have a higher proportion of workers employed in industries most affected by lockdown measures, compared to both England and Northern Ireland. Therefore, if just one in four of these workers lost their jobs, it would mean that unemployment in Wales could increase to a higher level than seen under the last recession.

Whilst the Welsh Government has committed to giving every business that receives small business rate relief a £1,000 payment, and small and medium-sized retail, leisure and hospitality firms that are forced to close will receive a one-off payment of up to £5,000, that's simply not going to be enough to help protect the sustainability of so many businesses across Wales for the future. Therefore, I hope the Government provides assurances to businesses across Wales that it will provide the support they need to protect their sustainability going forward.

Llywydd, I have tried to be as constructive as I can in my contribution this afternoon. As I said at the start, whilst we on this side of the Chamber remain open-minded to the idea of a lockdown, we cannot support this one, at least not until we see the full picture of data and we can persuade the people that it's not only justified, but proportionate too. But I also want to make it clear today that, given this is the Welsh Government's position, on Friday, these temporary lockdown measures will be introduced and, therefore, even though we disagree with them, we will naturally be adhering to the law and we will ensure that the people of Wales do so as well. I urge Members to support our amendment.

I call on Adam Price to move amendments 4, 5 and 8, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian—Adam Price.

Amendment 4—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new point at end of motion:

Agrees that existing capacity should be fully utilised and that the additional resources that are necessary should be provided as a matter of urgency to the Welsh test trace protect system to ensure that all results are returned and tracing teams notified of positive results within 24 hours of a test.

Amendment 5—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new point at end of motion:

Agrees that the firebreak should be used as an opportunity to plan and implement a new set of interventions based on a Zero COVID or elimination strategy which aims to avoid the necessity for successive waves of lockdowns, drawing upon the lessons of best practice from within Wales and internationally in areas such as, though not limited to: mass and routine testing including testing asymptomatic contacts; ventilation; preventing importation of cases from outside Wales; practical and financial support and advice for those needing to isolate; clear and consistent public communication; and extending mask-wearing to other settings.

Amendment 8—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new point at end motion:

Calls on the Welsh Government to review its hospital infection control policies for preventing hospital-acquired infections of COVID-19 and to consider establishing designated COVID-19 free sites to facilitate timely and secure treatment for cancer and other life-threatening illnesses.

Amendments 4, 5 and 8 moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. We are clearly of the view that, given the grave seriousness of the situation that now we face, the Government has no option but to introduce the measures that were announced yesterday. Time is a luxury that we don't have, quite frankly, because the report by the technical advisory cell is about as unequivocal as it's—. Well, I've yet ever—. The leader of the Conservatives shakes his head, but I, in 20 years in public life, cannot remember an advisory report to Government that has been as clear and unequivocal as this. Let me just read the last paragraph:

'TAC recommends urgent consideration and execution of a hard national fire break to massively reduce transmission for a period of weeks'.

And in the report—. Let's be absolutely clear what it says: if the Government were not to do what it has announced, then between 960 and 1,300 people would die in Wales, according to the estimates, by the end of the year. That's the price, potentially, of delaying any action; we would have liked to have seen it sooner.

Of course, it is true that we do not have perfect information. We do not have randomised control trials in relation to the detailed interventions, but what does SAGE say? I've seen a quotation. Let's read what SAGE says on the evidence in full:

'The evidence base into the effectiveness and harms of these interventions is generally weak. However, the urgency of the situation is such that we cannot wait for better quality evidence before making decisions.'

We have to make a decision based on the evidence in front of us, and TAC is absolutely clear—we have an exponential rise in cases, an average of 4 per cent, according to the TAC report, and that is continuing and it's leading to seeding across Wales, and that's why they've come to the conclusion that it's necessary, as an urgent measure, to introduce the firebreak.

Now, of course, continual lockdowns are not the answer. We then absolutely have to have a reset of the strategy and of the policies, and that's what's at the heart of our amendment, and it's consistent with what we have said throughout. We should not be in this position. We have to use this time and reflect on what has gone wrong and what can be put right.

And when we look across the world, of course—and we saw in the study in The Lancet a month ago—we have lessons from across the world that we can put into place in order to prevent us from being in this position again, and, particularly, as one of the other amendments stresses, of course, the importance, the central importance, as the World Health Organization said right from the beginning, of a test, trace, isolate and support system. We have to put that right, and there are lessons from around the world in terms of how we can strengthen that system and make sure that it's adequately resourced.

We need to adopt a zero-COVID or elimination strategy, because, when we look across the world, of course—. Look at the situation in many countries across the world—Vietnam, 97 million people. How many deaths in Vietnam? To date, 35. Taiwan, 23 million people. How many deaths to date? Seven. New Zealand, which we are very familiar with—33 deaths in a population of 5 million. Compare that—125 million in those three countries together, 75 deaths overall— compare that to the 1,700 deaths in Wales. There are countries out there that we can learn from, and we need to use this period across the next few weeks to have a debate, yes, and put in place a different system, a different policy, a different framework, which means that we are not having to consider successive lockdowns.

We should not be in this position, but we have to act now, otherwise people will die unnecessarily. But let's, absolutely, look across the world at what Germany's doing on ventilation, on the masks policy that's been introduced in many countries, extending its use, on the three-tier contact tracing that Vietnam is using, on the importance of financial and practical support to help people isolate, on preventing superspreading events, on testing asymptomatic contacts—there are a whole host of lessons out there, and clear and consistent communication is absolutely central. Let's learn those lessons now, so that we can use the next few weeks and have a sense of a national mission, so that we can all come together, Government and opposition working constructively, working with communities right across Wales, so that we can save lives not just over the next three months, but prevent us from being in this position again.

Llywydd, when we first went into lockdown in March and passed emergency legislation against so many of our natural, democratic instincts, I said then—and I'll say it again now—I didn't come to this place to make decisions like that, but, in times of crisis, the most difficult decisions have to be made. That's our duty. That means that we can't hide or shirk those difficult decisions. We can't ride populist bandwagons that might give us some short-term popularity with people who will not listen to or be guided by the science. We have to take tough decisions for the greater good—that is the right and proper thing to do. That is what we were elected to do, and that is what our Welsh Government has been doing.

Our First Minister has shown a calm, measured and intelligent approach to the handling of this crisis. He's on top of the issues, he understands the impact on us all, and he's shown everyone who is prepared to listen the value of devolution and good governance. Compare that, if you will, with the bumbling, Trumpist lack of detail and grasp of a crisis shown by the UK Prime Minister, and I thank goodness that we are in Wales.

So now, having been through the most difficult period that any of us can remember, at this time I ask myself: what is the most important? And the answer has to be supporting those actions that help reduce the rates of infection and help to save lives in my constituency and across Wales, and to do what we can to ensure that our NHS can not only manage the rise in COVID cases, but can also maintain the increase in non-COVID activity that has been brought back in recent months.

Having read the background advice to this decision, I will support the Government today in its decision to introduce a firebreak. It's based on science, it's based on medical advice, it's based on information from the technical advisory cell. It's not running away from what has to be done—it is doing the right thing. And the Government's populist opponents in the ranks of the Welsh Tories, UKIP, Brexit, Abolish the Welsh Assembly, independent reform group, or any other incarnation of the flat-earthers and COVID deniers, should reflect on that.

But Ministers will also know—and I've been very clear in my view—that any health restrictions have to be accompanied by economic support. So, I'm very pleased to see that measures have been announced that will help to support those businesses that will be required to close again for the next two weeks. Welsh Government is doing all it can here within the resources available to it. They're taking responsibility for their decisions, but we also need to see the UK Government and the Chancellor do the same. They too carry a huge responsibility, and have to step up with additional support for those employees who find themselves on short-term lay-offs or redundancy as we try to get control of the spread of this virus. 

In truth, a summer of half-priced pizzas was not the best response to this pandemic. Continuing economic support is the only bridge we can provide between now and an unknown future. But it is clear that the economic model of recent decades faces a profound challenge in the face of this pandemic. The public health crisis cannot drift into a long economic and social crisis, and I believe that that is now the real dividing line of contemporary politics. As Members of the Senedd, we must act to protect the health of our constituents, but I expect our political system to protect the social and economic interests of our communities too. We may be struggling to deal with this virus, but we can give people the support they need.

Just to be clear: Plaid Cymru supports this firebreak, because it's been apparent for some time, I think, that the route we were on hadn't been working. We've been asking for a reset, and the data that the Government has shared with us over the past few days has confirmed that we were right in saying that, and I'm grateful for that data, which has been shared with us. But, even then, our support in taking this step, which will have a far reaching impact on people, does depend on a number of elements. 

Helen Mary Jones will discuss the economic issues, that we need substantial and swift support for the businesses and individuals who will feel the impact of this—the tourism and hospitality sector is an obvious one in my constituency and elsewhere, but there are many other businesses that are suffering, so we will continue to press for that.

May I appeal particularly here, please, please do urgently publish the list of businesses and sectors that will be expected to close immediately? M&G Windows in Holyhead is one of the businesses that have been in touch today to say that they have read and re-read the explanatory notes, but they are still none the wiser. So, businesses need to know, but they also need to know, as soon as possible, not only what will happen from this Friday, but what will happen after this lockdown, which brings me to the main theme of my contribution this afternoon. 

We can't view these restrictions in isolation. And Plaid Cymru's call for a national firebreak was made because we could see that we need a reset, but it can't be a resetting of a circuit where you then end up going back round and round again. We can't commit to a cyclical process, which makes similar lockdowns inevitable in the future, and that's the basis for our amendment 4. What happens after 9 November is as important, or arguably is more important, than what happens in those 17 days of renewed lockdown.

We've put forward a number of ideas this week. We dubbed it '14 ideas for 14 days', but I can assure you that, if tidy communication is important, we can make it '17 ideas for 17 days' of lockdown, if you'd like. The point being that we need urgently to look at all the ideas, from our party and others, and from within Government, that can help put a new national framework in place for the next stage—a more sustainable stage, hopefully, in the fight against this virus.

So, we have to sort out the testing regime; it's crucial. You know my thoughts on the over-reliance on lighthouse. We should have built up our own capacity—capacity we could control. Despite promises, those problems persist: people waiting five days for results; people being told, as part of the process actually, that they should expect their results within 72 hours, and it's not good enough. We have to have robust systems and that means results back within 24 hours, so that tracing teams can get to work. We need testing of asymptomatic contacts. I have plenty of people I know taking that into their own hands, and going for a test having been in contact with somebody who's positive, but that has to be the norm, and there has to be testing of international visitors to Wales too.

And, of course, those who are positive, and those who have to self-isolate, have to know that they'll be supported to do so. We can't have a situation where people have an incentive to break the rules to go to work because they can't afford to put food on the table otherwise. To do this—and this is what we refer to in amendment 4—we have to be able to use the capacity we have in Wales in our own labs. We've heard Ministers talking about what our theoretical capacity is, but theoretical tests are no use; we need actual tests taking place and being reported back on quickly.

What else? Let's get a ventilation plan in place. Opening a window sounds so, so easy. Fresh air makes it less likely for infection to take place. But that's got to be communicated well as part of a strategy. And communication has to be sharpened right across the board. It's got to be the kind of communication that people consume and relate to, that cuts across the realities of human behaviour. I made the case to the health Minister this morning: explain what the firebreak is about; what the data tells us; what the scenarios are that we're trying to avoid; and, crucially, what people can do to help themselves and to avoid coming back here time and time again.

Let's extend face covering guidance. There are workplace settings, for example, where things could be tightened up. I have figures showing that, UK wide, workplace settings are responsible for perhaps a fifth or more of transmission still, so let's see if we can bring those numbers down. Numbers also show, sadly, that care homes are still vulnerable. We need a further tightening there. And as we refer to in amendment 8, there has to be a fresh approach to infection control in hospitals. There's a non-COVID emergency going on now in untreated illnesses that has to be resolved.

So, to conclude, the correct step is being taken in bringing in this firebreak, but the embers of this virus will still be burning after this firebreak. This will be a virus that will be ready to burn again, so let's not waste this opportunity.

I speak briefly in support of the main motion put forward in the names of Rebecca Evans and Siân Gwenllian. This is a moment when decisive leadership really matters: leadership at the top of Government, leadership in political parties, and leadership from us in the communities that we represent. And I commend the leadership that is being shown by the First Minister and by Welsh Government, represented by my own party of Welsh Labour, of course, but also with representation from the Welsh Liberal Democrats and an independent member of the Government, who have come to a difficult but collective decision on the best way forward for Wales and the people of Wales, based on the evidence and the data showing the rise in the virus. I commend also the leadership shown by the support of Plaid Cymru, with this motion jointly laid in their name too, recognising, as we've just heard, the urgency of the situation.

Moreover, I commend the leadership of front-line nurses and doctors, and allied professionals and unions, who have supported the measures proposed because they know first-hand directly the rising threat to our NHS unless we turn this virus back on its heels. I also commend the individual leadership in their homes and their workplaces, their families and their communities of the vast majority of the people of Wales—in my area of Ogmore, but throughout Wales—who've led by example. By complying with the rules and the guidance so far, they've helped to slow the rise and the spread of the virus below that which we see in other parts of the United Kingdom.

So, First Minister, health Minister and others, I support the measures proposed and the firebreak encompassed in the motion before us today, but in doing so, I would also ask you to consider some important questions. The additional economic measures and financial measures are hugely welcome, but I wonder if you could outline how the discretionary fund that's available to local authorities will work. Will it be available to especially those smaller self-employed businesses that have fallen outside the criteria of support for business rate relief and related support because they have no premises or they're below the turnover threshold for the ERF, set at £50,000, or they're not VAT registered, or they're relatively new start-up businesses that, over the last two or three years, have sunk their costs into the start-up and cannot therefore demonstrate high profit or turnover? So, will this discretionary fund, which I really welcome, be able to consider any of these small entrepreneurs who have slipped between the current stools of business and job support? And if so, how do they go about it and how easy is it to apply?

And also, in respect of business and job support, can he continue to make, as First Minister, representations to the UK Government to work with us in Wales by ensuring that job support is in place in time for our timely firebreak measures? It's not our fault, after all, that the Prime Minister is delaying and dithering on wider measures in England. But can I also urge him to press them to rethink the level of support for job retention, which will drop, as we know, from the furloughed level of 80 per cent to just over 67 per cent? It seems like Cabinet Ministers in the UK Government don't understand that a landlord will not accept 67 per cent of the rent, the supermarket will not accept 67 per cent of the food trolley bill, the electric and gas supplier is not going to accept 67 per cent of the energy bill, or the mortgage company 67 per cent of that month's payment.

And finally and crucially, could he lay out, straightforwardly, honestly, clearly today for the people of Wales what confidence he and the Government have that if we all do our bit, if we all comply with the rules for 17 days from this Friday at 6.00 p.m., this will indeed knock the virus back on its heels again, get us to Christmas and within sight of the new year, and what more we may then need to do to get us to Easter and to the summer, and the realistic hope of medical interventions, including vaccines, which may help us live with COVID-19 going forward? Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I rise primarily to speak to point three of the motion, and to make some additional points with regard to the impact on the economy. But before I do that, I want to emphasise that nobody thinks this is easy, and nobody wants us to be here. We will all be thinking today of people that we will miss in the next 17 days, and for some of our fellow citizens, that's much, much more serious. But the points that have been made by Adam Price and others about what is the consequence to some of our most vulnerable fellow citizens if we don't do this: are we prepared to say that we are prepared to sacrifice those people's lives, their actual lives? Well, I don't know about other Members in this place, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has written many letters in the past few months that I never wanted to write, to people in my region who have lost their loved ones, and that's what we're talking about today. We're talking about making hard decisions for reasons that must be made to protect those most vulnerable people.

So, I want to, as I said, speak to point three, which is about the Welsh Government's financial support for business and individuals at this time. Of course, I want to very warmly welcome the additional funding for the economic resilience fund—that's very important—and I'm very pleased to see that the Minister has agreed, in response to representations from both main opposition parties, to repurpose the fund to focus more on emergency support and less on development. We look to the day when our businesses can be developing, but many of them are just desperate at the moment—they can't do that. And we very much welcome the emergency support that's there for businesses in the 17 days that many of them must be closed.

We must, as Huw Irranca-Davies has said, ensure that that support reaches all types of businesses, including microbusinesses and including some that have previously been excluded. Hopefully, that is what the discretionary fund will be for when we see the detail. Longer term, of course, we must see longer term support for certain sectors, like hospitality, like cultural businesses, that won't be able to make a profit for many months to come.

People will find it very hard to comply with this lockdown if they are choosing between putting food on their table and keeping their community safe. I already have received representations from individuals whose companies are asking staff to travel from Wales to England to undertake work in people's homes. And they'll have to go if there's no support. They'll have to go, because, as Huw Irranca-Davies says, they have to take their wage home.

I cannot understand why the Chancellor will not bring his job support scheme for local lockdowns forward by eight days—just eight days—to enable Welsh businesses to start getting support for staff costs as soon as we need to enter this closed period. Well, it shows where Wales is on the UK Government's priorities, and I'm sure if this was a local lockdown in Berkshire or Surrey, he would find the key to the cabinet.

There are real issues too, of course, about the level of support. Two thirds of the minimum wage is not enough to manage on, not even for a couple of weeks, and I would invite any Member on the benches opposite who thinks that it is to try it. The Chancellor must lift back up to the 80 per cent provided under the previous furlough scheme. For some, that was not enough. And if the Chancellor won't act, then the Welsh Government will have to consider how they can support people's incomes, especially at the lowest level.

And my final point, Llywydd—and it's a point that I keep making—is that I don't know how much more evidence the Welsh Government needs to show that we cannot rely on Westminster to prioritise Wales's needs. The Welsh Government must be much more vocal in demanding borrowing powers to enable us here to set our priorities to support our people and businesses that need it most. It is pointless to bemoan the fact that the Welsh Government doesn't have the firepower without demanding the firepower. It will be interesting to see, when we look back, how long Labour Members cling to the myth of UK-wide solidarity despite the overwhelming evidence adding up to the contrary.

But that said, I do want to put again on record my thanks to the economy Minister for the way in which he has worked with me and other opposition spokespeople in this crisis and in the build-up to the decision that we have had to make today. I commend this motion and amendments 4, 5 and 8 to this Senedd.

The idea that this two-week lockdown is going to make the slightest difference to the long-term infection and mortality rates of this disease is self-evidently absurd. There is nothing in what we know of the epidemiology of this disease in the last six months that could possibly justify the absurd Armageddon predictions of the mathematical modellers—not scientists, mathematical modellers—who are advising the Government to introduce these draconian measures.

I'm pleased to say that throughout this whole crisis I've been consistent, right from the very start, when I quoted Dr Johan Giesecke, a very distinguished, world-class epidemiologist who wrote in The Lancet on 5 May that this disease,

'Almost always spreads from younger people with no or weak symptoms to other people who will also have mild symptoms...There is very little we can do to prevent this spread: a lockdown might delay severe cases for a while, but once restrictions are eased, cases will reappear. I expect that when we count the number of deaths from COVID-19 in each country in 1 year from now, the figures will be similar, regardless of measures taken.'

Well, we're not a year on yet; we're only six months, but so far, he's been proved absolutely right. I think this message has got through to some parts of the Labour party, if not in Wales, because Sir Richard Leese, the leader of the Labour Party on greater Manchester city council said yesterday,

'Most people who test positive for the virus are not getting particularly ill. They are not the problem'.

So, the number of infections is not the right statistic to concentrate on if we are looking to reduce the impact of this disease upon the country. Sir Richard Leese said yesterday that,

'If the Government spent £14 million a month shielding the most vulnerable it could avoid the need for a Tier-3 lockdown', and he claimed that this would be less than a fifth of the cost of business closures, enabling them to stay open and for most people to avoid tougher restrictions. That is a mature and sensible attitude based upon reality, not upon absurd predictions in worst-case scenarios that have never been seen anywhere in the world, as far as I can see. It is a relic of the days when the great Professor Ferguson of Imperial college was forecasting half a million deaths from COVID in the United Kingdom, a prediction that was very quickly exploded in somewhat embarrassing circumstances for him, as we might all remember.

This set of measures is not a firebreak; it's actually an incinerator for the businesses and jobs that will be lost as a result of these draconian changes. In some areas in Wales, there are only 20 new cases. During the summer break when we had an invasion of holidaymakers from other parts of the country, there was no spike in the incidence of the disease. There were 600 new cases in Wales yesterday and one death. It's on that basis that we're introducing these extraordinary measures, which have never been seen in peacetime on previous occasions.

I had a meeting, along with other Members, with the Hywel Dda health board last Friday, and in the counties of Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire and Carmarthen, there were six people in hospital with COVID: three in Llanelli, three in Bronglais at Aberystwyth, and one of the three at Aberystwyth was actually transferred there from Swansea. And there are 16 people suspected of having COVID. That doesn't seem to me to be a health crisis of the proportions that the health Minister was setting out at the beginning of his speech today. Meanwhile in Hywel Dda, 15,800 people have been waiting for more than 36 weeks for treatment for a variety of serious conditions, and the health board is 650 registered nurses short of what it needs to look after people in hospital. We are destroying the very basis of wealth creation in the economy upon which the health service is funded, and if it's so urgent, why do we have to wait till Friday for these measures to be introduced?

The problem that we've got is that this is a massive exercise in Governments and health advisers covering their own backsides by putting forward the worst possible case scenario, however unlikely it is to occur, so that they can't say, 'We were responsible for x number of deaths at the end of it all.' But what we need, actually, is a sense of proportion in all this, and that's the one thing that the Welsh Government lacks.

Oh, well, Neil, it won't matter to you; we're not in Wiltshire anyway. This is a matter for us who actually seek to represent the people who thought they were electing us.

Let me say this: when I looked at this proposal from the First Minister, I quite honestly was unsure. I asked myself three questions. The first question was, 'Is there any alternative?', secondly, 'Is it proportionate?' and finally, 'What happens next?' I read the evidence provided by the Welsh Government. I read and listened to the evidence from the expert advisers. I listened to what the chief medical officer had to say. I read through the technical advice report, and I came to the same conclusion not only as the first Minister, but Adam Price as well. As a Minister, I've read a number of decision folders provided by advisers, and I've wished that we had the clear advice that was provided in this document. I've often wished for less equivocation, I've often wished for more direction, and when I read this document, I was clear, absolutely crystal clear in my mind, that the responsible thing that I have to do is to support the Government in what it's doing.

I say that as somebody who would also speak out if I thought they were wrong, and I say that because I represent the people in this community in Blaenau Gwent. I have to do what is right and proper for the people in this community in Blaenau Gwent. And when I walk up and down the streets here, I have to look people in the eye; not disappear once an election has been fought, send them a message on Facebook and forget about them, but look them in the eye—look them in the eye in the supermarket, in the shops, and talk to people, and talk to members of my own family, and talk to people I was in school with about the impact it's going to have on their lives. It would be the wrong thing to do to do the easier thing and say, 'I'm less sure, I'm not sure.' Because I know that I am sure that we have to do the right thing and move in this direction.

All too often, Presiding Officer, in this debate, we've seen people who call themselves public representatives—although the public wouldn't recognise them—playing with false information, playing with fake news, putting things on social media, not only not knowing if it's true, but they can be pretty sure it's not true. Two and a half thousand people today retweeted a lie about Nevill Hall Hospital, saying it's empty, with doctors playing golf. The sort of information that's going round our communities and our societies at the moment is really dangerous and it's going to cost people their lives. So, there was no alternative, and I would invite all Members of this place today to support the Welsh Government in what it's doing.

Is it proportionate? I've spoken to the First Minister about some of my concerns around the impact on mental health, around the impact on physical health, around closure of gyms, and around closure of leisure centres, because I do have concerns about the impact that this is going to have on people. I have concerns about the impact it's going to have on young men, who won't be phoning helplines, who won't be speaking to people about the impact it's having on their mental health. I recognise the force of his argument that a shorter, harder lockdown is the best approach to take, and I hope the First Minister will also acknowledge the force of my point on issues around physical and mental health that we'll need to address as we go through this period.

And finally, what comes next? I do not believe that we can continue to lock down then relax, lock down then relax into the distant future, providing people with no sense of where we're going. I think we need to use the tools that we have at our disposal. We, in Wales, I think, can be proud of the way that the Welsh Government has faced this pandemic and this huge crisis. We haven't had the corrupt contracts that they've had in London. We haven't had the failures when they've given their mates jobs rather than somebody who knows how to do the job. We have a testing regime that works. We have a trace and track process that works, and we have the means of protecting our population. And we do that because we work together, and we marshal and work the whole of the public sector together—local government, Welsh Government, the national health service working together to serve the people, not to serve themselves and not to fill their pockets. That moral difference of values, I believe, also provides us with a platform moving forward and looking forward, using the facilities that we have at our disposal, using the mechanisms and the structures that we've created in these last few months, to paint a different future as we move forward, so that we can say to people, 'Yes, not only will you have Christmas, but you will have more hope in the new year', that we have a means of tracking and tracing the virus, ensuring that we have the means of enforcement to ensure that we can, then, have a very different future.

So, I hope that Members on all sides of the Chamber this afternoon will vote in support of this motion. And I know it's difficult, as well, for Members of the opposition parties to sometimes do that, but we've seen examples in these last few days of responsible opposition, and I pay tribute to Adam Price in the way that he's approached that. And then we've seen examples of irresponsible popularism and irresponsible opposition, and we all know what is meant by that. The people of Wales come first. The people I represent in Blaenau Gwent come first, and we should all put everything else to one side.

I support this motion for many of the reasons already outlined. It's disappointing, of course, that we have to do this, but this is a necessary step, it's urgent, and I truly believe that those people who intend to not support this should reconsider their priorities. We should never consider any death of COVID-19 as something that is inevitable, and I think it's quite insulting that people have been making such comments here this evening. 

In my contribution, I want to raise some well-being issues, so that that they're at the forefront of the Government's thinking. I welcome the fact that the motion mentions well-being, but it would be good to set out a few specifics that are required. The important principle here is that we can't expect people's mental health and well-being to cope in this firebreak, and for support only to be available at the end of the period. That would not only lead to a backlog, it would also neglect the people at the very point where they most need support.

I welcome the fact that people living alone will be able to continue with their support bubbles during this firebreak, and I'm pleased that this option will also be available for single-parent households, but neither can we ignore the impact that this will have on the well-being of people, and we must provide support for people as a matter of urgency. This will include resources to help people with mental health issues. This should include a purposeful helpline and online resources, taking into account what Alun Davies had said about some people being less willing than others to actually look for that support that should be available.

Resources should also be available to assist those people who are parents to young children and who will be working from home during this time. Parents are under so much stress and pressure because they either have to juggle their parental responsibilities and, perhaps, can't work as much as they would want to, or they have to choose to work and then feel guilty for not spending that time with their children. This will, inevitably, have an impact on people's mood and their ability to cope. We should be targeting resources to help this group of people, because we're asking them to do something that may appear impossible. We should also be asking businesses to develop guidance so that staff members who don't have caring responsibilities can understand the additional pressures that their colleagues may be facing.

That brings me on to those with caring responsibilities; those who are carers for family members and live with those family members. This group of people has already gone for months without a break, and it's bound to have an impact on their well-being. While the day-care facilities are closed, we should ensure that there is individual support available for those families, and this should certainly continue during this lockdown. The 'Caring Behind Closed Doors' report published today highlights the grave impact the past few months have had on carers. My colleague Dr Dai Lloyd said earlier today that 95 per cent of people say that the past few months have had a negative impact on their health, be that physical or mental—that's 95 per cent of carers, I should say. Sixty-six per cent said that they were constantly tired. We need additional respite care and advisory services.

Llywydd, this period will be difficult for everyone, but for some groups of people the period will be even more challenging. We must build a contract of trust with the public in order to ensure that they feel that the sacrifice we're asking people to make—and I do welcome the fact that we are doing that as I do think it's necessary—that they can see that it's delivering something and that they feel part of that decision. We need clear communication, as that will be crucial for this to work. We must communicate as a matter of urgency as to what financial support will be available, as Helen Mary Jones has set out, and when, so that those who do have to self-isolate, or those who have had to close their businesses, do feel that support is always available to them. Thank you.

I just wanted to quickly address amendment 5, because I think it's very ambitious to want to eliminate COVID in the context of being part of the island of Britain. We're not like New Zealand, which is an island all on its own. We have a completely porous border with England, and, at the moment, we have a Government in England that is absolutely not on top of the situation. Unlike Neil Hamilton and some of the Members of the Conservative Party, I completely recognise the need for us to have this firebreak in order to prevent the resurgence of COVID from completely overwhelming our hospitals. I've got several constituents who are due to have non-COVID operations this week; they haven't got COVID, but they've got serious conditions that require medical interventions that need them to be in a hospital. So, are they to be turned away, in Neil Hamilton's world, or is it that Neil Hamilton simply doesn't recognise that all of our critical care beds are full now and some operations are so serious it's simply not possible to operate on that individual unless there's a critical care bed waiting for them when they come out of the operating theatre? I want to see a health service that's able to cope with COVID but is also able to continue with other medical services that people need. People don't go to hospital because they can't think of anything better to do; they go to hospital because they need to have something serious addressed to enable them to continue to have a quality life.

I just now want to address a particular section of my constituency, which is students, because there are more students living in Cardiff Central than in any other constituency in the United Kingdom. It's true that students are unlikely to be ill with COVID because of their age, but it's really important that they don't spread it into the communities that their universities are situated in, and it's even more important that they don't take it home with them to their families because, inevitably, their parents are going to be a good deal older than they are and they are going to be much more vulnerable to the serious consequences of COVID. So, students really need to think about the importance of knowing whether they've got COVID and then self-isolating until such time as they are no longer a danger to anybody else.

Today, I went to the Cyncoed campus of Cardiff Metropolitan University, and I was delighted to see the testing service that's been set up there, which has moved from the Talybont campus of Cardiff University. That's a really important service to have, to ensure that all of those students are going to be able to get tested, to ensure that when they are going about and about, they are not spreading the disease. Even if they don't feel unwell, they could still be carrying the disease asymptomatically.

For me, the most important students to worry about are those first-year students who have only just arrived here and who won't have formed friendships, in the main. They will have been thrown together with other first-year students who have been randomly selected, rather than the second- and third-year students, who are all living with people they have chosen to live with and, so, they have already got a bubble of support that enables them to come through the isolation that the first-year students may be suffering. But, I'm very impressed at the support mechanisms that both Cardiff Metropolitan University and Cardiff University have set up to ensure that students are able to get food delivered—either by a catering service, in the Cardiff Met case, or through the supermarkets, in the case of Cardiff University. We are not having a repeat of the problems that other university students had, where they were absolutely being ripped off, being forced to pay terrible prices for really rubbish food. So, that's absolutely not happening in my universities, and at Cardiff University they actually get a £20 credit if they are forced to self-isolate. Then, whatever they choose to order over and above that, they have a safe mechanism for paying for it without them being ripped off financially.

So, I just want to make sure that students realise that they are not the most vulnerable group. If they are in a good position, and if they can help others who are much more vulnerable in our community—the self-employed, the people in the gig economy, who are going to need our help in getting food to them, because they are simply not going to get paid during this two-week period because universal credit doesn't kick in for five weeks—if students are in a position to volunteer, I hope that they will come forward and join in with some of the voluntary groups that are supporting people.

The Welsh Government's obsession with making us different to England even extends to what it calls its latest lockdown. After weeks of discussion across the merits or otherwise of a circuit-breaker, the Welsh Government decides that it supports such a lockdown, but because we're Wales, we have to call it something different. So, instead of a circuit-breaker, we have a firebreak. Of course, it might have been more natural to call it a firewall, but that might have reminded people of the Welsh Government's border policy.

What is the purpose of this lockdown? In the First Minister's own words, to get us through to Christmas. Where is the strategy in that? Having locked Wales down at huge economic and social cost through spring and early summer, just to postpone infections into the autumn, the Welsh Government will now lock us down again, so as to postpone infections into the winter, when the NHS has least capacity. And, who is going to pay for this? As so often under devolution, we are told that it's the UK Government that should pick up the tab as we exercise power without responsibility. There are difficult trade-offs to be made in this coronavirus pandemic, one of them being the economic cost of lockdown versus any health benefit. That trade-off cannot be made rationally or effectively when one Government controls the economic lever and another controls the health lever, but that is what we suffer with devolution. The First Minister said yesterday,

'It is only the UK Government that has the financial power to guarantee the levels of income support workers need, and we need more generous payments to help workers through this crisis.'

A logical corollary of that is that it is the UK Government that should decide whether to lock down our economy or not. But no, we have to do things differently in Wales: lock down even low-infection areas, enforce a border with England, and then, incredibly, demand the UK Government pay for it. They may instead remind us that a key economic lever has just been devolved: the power to raise income tax rates by as much as Welsh Government and this institution desire. Next week, we will have a Wales-only lockdown; next year, a Wales-only tax rise to pay for it. Thank you.

In Wales, the situation is stark. In just six very short weeks, we have moved from having very low levels of coronavirus to high levels of infection spreading rapidly within our nation, and this is despite the knowledge and understanding that without localised health protection areas, the situation and virus prevalence would have been even worse, with more deaths, and not just of the very elderly.

As the Member of this Senedd representing the communities of Islwyn, I support fully the Welsh Government's time-limited firebreak. We know that this pandemic is entering another serious phase and, colleagues, it is above party politics, but that does not mean that, where the UK Government is failing, I will not call this out, because policies matter and can either save lives or end them. Just a look around the world shows rapid rises, as has been acknowledged, in cases, hospitalisations and deaths across this globe. Cases are soaring once again, and how Governments and public health agencies react determines death rates. Doing nothing is not an option. 

The Welsh Government's technical advisory group's published report explains in detail why the Welsh Government are following the science, the medical and science professionals, TAC, and SAGE—the UK Government's own technical advisory group. According to the latest figures, the growth rate of positive cases is around 4 per cent a day in Wales, and TAC's worst-case scenario projections predict 18,000 hospitalisations and 6,000 deaths due to COVID-19 over the winter period. So, the question really to be put is: do you want to wait for that scenario? And as Welsh doctor, Matt Morgan, stated publicly, I urge the people of Islwyn and Wales to,

'Follow the advice now so that when we meet again, no one will be missing.'

Those are very serious words. This firebreak will save significant numbers of lives—COVID and others. But moreover, experts state we must be prepared for the rate to rise after the firebreak, due to the nature of the incubation period, the length of stay in critical care beds, and the actual nature of this virus. But it will help to stop the NHS from being overwhelmed, and the firebreak will therefore ease capacity for cardiac, stroke and all other non-COVID care. It is important to state that this firebreak is not just about COVID; it is about an available NHS for the many, of all ages and conditions. I want to thank sincerely my constituents in Islwyn who have made such strong and determined continued sacrifices, and observed the recent localised rules in the Caerphilly county borough area. Thank you so much, everyone, because you are saving lives, and as the TAC report states,

'local restrictions currently in place across many local authorities in Wales has led to a significant slowdown in the current wave of the pandemic.'

We have collectively slowed that spread, but we need to slow that spread even faster, because this is not just health and medical specialists who say this, or those who have come through the disease. In fact, the First Minister spoke for us all, cross-party, I believe, when he said,

'We all want to see an end to this pandemic and our lives returned to us.'

However, until that day comes, I greatly welcome the Welsh Labour Government's creation today of a £300 million extra economic resilience fund, and it's further adding £150 million to its existing ERF. In Islwyn every business covered by the small business rate relief will now receive a £1,000 payment and any small retail, hospitality and leisure business will get a one-off payment of up to £5,000. But it is only the UK Government, as has been said, who have the financial firepower to guarantee the income support that workers need. Llywydd, this is, in one way, simple. It is about the United Kingdom working as it should, that Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak act decisively, in co-ordination with the Welsh Government, to save Welsh workers and the Welsh economy, and ultimately do all they can to protect citizens—the primary and overriding first duty of any Government.

Dai Lloyd. Dai Lloyd, are you able to unmute yourself? Yes—Dai Lloyd.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It's always worth waiting for my contribution.

Clearly we're at a crucial time, as many have already said. Can I start at the outset here by congratulating some excellent speeches that I've heard in this debate so far? Of course, to be fair, Vaughan Gething gave us a wonderful opening, and Adam Price, Helen Mary Jones, Rhun, Delyth and Alun Davies all made wonderful contributions. I would like to mention some of the Conservative contributions, but I'm not sure if any of their ranks have yet contributed, apart from their leader.

But essentially, this is a critical time and we are facing a national crisis, and everyone needs to pull together—this is over and above party politics. And in looking at the significant increase in the number of COVID cases today—yes, we heard of some 600 COVID cases yesterday; today there are 1,148 new cases diagnosed in our country. With the increase in the number of people who have to be sent to our hospitals because of COVID, because of the scale of their illness, and the recent increase in the number of patients in ICU, we are at capacity already. That's why I support this firebreak lockdown over the next fortnight.

I don't know if I've mentioned in the past that I've been a GP and have taken some interest in these issues. But we need to use this lockdown to prepare and strengthen our systems. As we have heard, we need to improve test, trace and protect—we must get test results back within 24 hours. Our public system of testing and tracing is working wonderfully well and we need more of that. Using our health service, laboratories in our universities and hospitals and Public Health Wales, that public system is delivering miracles on a daily basis. We need to redirect additional resources in that direction in our health service and in our local authorities in order to tackle the trace element, which then influences isolation. This would all reduce our reliance on the UK system of lighthouse labs, Serco and so on and so forth, which have been underperforming recently, and that also don't accord with our public system in seeking results.

At the end of the day, self-isolation is crucial to the success of all of this and we're all responsible for this. But also, self-isolation is very difficult when you're living in poverty. It's impossible, I would say, as others have said. We must get that £500 available to those who qualify to receive it and that has already been announced.

Back to testing—we need to extend testing to all NHS staff and consider testing asymptomatic staff regularly, as the BMA has requested, and extend testing to others, such as essential drivers and security officers. This isn't just a matter for health and care. We also need to tackle the spread of coronavirus within our hospitals too. We need to do more to safeguard workplaces in increasing testing and tracing, not just in our hospitals, but also in care homes, universities, meat processing plants, our prisons, and so on and so forth. We must make our workplaces safe.

And we must ensure that the COVID work in our hospitals increases, yes, but not at the expense of the non-COVID work. We can't close everything down and just deal with emergencies as we did in the past.

So, to conclude, in the next lockdown fortnight we need to ensure the resilience of our PPE stock, masks and so on. I still receive reports about concerns about a shortage of PPE and now is the time to resolve this.

Staff in our health service—and I know very many of them; I'm related to some of them, in fact—have delivered a great deal. Our nurses and doctors have also suffered a great deal and they're ready for the fight, but they do expect support in that fight, that their workplaces are safe and that the PPE is in place for them, and that the NHS should be open to other non-coronavirus-related cases, as the Minister has already said.

After this lockdown, everyone needs to continue to socially distance, to wash their hands regularly, to wear face coverings and reduce their contacts with others. The fundamental advice will not change and in adhering to that advice we will come through all of this.

Finally, Joyce Watson.

Diolch, Llywydd. And I'm going to speak in support of this firebreak that will be introduced on Friday. I do recognise that it's absolutely necessary. I have listened to the debate and there have been some excellent statements, and, unfortunately, not such excellent statements that have been made here today.

I want to also make it very clear that it isn't just the Labour Party who are supporting this, but also to make sure that others understand that Plaid Cymru and other Members of the Cabinet who don't belong to Labour—Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas and Kirsty Williams—will also be supporting it, because I think that's important. But what is also important here is that it is very clear that we need to act quickly to protect people and to protect services.

I cover rural Wales—I'm sitting here in Pembrokeshire today—and I've heard Paul Davies, who also represents Pembrokeshire, and I've heard Russell George, who represents Powys, who are claiming that there is very little support in low areas of infection for this type of action. Well, I can tell those that the people—. I haven't even had to speak to people—they have come up to me and asked for action, because they recognise, quite rightly, that in a rural area the services can go from coping to being vulnerable in a very short time. We don't have very large-scale hospitals, so we don't need very large-scale outbreaks to overwhelm those services.

I've also listened, quite rightly, to those same individuals asking for us to reopen the healthcare sector to non-COVID cases. That is exactly what has started to happen. They've been at meetings, with me and Neil Hamilton, where that has been said. We can't do two things with the system in rural areas, and that is to allow the COVID infection rate to go up and, at the same time, to keep the non-COVID services open. I'm also going to take issue with the fact that when, last week, the First Minister quite rightly asked the UK Government to put in some action that prevented people from, wherever they lived, and, of course, England, because they were in charge of that—they made it an English-Welsh issue. I think that that was really bad form. And what I think is bad form here is they're trying to make it a rural/urban issue today, and that, again, doesn't take forward what we are all trying to do here, which is to ask everybody who has already acted responsibly to carry on acting responsibly, that it's a one-nation approach. I'm sure we've heard 'a one-nation approach' somewhere else before. Well, it would be rather nice if we had a one-nation approach now. That is what I ask of my colleagues to do here today.

I also recognise that there will be a need for those people who will feel the isolation more than others, and I'm really pleased to hear that single households will be able to have the support that they need, and that was in recognition of what happened before. So, we have learnt some lessons from what we put in place before.

I'm also very pleased that Armistice Day remembrance services will be able to take place, albeit in a limited form. I think that what is clearly going to happen is that those businesses who do keep open, and particularly supermarkets—what I request is that people treat the staff with the dignity and respect that they will deserve, because there's an awful lot of evidence that has come out already where that hasn't been the case. So, I put that in there now.

But I think that it's time to recognise that being in Government does mean taking the right action. It means taking it at the right time, and I respectfully ask the Tories to recognise that now is the right time, that we have clarity not calamity in Wales, that we're putting public health at the forefront and not politics. I did hear last week with some dismay where David Rowlands did say, and it's been repeated here again today by others, that there are very few people who will suffer the consequence should they catch or be unlucky enough to contract COVID and that they are the vulnerable, and they are the elderly, and that, somehow, if we isolated those two groups, the rest could carry on. I think that that—

I am sorry to cut across—

—is a foolhardy statement. I will finish, thank you, Presiding Officer, but I want to thank the people—

You don't need to—

—who have acted. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All the thanks are gratefully received.

Mark Drakeford, the First Minister, to reply to the debate.

Llywydd, diolch yn fawr. Thank you to everyone who has taken part in the debate. I want to return us to where this debate began. What we are talking about here this afternoon is nothing less than a public health emergency in Wales, and we're talking about the most effective way in which we can respond to it. In opening the debate, the health Minister set out the seriousness of the position, the latest information on incidence rates, positivity levels and hospital admissions, and he also rehearsed the advice that Ministers have received from the most senior clinical and scientific advisers available to us.

We've heard, Llywydd, that there are Members here who take a different view. Well, I profoundly disagree with them. But at least some Members here are explicit in that opposition. Neil Hamilton dismissed the seriousness of coronavirus—a mild illness, he said. He claimed that scientists—that mathematicians are not scientists. He waved his hand away at the 2,500 people who have died in Wales from coronavirus, while urging the Government to have a sense of proportion. Alun Davies said that there is a lot of nonsense talked by some about coronavirus, but it's not just nonsense—it's dangerous nonsense. We heard it again, sadly, here in the Senedd this afternoon.

Others, Llywydd, are less straightforward but no less misguided.

As Dr Dai Lloyd said, we've only heard one voice from the Conservative benches in the debate this afternoon.

It's a dereliction in itself that, at a moment when we are discussing these profoundly serious issues, the Conservative Party could only mobilise a single contribution to this, the most serious decision we are facing as a nation. The leader of the opposition said that we should be taking local measures. As Joyce Watson said, today it's an attempt to stir up division between rural and urban Wales—a couple of weeks ago, when his Members of Parliament were writing to me with his Senedd Members opposing local measures, it was an attempt to divide north and south.

Now, I am profoundly grateful to those people who have helped us with the local restrictions that we have had to impose, and, if it wasn't for that, things would be a great deal worse than they are in Wales today, but when the leader of the opposition says that we should leave it to those local measures, what exactly does he mean? He's a man who has made a great play over many days now of his grasp of data. What does he make of the data, then, in the local area of Swansea, where, as he pointed out to us, numbers are down today—down to 155 people per 100,000 and a positivity rate of 15 per cent? What does he make of Wrexham, another area where figures are down today, down to 201 and a positivity rate of 12 per cent? What does he make of Rhondda Cynon Taf, down again today, again to over 200 per 100,000 in the population and a positivity rate of 17 per cent? Leave it to local measures—that is the Conservative prescription offered in the Senedd this afternoon. And while those measures have been successful in helping to arrest the flow of coronavirus, they are not enough. They are plainly and clearly not enough.

Now, the other pillar in the leader of the Conservative Party's argument was that he has not seen enough data. Llywydd, I looked again, following questions earlier today, at the TAC report that we published yesterday. It provides data on the rolling seven-day average of daily confirmed cases, of the seven-day rolling sum of deaths in Wales, of the average confirmed coronavirus cases per 100,000 of the population, of the positivity rate, of the doubling time, of the reproduction number, of the number of patients in hospital, the number of patients in ICU beds. It provides an analysis on age profile, on incidents by settings and incidents by geography. It provides data and analysis from the ONS, from Bangor University, from Swansea University and Imperial College. It cites seven different data sources on mobility of the population across Wales. Llywydd, just what is it that the Conservative Party in Wales thinks it needs? What more data does it need that has not been sufficient already to convince the chief medical officer, the scientific advisory group and our own technical advisory group? Data is not just an excuse for the Conservative Party, Llywydd, it's an evasion, and it simply doesn't wash.

The leader of the Conservative Party in the debate this afternoon ended by assuring us that his Members would obey the law. It was an astonishing moment, Llywydd; he said it to us as though this was something on which they were to be congratulated. It comes to something, I can tell you, when a major party like the Conservative Party thinks it needs to assure the rest of us that its members will obey the law here in Wales. 

Llywydd, if the Conservative Party does not vote for the motion in front of the Senedd today, they will place themselves in opposition to all the expert advice we have available to us. They will let down all those people who work at the front line of our health and social care services. And, most importantly, they will let down all those people right across Wales who do everything they can every single day to help us to keep Wales safe. 

Llywydd, in contrast, can I thank Plaid Cymru for their support in bringing this motion to the floor this afternoon?

I don't need to name all of the Plaid Cymru Members who have contributed to the debate, because Dr Lloyd did that on my behalf. I agree with what he said about the quality of the contributions from Members from Plaid Cymru and the Labour Party in this afternoon's debate.

Llywydd, the Government will not oppose the Plaid Cymru amendments laid to the debate, but, because each of those three amendments contains a mixture of measures, some of which we positively support but others over which we have more hesitation, we will abstain on them this afternoon. On the main issue, however, we are plainly agreed. Adam Price, quoting the TAC report, demonstrated the entirely unequivocal advice that we have received. And the points that Plaid Cymru Members have made in the debate—learn from elsewhere, use the firebreak period purposefully, communicate as clearly as we can, protect our businesses, build a national effort—all of those things are common ground between us.

Llywydd, I thank my Labour colleagues not only for their support during this debate, but for their support during the difficult days and the challenging decisions that we have had to make in those days—Dawn Bowden talking about front-line staff and about community representation; Huw Irranca-Davies on building that national effort, of using our discretionary funds, as we have done throughout the coronavirus crisis, to help fill the gaps that there are in other provision for businesses, urging the UK Government to work with us, not to be always trying to undermine what we are doing here in Wales. Steve Rotheram, the mayor of Liverpool, pleaded with the Chancellor last week to provide more help to those people whose wages are going to be reduced as a result of measures right across the United Kingdom to deal with the virus, but it fell on deaf ears. And I agreed so much with what Alun Davies said about the physical and mental health impact of a further period of restrictions. It's why we've gone for the shortest possible period that we could of an additional firebreak period.

I wanted to thank Jenny Rathbone for her recognition of the rapid advances that have been made in testing for our student population and for the measures being taken by Welsh higher education institutions to provide an education for those young people, to protect their well-being and their mental health and to regard them, as we do here in Wales, as full members of our community, with the same rights but the same responsibilities as well as every one of us to act in recognition of the seriousness of the position that we face. 

Rhianon Passmore referred to the way in which people in Wales are being asked to make another sacrifice, to manage on incomes that will be reduced, to think of the businesses that will struggle through this period and, of course, all of that was in the minds of the Cabinet as we wrestled with these matters. 

Llywydd, let me close by just saying this: of course we are all tired and fatigued of coronavirus. We all wish we could return our lives to where they were before this pandemic began. But Helen Mary Jones put it right when she said that, while none of this is easy, none of us can step away from the challenge that it poses to us. Rhianon Passmore said:

'Doing nothing is not an option.'

That is why we have made the decisions that we have made. That is why we look for the support of the Senedd in acting at this challenging time.

Coronavirus is circulating in every part of Wales. The speed at which it is circulating is getting greater every day. There are 800 people in hospital already suffering from it. The seriousness of the position cannot and should not be denied. A short but deep firebreak period will help us to turn back the tide. It will not eliminate coronavirus. It will not lead to a cure for it. But it will gain us the time we need to allow the health service to go on providing the services it does, not just in coronavirus, but in every other aspect that matters so much to people here in Wales. It will give us a path forward into the difficult days that still lie ahead in this autumn and in this winter, and it will draw on the reservoir of determination, solidarity and a willingness to act together that has been such a feature of the Welsh nation's response to this crisis. Let's see the same determination, let's see the same sense of solidarity amongst Members of the Senedd here this afternoon: support the Government's motion. 

The proposal is to agree amendment 3. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, there is an objection, and voting will be deferred until voting time. We will deal with all amendments and the motion at voting time. 

Voting deferred until voting time.