Thank you, Llywydd. I thank Members for their various contributions to the debate. I thank the member of the committee; we'll respond in detail to the points that he's made, so there will be a written response as usual to the committee to deal with each of the merits points to the scrutiny. Of course, as one of the later contributors mentioned, we're having this debate today, but the committee, as I understand it, were very clear they wanted to be able to scrutinise the regulations that had been introduced and to provide a report to assist in today's debate. And there are choices for us to make in doing so. We could have had this debate at a much earlier point in time, but we wouldn't have had the committee having the opportunity to scrutinise the regulations, and that is really a matter that is in the hands of the institution, in terms of timetabling when these debates happen and the process through the Business Committee.

I'll deal with Caroline Jones's comments. This Government recognises that intervention of this type is not a first response. We have had a range of other measures in place, going through local restrictions, which contributed, but did not make the difference that we needed them to, just as the Government in England had a range of local and regional restrictions over a period of several months in some parts of England and they've made their own decision that they need to have a national approach now for the next month. We're testing, on average, more than 10,000 people a day. We're regularly testing many more than 70,000 people each week. So, we have got a large testing programme. But tests and the contact tracing and the request and the support and the legal requirements for self-isolation are tools to help us deal with the consequences of infection and to try to prevent further infection. Actually, our primary point is how we live differently, and that point about how we ask, 'What should we do?' as opposed to looking to find a set of rules to try to work around.

As I said, I dealt with Mark Reckless's point about public support in my opening, about police evidence, but also there is widespread evidence of widespread public support. All the available polling evidence supports the choice that we have made. And on waste-water monitoring, we certainly aren't using that to try to scapegoat other parts of the UK—that sort of language is especially and knowingly unhelpful.

I want to thank Rhun ap Iorwerth for the broad support that Plaid Cymru have continued to provide for the measures and the constructive way that we have discussed, debated and not always agreed on some of the choices that we have made. We have reflected, though, as a Government, on a very difficult time in terms of the messaging around non-essential retail, but we made choices on significant closure in other parts of the economy because we had prioritised the interests of children and young people in keeping our schools open, and that meant we had to be harder and deeper in other activity to have the sort of impact that we want to. A different choice is now being made in other parts of the UK; Northern Ireland have had a much longer set of restrictions; England are now going for a later intervention, but a longer intervention as well. And, so, we'll learn more from each other, and that was one of the points that came from COBRA yesterday, where we have made clear that as well as reporting to the people of Wales, we want to share the learning that we get in the post-firebreak period with other Governments in the UK, as we definitely still have much to learn, as the virus has many more months to be with us before we have an effective and longer term answer.

In terms of what you say, well, I'll be having more to say about what the firebreak has allowed us to do: it's given us the space and the time to reflect on what we need to do moving forward, so I'll have more to say, as the First Minister indicated, on new testing technology, but also on what we're going to do to bolster our test, trace, protect service.

And just in terms of the direct comments from Andrew R.T. Davies, I've never suggested that people are traitors. I don't think I've said anything inappropriate at all in my contributions today. In terms of the reference to suicide rates in England, I believe he's referring to a programme about the London ambulance service, figures that are historic, as opposed to current, and, of course, we don't know about the impact on suicide rates in Wales. What we do know, though, is that all of the measures we are taking are a balance of harms: doing nothing has very real and significant consequences. That's not just my view, but the view of the UK Prime Minister too. We do know that there will be an impact on mental health and well-being, and that's why we deliberately chose to have a shorter period in this firebreak.

I still believe it was the only responsible choice to make. When we started, there were 775 patients in hospital beds. Today, there are, as the chief executive of NHS Wales has reported, 1,275, just 9 per cent below the peak in April with coronavirus. What the firebreak and the four-week lockdown in England have done is underline that the virus is not going away, but it's our behaviour that can make the biggest difference. This is not a decision that Ministers took lightly or with any enjoyment. We know how hard it has been and continues to be for people right across Wales.

I want to, once again, thank everybody for their effort and collective sacrifice that is being made in all parts of Wales. I would, though, ask the Welsh Conservative leadership in particular to reflect on their choices and to exercise responsibility in their language. Conservatives are, of course, entitled to disagree with the Welsh Government, the Conservative Prime Minister, and the view of every chief medical officer in the UK, as they do. However, the language they have used on a number of occasions to disagree has been highly personal, divisive, and goes beyond the normal rough and tumble of politics. These are not normal times. In these extraordinary times, the divisive, personal, and, at times, non-factual statements from the official opposition in Wales create more room for people on the fringes of politics. Those fringe views in the midst of a pandemic are not amusing; they are dangerous. We will, no doubt, continue to disagree, but I hope that in future the way that we disagree can be both robust and responsible. I ask Members to support the motion before us.