Questions now from the party leaders. Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. No responsible Government or opposition, First Minister, could fail to support radical action in response to the national emergency that we're currently facing. Of course it's important that the mistakes by both Governments that have led us to this point are acknowledged so that we can learn the lessons to prevent successive waves of infection. But as the technical advisory committee report says, doing nothing new now would mean 2,500 extra deaths by the end of the year. A two-week firebreak would save almost 1,000 lives; a three-week firebreak, 300 more.

It's incomprehensible, under those circumstances, indeed, even reprehensible, that the Chancellor has refused to bring the job support scheme forward or to top up the furlough to the level of the first wave. It's difficult to believe that the purse strings would be shut quite so tight if there were a circuit breaker in Surrey.

To what extent was the UK Government's intransigence on financial support a factor in determining the optimal length of the firebreak in Wales? Is progressive public health policy in Wales being hamstrung by Westminster's Tory economics?

Llywydd, let me thank Adam Price for that and for the support that I've heard him give over recent days to the idea of a firebreak as a way to deal with the very, very sobering position set out, as he said, in the TAC report.

The sequence of decision making, Llywydd, was that the Cabinet makes its decisions on public health grounds, we take our advice from the chief medical officer, our chief scientific adviser and others and come to the conclusion that the actions we propose taking are the best ones to deal with the spiralling cases of coronavirus. We then look to the UK Government to play a part in dealing with the consequences of those public health actions in the lives of individuals. That's why I wrote to the Chancellor asking him to bring forward the date of the JSS scheme to 23 October. And, Llywydd, it cannot be that it was financial reasons that prevented him from agreeing to that, because we agreed as a Welsh Government to pay the additional £11 million it would've cost the Treasury from our own resources, if that was the sticking point. So, it can't have been turned down on cost grounds, and it is difficult to see why the Chancellor didn't feel he was able to play his part.

I've written again to him today offering him a different solution—a solution in which the qualifying terms for the last week of the furlough scheme could be brought into line with the JSS scheme that will begin from 1 November, and thus make it more available to more citizens here in Wales. We keep offering solutions; so far, the UK Government keeps turning them down. I do hope the Chancellor will find a different answer in his repertoire in response to my letter of today.

First Minister, another defining issue where the people of Wales are at the mercy of Westminster is planning for the end of the Brexit transition period and the proposed UK internal market. I agree with the Counsel General when he said that a UK Government seeking the power to spend in devolved areas and to control that spending is one which seeks to neuter and negate the devolution settlement. I agree with you, First Minister, that this will hasten the break-up of the United Kingdom. For Wales, the Bill is damaging without precedent, emerging fully-fledged as the single biggest sustained assault yet to threaten democratic devolution. The Bill conjures up the spectre of a no trade deal and the UK breaking international law, which has been condemned by just about everyone from the Confederation of British Industry to the Anglican Church. Given the Counsel General's and your well-founded concerns about the attitude and behaviour of the Westminster Government, what legal advice has the Welsh Government received on a potential challenge to the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill in the Supreme Court?

Well, Llywydd, the leader of Plaid Cymru is absolutely right to point to the threats posed to Welsh businesses, to Welsh livelihoods and, indeed, to the powers of the Senedd by this Bill. And Members who don't agree with that don't need to listen to the leader of Plaid Cymru or, indeed, to me; they could take note of, as Adam Price said, the letter published yesterday in the Financial Times, signed by the Archbishop of Wales, the Most Reverend John Davies, which points to the damage to the United Kingdom's reputation of that Bill, the moral hazard that is involved in breaking international law, and the threat that it poses to the United Kingdom through the way in which it rides roughshod over the settled devolution arrangements, endorsed, in Wales's case, in two successive referendums. And if there are Members who don't wish to take their advice from those with spiritual credentials, they simply need to read the report of the House of Lords Constitution Committee, which once again urges the Government to withdraw the clauses that are are an assault on devolution, to rely, as we urge the Government to rely, on the work that has gone on between us all to develop common frameworks. We believe in resolving the problems, we believe in a level playing field, but we believe that those problems should be agreed in their solution rather than imposed on the rest of us.

Our legal advice, Llywydd, at this point, is focused on crafting amendments, which we have published and hope to see laid in the House of Lords, because we think that there are still parliamentary opportunities to right the wrongs that this Bill brings about, both to the devolution settlement and to the way in which the United Kingdom's standing would be damaged in the world.

Whether it's COVID or Brexit, being wedded to Westminster is having disastrous consequences for Wales. The health Secretary in England is overseeing a calamitous lighthouse lab system hampering the Welsh COVID response, while the Chancellor turns a blind eye to the struggle of Welsh businesses, workers and the self-employed. Compare our situation with that of New Zealand. I'm sure, First Minister, you will want to join me in congratulating Jacinda Ardern on her stunning victory. Here is a Labour politician, in a country not much bigger than Wales in its population, who has presided over one of the most successful COVID responses anywhere in the world. Not only is New Zealand COVID free, it is also free from the British state, its blustering Prime Minister and his Cabinet of calamities. The Prime Minister is 'utterly shambolic', whose 'indifference to Wales borders on contempt'. Your words, First Minister, not mine, but with which I nevertheless agree. Given how Westminster is wreaking havoc on Wales, are you not remotely tempted by the notion of Wales joining New Zealand as an independent nation—small, successful and progressive?

Llywydd, of course I congratulate the leader of the New Zealand Labour Party on her fantastic victory in their general election, and I very much look forward to the day when the present Prime Minister is no longer in office. Does that amount to a belief that Wales's future is better off being ripped out of the United Kingdom? I don't think it does. We have a double advantage here in Wales: we have strong, assertive devolution, using all the powers we have to defend people here in Wales, but working people in Wales have very important interests in common with working people in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland. And removing ourselves from those alliances, taking ourselves out of the insurance policy that the United Kingdom provides to working people here in Wales is not the answer to making a success of our future. An assertive devolution in a successful United Kingdom—that is the recipe that defends the interests of Welsh people.

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, the Wales-wide lockdown announcement yesterday has left many people across Wales frustrated and disappointed that their freedoms will be curtailed, their ability to see their loved ones restricted and their businesses told to close. Whilst I'm open-minded about further restrictions, regardless of what others may say, the full picture of data that is available to us simply doesn't justify a national lockdown, and I think the Welsh Government's national lockdown will disproportionately harm communities and businesses where cases are already low, such as the whole of mid and west Wales.

First Minister, according to Public Health Wales's latest data, in 20 of the 22 local authority areas, cases of COVID-19 per 100,000 have gone down from week 41 to week 42. How can you justify a national lockdown when figures in all but two areas are actually coming down?

Well, it's very easy indeed to justify it, Llywydd, because while the efforts that have been made by people in those local lockdown areas are succeeding, they cannot succeed far and fast enough to turn back the tide of coronavirus as it is currently accelerating across Wales. So, I very much want to thank those people in those areas for all the efforts they have already made, and the two-week firebreak period that we are introducing will build on the success that those measures have had. But the sober truth is, Llywydd, as the TAC report that we published yesterday says, that unless we take these actions, cases and hospital admissions will rise across Wales, that there is compelling evidence for further interventions and that unless we do so, 6,000 additional deaths will take place due to coronavirus over this winter. What more data does the Member need before he is prepared to do what his duty should tell him he should do and to support the actions being taken to save the NHS and to save lives in Wales?

Well, First Minister, you say that there is compelling evidence, you say you publish all the data, but information on a community-to-community basis is still not available in all parts of Wales, and data on a transmission basis and on a demographic basis is certainly not available. So, I would urge you to publish that level of information as a matter of urgency.

Now, First Minister, to my mind and to thousands of people living right across Wales, the Welsh Government's decision to implement a nationwide lockdown in response to the figures I've just mentioned is unjustified, and it'll take more than a one-size-fits-all approach to tackling this virus in our communities. We have to see a much more targeted intervention approach, and yet, from Friday, everyone living in Wales will be under the same restrictions, regardless of whether the data shows further intervention is needed. In your press briefing yesterday, you made it clear that you don't expect to see any results at the end of the two-week period and that it'll be a little while later before cases will fall. Therefore, can you tell us exactly what criteria the Welsh Government will use to measure the success of a national lockdown, and, should the Government not get the results it wants in all 22 local authority areas, then can the people of Wales expect a further lockdown in the very near future?

Well, Llywydd, the reason that we ask people in all parts of Wales to take part in the two-week firebreak period is because we need a national effort—a national effort that would be much enhanced if his party were prepared to support it, rather than attempting all the time to undermine it. I'm hugely grateful to those people from his constituency and other parts of west Wales who've contacted my office to express their support for the actions we are taking. They understand that they are not immune from the way in which coronavirus is spreading elsewhere in Wales. They understand that, unless they are protected too, their local services will come under huge pressure. Unlike the Member, they want to make their contribution to saving lives and saving the NHS here in Wales, and that's what this period will do. That is what the SAGE committee tells us, that is what the chief medical officer tells us, that is what our own technical advisory group tells us. I don't know what the Member thinks he needs that will allow him to believe that his ability to analyse would trump the ability of our scientists or clinicians to do exactly that.

He was right about one thing—that it is impossible that—[Interruption.]

I can't hear the First Minister at this point, because there's a debate going on within the Chamber. If we can have some silence so that at least I can hear the First Minister. Carry on, please, First Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd. The leader of the opposition was right in one thing— that we will not see the impact of the measures we are having to take during the time that the measures themselves will be in place. It will take longer than that for them to feed through into the key figures, and, if he wants to know what the key figures are—for a man so interested in data I would have thought he'd have spotted them for himself—it will be to reduce R from where it is today, between 1.2 and 1.4, to below 1; to stem the flow of people into our hospital beds suffering from coronavirus; to see a fall in the positivity rate amongst those people being tested in Wales; and the range of other measures that are set out for the Member's perusal in the TAC summary report that we have published.

Well, First Minister, I've already told you the data that your Government should be publishing—you should be publishing data on a community-to-community basis in all parts of Wales, you should be publishing data on a transmission basis, you should be publishing data on a demographic basis. That information is not available—it's not being made available by your Government, and it is being made available by other Governments across the United Kingdom.

On your point about constituents contacting us as Members, I can tell you I've had many constituents contact me very concerned about the temporary national lockdown that you intend to impose. A second national lockdown could have a huge impact on the sustainability of businesses right across Wales, and could be devastating for businesses in west Wales, in mid Wales, and some parts of north Wales.

Now, the Welsh Government has announced a package of support to cover some businesses over the 17 days of a Wales-wide lockdown, but there really needs to be more detail by way of how the Welsh Government will protect the sustainability of businesses for the future, particularly if the Welsh Government is considering further lockdowns, as suggested by you yesterday in a tv interview. The Welsh Retail Consortium has said that, and I quote:

'This revenue-crushing firebreaker alone will put thousands of jobs and hundreds of shops at risk—but if it extends into November it could be a disaster for high streets across Wales.'

Unquote. Therefore, can you tell us where the £300 million enhanced economic resilience fund support will come from within your current budgets? And can you confirm that the Welsh Government has undertaken an economic assessment of the costs incurred, as well as the number of jobs that may be lost as a result of a Wales-wide lockdown, and that, as a result, the Welsh Government is fully prepared to reimburse businesses who are directly affected by the latest announcement?

Llywydd, Welsh Government has drawn together over £294 million from a range of sources within our own existing budgets, and we have drawn on some additional consequentials that have come through the UK Government as a result of support to businesses in level 3 lockdown areas in England. All of that will be used to support those businesses that are affected by this temporary firebreak period. 

Let's be clear: the choice is not between doing what we are doing and simply carrying on as things are, because to do that will undermine businesses even more—businesses that find that workers can't come into work, because they are infected with this disease; people who are required to self-isolate because they've been in contact with a growing number of people infected by coronavirus; businesses who find that people are fearful of coming into their premises because coronavirus is escalating away from our ability to control it here in Wales. So, the actions we are taking will be to the benefit of business beyond the firebreak period. It will stabilise the numbers, it will bring things back under control, it will create the conditions in which business can go on trading up until Christmas. I would have thought the Member would have welcomed that. I haven't heard a single word from him this afternoon that suggests that he's doing anything other than continuing to undermine the efforts that are being made here in Wales to do the things that are necessary to protect our health service, to save lives, to invest in those businesses that have a future beyond coronavirus. It's a dereliction of responsibility, Llywydd, for a party in this Senedd not to put their support behind the measures that are necessary at this crucial point, this emergency point in a pandemic, to do the right thing by the people of Wales.