So, we will move to the statement by the First Minister on coronavirus and the December restrictions, and I call on the First Minister to make that statement—Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. On Friday, we will strengthen our regulations in response to an increase in coronavirus cases in Wales. A written statement was issued yesterday drawing Members' attention to these new rules. This afternoon, I will provide further information to explain the background and why we must act now.

Briefly, the virus is still spreading quickly in Wales, and we must react in order to reduce the pressure on the health service as we prepare for the Christmas period. Last month's firebreak was successful in reducing case numbers across Wales, but there's no getting away from the fact that numbers are increasing once again, as we have seen across the UK, in Europe and globally. 

Llywydd, coronavirus is once again spreading across Wales, eroding the gains achieved during the firebreak period. Unless we respond now to the growing number of people infected with the virus, the advice from our scientific and medical advisers is that by 12 January the total number of people with the virus in hospital in Wales could rise to 2,200.

Our modelling suggests that, unless we act, between 1,000 and 1,700 preventable deaths could take place over the winter period. On Friday, the all-Wales seven-day incidence rate was 187 cases per 100,000 people; this has risen to almost 216 cases per 100,000 people today. 

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Welsh Government has listened to the scientific advice and taken action to suppress the rate of transmission. The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, SAGE, has reviewed the restrictions applied across the United Kingdom. They have pointed to the tier 3 measures in England and the level 3 measures in Scotland as providing evidence of shrinking the epidemic in those areas.  

Now, we already have many of the equivalent restrictions in place across Wales. The key differences have been in restrictions on hospitality, on entertainment businesses and on indoor tourist attractions. These are places where the risk of transmission is higher, as people can be in close proximity to one another for significant periods of time. With increasing rates across Wales, these are the places in which we have to intervene.

The restrictions, which will come into force on Friday, focus on adapting what has been effective elsewhere to add to the repertoire of measures already available in Wales. From Friday, pubs, bars, restaurants and cafes will have to close by 6 p.m. and will not be allowed to serve alcohol in the premises; after 6 p.m., they will only be able to provide takeaway services.

It will be for hospitality businesses themselves to decide whether to remain open, but those that do so will provide a place for people to meet. This is particularly important for young people and those people who haven't been able to take advantage of our extended household arrangement. That, Llywydd, is why we are keeping the rule-of-four arrangements. With the restrictions we are setting out, including on hospitality, the risks of meeting in such small groups are diminished.

And because of the seriousness of the position we face, from Friday, all indoor entertainment venues, including cinemas, bingo halls, bowling alleys, soft-play centres, casinos, skating rinks and amusement arcades, must close. Indoor visitor attractions, such as museums, galleries and heritage sites, will also have to close. Outdoor visitor attractions will remain open.

Llywydd, of course, placing further restrictions on hospitality was not an easy decision. We recognise the enormous effort made by the sector to comply with the regulations, and I'm very grateful for everything that they have done. Unfortunately, similar restrictions have had to be introduced in all other parts of the United Kingdom and, indeed, across the world. The consumption of alcohol has been identified by health officials and policy makers internationally as increasing the risk of transmission, as social distancing can break down as people have an altered perception of risk. Feedback from incident management teams in Wales repeatedly highlights issues associated with alcohol and with some hospitality venues. Data from the TTP system regularly highlights hospitality as venues where contacts of infectious individuals are identified.

Llywydd, these changes will apply across Wales. We know from our own direct experience that the volatility of the virus means that those areas that have relatively low prevalence today can see very rapid rises in just a matter of days. The advice of the SAGE committee is clear: measures are most effective when taken early. The measures we are taking will protect all parts of Wales at a time when the virus is rising in 15 of our 22 local authority areas amongst young people, and where that rise is already translating into infection rises amongst the over 60s. Indeed, 14 of our 22 local authorities see rises in the 60 and over age ranges today. And while the position remains as it is at present, national measures in support of a national effort remain the most effective way of safeguarding us all.

As a Government, we recognise that these new restrictions will be particularly difficult at one of the busiest times of the year for the hospitality sector. To support those businesses affected, we will provide a support package of £340 million. This is the most generous anywhere in the United Kingdom, and is, of course, in addition to the UK Government's support schemes. This will include a £160 million grant scheme specifically for tourism, leisure and hospitality businesses. We're working with partners to ensure that, where we can, we will make payments to affected businesses as quickly as possible before Christmas.

Llywydd, as we know, there is more than one form of harm that this virus brings. Our decisions have been informed by equality and children's rights impact assessments, which have helped identify where we can minimise adverse impacts and put in place additional support. This includes maintaining, as far as possible, the remainder of the current regulations in Wales. The rules on meeting indoors and outdoors are therefore unchanged. Two households are still able to form, together, an extended household. As is currently the case, schools, gyms, non-essential retail and close-contact services will remain open. Allowing people to exercise has a positive impact on mental health and well-being. We know that keeping schools open is vital for schoolchildren, especially those that are vulnerable and from more disadvantaged backgrounds.   

Finally, Llywydd, all this remains under regular review. As part of that, this week the Cabinet will consider travel restrictions, the rules on self-isolation, our fixed-penalty notice regime, and other associated matters. We will then bring forward new regulations to come into force on Friday at 6 p.m. We will formally review these restrictions by 17 December, and then every three weeks. 

Llywydd, as in the rest of the United Kingdom, we need to act now to put ourselves in the best position we can ahead of the relaxations over the festive season. These strengthened restrictions will protect people's health, slow the spread of the virus and, with the help of us all, will keep Wales safe. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I thank the First Minister for his statement this afternoon? Now, earlier on in First Minister's questions, the First Minister demanded I make it clear that we're in a public health crisis. Well, he's right, we are, but we're also in the middle of an economic crisis too, and an economic crisis that will continue to grow, especially when the Welsh Government decides to partially close sectors of the economy that so many workers in Wales rely on. So, I hope he will acknowledge that we're in an economic crisis as well as a public health crisis.

As I've said before, it's absolutely vital that the Welsh Government publishes the full picture of data and explains where COVID-19 in hospitality is taking place. Because, for too many people across Wales, this measure seems like a step too far. The First Minister earlier on said there is no absence of evidence. Well, if that's the case, then he needs to make that available and publish the information. Even the Member for Blaenau Gwent has called on the Welsh Government to publish the evidence to support the Welsh Government's decision, thereby confirming that the evidence has yet to be published.

From Friday, people across Wales will be able to continue to purchase alcohol from supermarkets and shops, but not in a pub or restaurant, and so I fail to see how choosing an alcoholic drink with your lunch over a non-alcoholic drink would require such a punitive measure to be introduced. Therefore, perhaps in response, the First Minister will tell us how specifically prohibiting the sale of alcohol in pubs and restaurants during the day will have an impact on levels of transmission. And how exactly will the Welsh Government determine success, or could we be looking at these restrictions staying in place for a lot longer than a few weeks?

There's a very real fear that this measure could result in more people gathering in people's homes. So, will the First Minister confirm what modelling the Welsh Government has done on this, given that not serving alcohol in pubs, bars and restaurants could lead to more people congregating and drinking in each other's houses, which could then lead on to an increase in the transmission of the virus?

The Welsh Government's measures will affect hospitality businesses across Wales, whether they are located in areas of low, medium or high risk, and the Welsh Government has failed to take this into account. Hospitality businesses in Conwy, for example, are now under the same restrictions as pubs and restaurants in Blaenau Gwent and Merthyr, where rates are significantly higher. I understand that the leader of Conwy County Borough Council has written to the Welsh Government, expressing his disappointment at the unfairness of this approach and over the lack of engagement in consulting on these proposals. Does the First Minister therefore accept the frustration and upset felt by businesses and, indeed, local leaders in areas like Conwy, who feel as though they've been disproportionately penalised as a result of the Welsh Government's latest approach?

Of course, underpinning the new approach, it's crucial that businesses across Wales can access the support that they need. Many hospitality and leisure businesses in Wales have been under some form of Government restriction for most of this year, and so it's vital that the Welsh Government is listening to their concerns and helping them find and access the support that they need quickly. The Welsh Government has made it clear that the eligibility checker for this new package will be live by 11 December and the application process will only open in January, which is simply unacceptable. Therefore, can the First Minister confirm what urgent funding will be made available to hospitality businesses across Wales before January, given that they're expected to adhere to these restrictions from this Friday? And given today's statement from the economy Minister, does he accept that some hospitality and leisure businesses will simply not be able to survive until January and that that support should be made available from this Friday, not in four to five weeks' time?

As Members are aware, one in 10 of the workforce is employed by hospitality businesses and many would be relying on pre-Christmas trade. This announcement puts those jobs at risk and the Welsh Government needs to tell us how it intends to support those people who lose their job as a direct consequence of this measure. These jobs are in the Welsh Government's hands, and in responding to this statement, I hope the First Minister will tell us what the Welsh Government is going to do to support those people who lose their job this winter because of this specific measure.

The Welsh Government has told us that it has engaged with the sector and consulted with them on their proposals. However, a spokesman for the Welsh Association of Visitor Attractions, which represents family attractions right across Wales, has made it absolutely clear that the Welsh Government did not consult with their leaders before deciding on these measures. Surely it cannot be acceptable for the Government to push ahead with measures that will have serious consequences for the sector without at least consulting the sector in the first place.

Llywydd, the hospitality, entertainment and tourism sector in Wales has been in an endless cycle of restrictions from the Welsh Government for many months, and this latest decision will mean that many businesses will, unfortunately, not survive. The health Minister is right to say that there is no perfect balance between protecting public health and business, but this will have an enormous impact on our hospitality, our entertainment and our indoor businesses, and I urge the First Minister to, instead, find a way forward that listens and understands the concerns of businesses across Wales, because it's not too late to reverse this catastrophic decision.

Llywydd, the Welsh Government recognises the economic crisis with £340 million-worth of recognition; that is the extent to which we recognise this crisis. He will have seen the derisory—I'm quoting the trade association in England—help that has been offered there today for the same sector. And when the Member asks me why we are prohibiting the sale of alcohol in pubs and hospitality, I hope he will have been listening to the leader of his party, the Prime Minister, explaining exactly that in the House of Commons today, in those parts of England where millions and millions more people than live in Wales are subject to more stringent conditions than we are introducing here. The Prime Minister was explaining to people why pubs in England are not just open until 6 o’clock in the evening, but are closed completely, why restaurants are closed completely. If he can't take it from me, then maybe he will be willing to listen to what the Prime Minister and the leader of his own party has to say on that matter, because the explanation is the same there as it is here.

The Member asked me about gathering in people's homes. Well, of course we discussed with the enforcement authorities that issue, and how we can respond to it if we see evidence of that. I urge people, and I hope the leader of the opposition urges people, not to break the law here in Wales, because that is what such a gathering would involve. The Cabinet this week will consider a paper in which we will increase the penalty for people who break the law in Wales in that way, because when people break the law and gather in each other's homes in the way that the law does not allow here in Wales, then the virus has all the conditions it needs to spread again. 

I disagree completely with what Paul Davies says about trying to separate out some parts of Wales where the figures are temporarily, I'm afraid, below what they are in other parts of Wales. I would have thought that he would have been more willing to draw on his own direct experience. I think it's only two weeks ago that I was being asked about why similar measures were being put in place in Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire, because the numbers in that part of Wales were so different to other parts of Wales. Today, the figures in the Hywel Dda University Health Board area are an incidence of over 200 per 100,000 in Carmarthenshire, over 155 per 100,000 in Ceredigion, and over 130 per 100,000 in Pembrokeshire. Within just a couple of weeks, areas that had a very low circulation of the virus find themselves in a very different position, and the volatility of the virus means it simply does not make sense to have different levels of restrictions in different parts of Wales. Today, sadly, the rate across the whole of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board has gone up for the first time since the firebreak period, and that just tells us something that we all have to be willing to grasp, that this virus doesn't respect geographical boundaries within Wales and that we have to be serious enough to take the advice of the scientific advisory committee and act early. When you see a problem happening, don't wait for the problem to get out of hand, act early, because in that way you prevent more people from suffering, more deaths from occurring. I am determined we will offer that protection to people in north Wales, and that's what our decision delivers.

I said in my statement, Llywydd, that we would do our best, working with our local authority partners to get help out to businesses before Christmas. There are two elements to the help that is being made available. The leader of the opposition either overlooked that, or chose not to remember it. There are two elements in the help that's being offered. We intend to offer the help that we can deliver through local authorities to be offered as soon as we possibly can, remembering that our local authorities are already helping us enormously with the provision of help to businesses here in Wales.

Finally, to the issue of evidence. I'm sure we'll hear a lot of that this afternoon. I'm going to say it now, Llywydd, and hope Members will forgive me if I do not simply go on repeating the same answer throughout the afternoon. The evidence is there. The evidence is there in the public health emergency we are facing. Two of our local authorities in Wales have rates of more than 400 per 100,000 of the population; seven of them rates of over 300; 11 of them rates over 200, and those rates are growing—growing across Wales. Here are the figures of people who have died in Wales over the last four weeks: four weeks ago, 150 people; three weeks ago, 168 people; two weeks ago, 177 people; last week, 159 people. Six hundred and fifty-four people have died from coronavirus in the last four weeks alone. There is evidence—every one of them evidence for why we have to act now, because if we do not, lives that need not be lost would be lost. The evidence for the actions we are taking is there to be seen in the reviews published by SAGE on 11 and 19 November, reviewing the measures that have succeeded across the United Kingdom, and we have drawn on that to put in place in Wales those steps that will reduce the flow of coronavirus and save lives that need not be lost. That's the evidence. It's the same evidence that his Government has drawn on to close pubs and prevent the sale of alcohol in tier 3 levels in England; it's the same evidence that led the SNP Government in Scotland to close pubs and to prevent the sale of alcohol in level 3 areas in Scotland. It's why hospitality is closed in Northern Ireland today. The evidence is the same everywhere. This Welsh Government acts on that evidence, and the evidence supports what we are bringing forward to protect lives and livelihoods here in Wales.

The First Minister knows that we in Plaid Cymru have supported the Government, even in making difficult decisions, when we are of the view that the Government has done the right thing. And generally speaking, we do believe that the First Minister's done the right thing by being cautious from the beginning of the pandemic, and to a great extent, he struck the right balance between safeguarding public health and taking the broader economic and social damage that emanates from the kind of restrictions that were discussing now into account. But we have to say sincerely now, First Minister, that we do think that you are making a mistake in terms of the regulations that you introduced yesterday.

Another mistake brought us to this point. I'm referring, of course, to the way in which we in Wales relaxed the rules too soon following the firebreak. I think that you have accepted that, and perhaps you could put that on the record. And I have to say there is no Government in the world that hasn't made mistakes—let's be honest about this. But the important thing is that we learn from those mistakes and also listen to the voices of the people, because the trust and support of the people to the general framework in terms of policy is so very important. That's the most important tool we have in Wales. I would encourage the First Minister to listen to those voices now, because I think the views of so many people demonstrate that these current regulations are not comprehensible to the people of Wales. It challenges rationale in terms of the restrictions introduced, and that is dangerous, because if you lose the trust and confidence of the people, what you then see is that there is less compliance with the other regulations that are so important. 

In terms of evidence, I think it's only fair for those of us who have to make decisions on these regulations to see the evidence encapsulated in one place. We saw yesterday a 48-page document drawing that evidence together. The First Minister has referred to some SAGE papers; now, I've been looking at other SAGE papers, and there is a summary of evidence as far as the hospitality sector is concerned, which was published last week. It's a single-page document, from 27 November, referring to different SAGE meetings on 12 November. And there are two or three papers by NERVTAG, which is one of the sub-committees of SAGE. What we need is what we had at the time of the recommendation of the firebreak, which was a paper from TAC drawing all of this evidence together on the exact regulations that you have introduced, namely to do away with the right to sell alcohol and to close premises at 6 o'clock. Surely we have to see that evidence now, because of course the understanding on this virus globally is evolving all the time, so even referring to papers published a month ago or six weeks ago isn't adequate in enabling us to make the right decisions.

May I also ask that we should have a vote sooner than is currently suggested? Because there is no point in us voting on this in a fortnight's time if we truly are going to meet our main objective as a Senedd, namely making a decision in good time. There's a very real risk, First Minister, that public trust will be eroded because there isn't support for this, I'm afraid. And the fact that we as a party—. I hope you'd accept that we have been responsible in our approach to the pandemic, but we have to say in this regard, in terms of the recommendations that you've brought forward, we would truly encourage you to think again for the benefit of the people of Wales. 

Thank you to Adam Price. I recognise the fact that Plaid Cymru have been supportive in terms of many of the difficult decisions that have faced us here in Wales. 

Let me say to the Member that we publish TAC advice every week. We are, I think, the only part of the United Kingdom that puts all the advice we get in that way into the public domain as quickly as we are able to do that, and we will publish further advice that we receive from TAC again this week. Just to be completely clear with all Members, the people who we rely on to synthesise the advice, to look at all the different possible sources that we can draw on, and then put it to the Welsh Government, are our chief medical officer, our chief scientific adviser and the chief executive of the national health service here in Wales. The advice of all three to us as a Cabinet was that we had to act and we had to take these actions now, because in their view, as people who are experts in this matter, the position we face in Wales is so serious that unless we do take these actions—actions already taken in all three other nations of the United Kingdom—we would face a situation in which our NHS would be unable to go on doing what Members here very regularly urge me to make sure it can do, and that is that it can deal with coronavirus and it can go on providing all the other services that we want the NHS to do.

Let me just be clear with Members about that: that is what the NHS would not be able to do. If we don't take this action, that is the position we will end up in. You cannot escape from the responsibility of facing up to that advice. Certainly in Government, you cannot escape that responsibility, and I will not escape that responsibility as the First Minister here in Wales. And I say to Mr Price that these are very difficult decisions, and they may indeed be unpopular decisions, but if I have to make an unpopular decision because it is the right decision, then I will make the right decision and not just the one that makes me popular. And while I think it's been an enormous strength for us in Wales that we have had the support of people in Wales for the way in which we have stood together in the face of the coronavirus emergency—and I believe we will go on having that support because of the way that we take the decisions in the way that we do—the key thing for me is that we make the right decision and we make it on the basis of the advice that we get, and that we face up to our responsibilities here as politicians and that we make the decisions that prevent our NHS from being unavailable to people who desperately need it for other conditions—that we understand that when we are told that our actions can save the lives of between 1,000 and 1,700 of our fellow citizens, that is not something you can just set to one side in the pursuit of evidence; that's the evidence you have. That's the evidence we act on and that's the right decision that we are making for Wales.

I'd just like to read some of the details of e-mails that I've sent to people who'd been asking for information regarding the decisions that have been taken and the evidence behind it. This morning, I've been looking at the SAGE committee advice, in which it says, and I'll just quote from the SAGE paper of 19 November,

'In England, in tier 1, many Lower Tier Local Authorities (LTLAs) had positive growth rates both before and after the introduction of tiers. In tier 2, the epidemic in some but not all LTLAs was shrinking after the introduction of tiers, with almost all of these areas having a reduction in growth rate as a result of the intervention but with many nonetheless remaining positive. All tier 3 LTLAs (where prevalence was generally highest) had negative growth rates after the introduction of tiers, and in all these areas the growth rate had decreased as a result of the intervention.'

So, what we've seen in England is that the tier 3 rates recognised by SAGE are the ones that are not only most effective, but are most likely to be effective. With tier 2, you have no guarantees, and tier 1, according to SAGE, is barely effective at all. That is according to the advice on 19 November, which is freely available. And tier 3, of course, relates then to the consumption of alcohol. And it's the same rules that are in place in England with regard to the closure of premises in tier 3, and in Scotland, where very similar rules to those in Wales have been introduced. So, there is a logic behind what the Government has done based on that SAGE advice from those epidemiologists, behaviourologists—who are part of SAGE—and clinicians.

One of the things I would say to the First Minister, though, having been on Facebook last night, is that as we're speaking right now, there is a lot of frustration and anger out there with regard to this decision, and my job has been to explain to people the rationale behind the decision and the fact that it is designed to save lives. I think the projected number of deaths that the First Minister has identified has been in the thousands if we do not take action. So, I see what the First Minister said about being popular, and I understand that you have to take the right decisions. But one thing I would say, and I make this point to the First Minister, is that the technical advisory cell note is updated every Thursday, and—I say to Adam Price—the technical advisory cell note was last updated on 20 November. We would expect one this week, but it's on a Thursday. It should be when the decision is announced, and therefore we would like to have seen that technical advisory cell note to the Welsh Government on Monday, not on Thursday. So, please could the First Minister expedite that, and get that out before Thursday so we can have that information that relates back to that SAGE advice?

Finally, a question on Facebook I've had. The travel restrictions—when will that announcement be made? Because as the English lockdown ends, people are wondering whether they can travel to England.

Llywydd, can I thank Hefin David for his contribution? I thought he very fairly and cogently summarised the SAGE advice. Only level 3 restrictions in England have been found to be effective. It's another reason why I'm not prepared to have less than level 3 restrictions in any part of Wales. Why would I be willing to do something that is known to be ineffective when I can do something that is effective and will protect people's lives? 

I understand the anger and frustration that he reports. None of us are immune from feeling that, and it's no wonder, is it? Everybody is fatigued, everybody is frustrated, everybody wishes that we didn't have to do the things that we have to do to cope with the virus. It's just the sad fact that, unless we are prepared to act, many of those people who are angry and frustrated at us will find even worse causes for frustration and upset in their lives as people they know, people who are close to them, people who matter to them the most, find themselves caught up in an ever-escalating number of people falling ill, and for some people, not ever recovering from it.

But can I thank him for everything that I know he does? Because I know that he provides a fantastic service to the people of his constituency in answering their questions, in putting arguments to them, in sometimes having to deal with people who take a different view. I think it's a fantastic service that he provides. 

On the TAC advice, we will do our best to expedite it, but just to make the point to Members, this is not the Government advice, this is TAC's advice. They are responsible for it. They provide it when they are confident that they've got it ready for publication, and it's very important that I do not attempt to try to influence them in the work that they do. They independently provide their advice to the Welsh Government and then we publish that advice so that everybody else can see the advice that has been given to us.

Then, on Hefin David's final point, Llywydd, the Cabinet will meet tomorrow again. One of the items on our agenda will be travel advice and travel arrangements in the post-lockdown period in England. 

First Minister, I shall first acknowledge the unprecedented package of financial assistance you have unveiled for the hospitality industry. However, First Minister, the hospitality trade want to be doing just that—trading. They don't want handouts, however generous, because they don't adequately cover their costs.

First Minister, this latest set of quite farcical lockdown measures is another example of punishing the many for the antics of the few, and it isn't even based on science or what the statistics tell us. If you increase the number of tests you must, ipso facto, increase the number of positive results, and that is throughout the United Kingdom. How deadly is a disease if you have to test to identify if people have it? This is because, of course, the vast majority of the population who contract it will suffer little or no effects from the virus. We need targeted, not universal, interventions.

The hospitality industry has followed all instructions and regulations in an exemplary manner and your own statistics show they are not the source of rising infections. What science lies behind your banning of alcohol in pubs and restaurants? You've given a new meaning to the words of that old song, 'A pub with no beer'. You can't even have a glass of wine with your meal, but you can, of course, buy wine by the caseload from the supermarket and, if you're so minded, have half a dozen people around to drink it with no safety precautions present at all. Of course, the reason you haven't banned supermarkets from selling alcohol is that you know the consequences of that would be civil unrest. First Minister, you are targeting and devastating the hospitality industry yet again, and your own statistics show the real source of infections is schools, care homes and hospitals. Please, First Minister, I beg you, on behalf of the hospitality industry and the economy in general, to end this massively damaging carousel of lockdowns and restrictions. 

Well, Llywydd, I agree with David Rowlands that, of course, the industry would rather be trading than relying on the help that they can receive from Government—of course they would—and we wish they were too. But where I profoundly disagree with him is in his suggestion that coronavirus is a disease that can be dealt with by targeted measures. The very earliest lessons for public health were learned in the cholera outbreaks of nineteenth-century Merthyr Tydfil. If one person gets cholera, that cholera spreads to everybody.

If just a minority of people act irresponsibly and selfishly, coronavirus doesn't distinguish between them and people who are following the rules. Coronavirus spreads to everybody, and that's why you have to deal with it on a population-wide basis. That is the decision of all governments across the United Kingdom and, indeed, governments right across the world. And the idea that this is a virus that can be simply dealt with by separating out some people from everybody else, it just profoundly misunderstands the nature of the epidemiology. It simply wouldn't work; it doesn't protect the people who follow the rules. We have to do it in the way that we are doing it, and that puts us, sadly, in the mainstream of the way in which countries across the globe are having to respond to this awful disease. 

I have very many Members wishing to question the First Minister. If I can remind everybody now to keep their questions succinct, then I can get through as many names as possible. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Two quick points, if I may, First Minister. First of all, I'd like to put on the record that I disagree with the actions you've taken, but I understand you, as a Government, have the right to do that. I do ask for your support, though, in seeking a debate in this Chamber tomorrow. I have tabled a motion in the Table Office for consideration. I appreciate, procedurally, under Standing Orders, we can do that, and you, as a Government, along with Plaid Cymru, did that very thing when the firebreak was announced. So, I'd hope that you, as a Government, will offer your support to allow that motion to be taken tomorrow, because, as a Welsh Parliament, I think it is vital that we, as parliamentarians, have the ability to vote on this. You've given a statement today, and all you're doing is taking questions, which is appreciated, but it is important, as parliamentarians, we have the ability to vote. 

And, secondly, you talked in First Minister's Questions today about liaising with the enforcement agencies. As someone who represents South Wales Central, where, last time, licensed premises were shut comprehensively, back in the summer—and I appreciate the weather was quite different then—there were various instances across my region of civil unrest that caused great anxiety to many people across the region. How confident are you that there will be no replication of such activities of unlawfulness in public places, and that the enforcement agencies have given you the assurance that they will be able to deal with such actions? Because, in my opinion, it is far better to deal with alcohol in licensed premises, where it is regulated, rather than move it on to the street or into house parties, which your regulations will have the effect of doing.

Well, Llywydd, no doubt the Member is one of those who will be looking for evidence, and he could look for evidence in those parts of England where his party has already instituted restrictions of this sort for many, many weeks, and I don't think he has evidence of large-scale public unrest or of the problem being moved wholesale elsewhere.

We did indeed talk to enforcement agencies. They will respond to the rules that the Welsh Government puts in place. The key thing, surely, is for every one of us who has any form of influence at all to use that influence to explain to people why breaking the law and acting in the way that the Member has described would be to put themselves, and other people who matter most to them, at risk. The best answer is not to need to enforce a rule because it's being broken, but to try to use our voices to explain to people why it is in their interest, and in the interests of everybody else, to do what is being asked of them.

People in Wales have done that, I think, fantastically over the period of the coronavirus crisis. We need to ask people to go on doing that as we move into next year. With new possibilities that we know are coming our way, now is not the moment to throw in the towel and to assume that people in Wales will not be prepared to act in a way that helps us all to prevent this virus from continuing to escalate away from us, with all the difficulties and damage that we know that that would cause.  

Over the past few months, in trying to be constructive in scrutinising Government, I've tried to listen carefully to what people are saying because people, generally speaking, understand things. Encouraging them to understand why the Government is doing what it's doing is crucially important, and I truly feel that these regulations have crossed a line in people's minds—from generally understanding and supporting the Government to failing to understand the value of these steps. And we are talking about very harsh measures here, and in parts of Wales that will pay a very heavy economic price as a result of them, and in areas where case numbers are very low at the moment, although that can change. Nobody is arguing that there shouldn't be any restrictions. 

You mentioned Scotland and England, but there isn't a single rule across those territories, and that lack of sensitivity to the different picture in different parts of Wales does play on people's minds. So, please consider the alternative option that we in Plaid Cymru have outlined. If you can't do that, then provide the evidence. Show us in black and white, publish evidence that shows that it's through restrictions as harsh as this on hospitality and a total ban on alcohol that cases are reduced. Tell us what the impact is on well-being, because I am concerned particularly about young people, and tell us what the behavioural science tells us about the risk that people will make even more dangerous choices as a result of this—in gathering and drinking in people's homes, and so on. We need to see that in black and white so that the public can have confidence. 

[Inaudible.]—that Rhun ap Iorwerth has raised already during this statement. I just say to him again that we very deliberately looked to see where the evidence for successful measures had been found elsewhere. In Scotland, where his sister party is in charge, and his party is very fond of suggesting to me that what happens in Scotland should be a model for Wales, we found that pubs were able to stay open until 6 o'clock in the evening as our other hospitality venues. They don't serve alcohol at their level 3, but they are able to stay open. Part of the reason why we decided to follow that course of action, rather than the course of action that had been found to be successful as tier 3 in England, was because of our concern for the mental health of people, and of young people in particular. Our rules will be more generous than in Scotland in this regard, and we will still allow four people from four different households to come together. That is particularly because of our concern to find a way within the law that young people can get together. Household mixing, which is all that is allowed in Scotland, doesn't help young people at all. They want to meet their friends. They want to meet their contemporaries. We will allow that to happen in Wales. That is one of the ways in which we have adapted what we have seen elsewhere to meet our own concerns and our own circumstances.

Now, I heard the leader of Plaid Cymru suggest that we should do what is popular, and I'll try to answer that. We need to command confidence of people, and I believe we do that by explaining to people that this is what the evidence tells us, that this is what the expert advice tells us we have to do, hard as it is, and frustrating as it is, it is what we in Wales have done throughout the whole of the pandemic. We have to go on doing that, tough as it is, difficult as it is, and when it is right to do it that way, I think people in Wales will recognise that.

First Minister, I fully support the actions of the Government, and it is difficult, and there are many people out there who have raised questions on this matter, and when you explain to them the real reason behind it, they have an understanding of why we have taken these actions. But I want to focus on the hotel sector, if I can, at the moment. Clearly, hotels are being also impacted upon in this. My hotels, in my constituency, many of them are saying that, actually, they're having cancellations for lunches and dinners as a consequence. Can you ensure that the package you're putting together is actually going to also be available before January, because this has always been the peak time for many of those businesses to actually build up their cash reserves for the year? Waiting until January for the application to come in means that they're going to have some struggling during the next month, as they try and survive until January. So, can you look very carefully at how you can help those businesses, and can you also clarify for them what you mean by room service, because room service can provide food and possibly drinks beyond 6 o'clock? And I want to know—. People coming into hotels are often coming in late, and they're working people, many times, during the week. They've been out in work, they're coming back, they want to relax, they want to rest, and they want to be able to have the opportunity to have food when they come back in.

I thank David Rees for that. I agree with him that the patient work of explaining to people why the decision has to be made does result in people understanding the rationale for it. It's a very rare family in Wales, now, who does not know somebody who has lost somebody during this crisis, and when you explain to people that that is what is at stake here, and that is why these difficult decisions are being made, I agree that people's innate sense of what is right, what is fair, and how their actions can contribute to the well-being of others draws on a very deep wellspring here in Wales.

I recognise absolutely the impact on hotels. We will do our best to get help to people before Christmas where we can, and even when it isn't possible to get the cash directly into people's hands, I hope we may be able to get a sense of the help that will be available, so that people can use that with their creditors and to be able to make sure there is a pathway through the next few weeks for them. As for room service, you're right; people who are resident in a hotel will be able to receive room service after 6 p.m. in the evening. A restaurant in a hotel will not be able to serve non-residents after 6 o'clock, but will be able to serve people who are staying at the hotel, because, as David Rees said, many of those people will be working, will need to eat after 6 o'clock in the evening, and we'll make sure that we get that advice clear with the sector itself.

It's a small matter, but just to give colleagues the sense of the detail that we've had to wrestle with over this last week, we will also make sure that the additional days either side of the five-day Christmas relaxation period that's available in Wales, which people in Northern Ireland have available to them so that they can travel to and from the mainland on 22 December and then the day after the relaxation period ends in Wales, that they will be able to use hotels in Wales as part of their journey on those two extended days.

First Minister, you've been talking about making the right decision. We simply disagree with you. I was very disappointed to hear you, in an earlier answer, refer to the frustration that people are feeling, which, in my view, completely trivialises some of the very serious mental health effects that are being experienced as a result of these lockdowns. And I'm also very disappointed that, when we're talking about pubs in my area—I could pick any one—which are in no way implicated in the spread of the virus, they have been unilaterally physically shutdown by your decision today. And it is a unilateral decision, because we cannot vote on this for two weeks, and I think it's worth pointing out, of course, that the UK Government and the UK Parliament are voting on English regulations tonight.

I want your answer, though, on this—I'm really interested in your response—a conversation overheard in my local corner shop yesterday, in which a very socially distanced queue, to be fair, were all complaining about these latest restrictions so vehemently that they all said that they were going to vote for the Abolish the Welsh Assembly Party at the next election. Do you accept that some of these decisions that you are making are taking down the institution as a whole, in the view of some of the members of our society? And when you grumble about more powers, do you think you should really be paying a bit more attention to the voices who think that you shouldn't have any powers at all? Thank you.

Well, in answer to Suzy Davies's first point, I hope that she will recognise that I used the word 'frustration' because that is the word that David Rowlands put to me in the question that he asked me. So, I was simply responding to the point that was directly put to me; it was certainly not to trivialise anything.

On her second point, I just come back to what I've said to other people. In this pandemic, all Governments are faced with impossibly difficult decisions, impossibly difficult balancing acts between lives and livelihoods, about the four harms that come from coronavirus and how we balance them all. All I can do and all members of my Cabinet can do is to hear the advice that we get, to weigh it up in the best way we can and to make a decision that allows you to look at yourself in the mirror on the following day. Now, that might be a different decision to the one that the Member would have come to, of course it can be, but that's the only way that I can proceed—I make the decisions that I think are most likely to be to the benefit of people in Wales. Whether, in the immediate aftermath of that, people feel aggrieved at it and say that they will vote in different ways, well, that's for them to decide. But what I have to do is to act in ways that I think most defend the things that matter most to people in Wales, and, if I wasn't making decisions on that basis, I wouldn't be able to carry on doing the job that I do, even when Suzy Davies and people she meets elsewhere take a different view to me.

I just want to begin by saying that nobody doubts for a moment the depth of the First Minister's concern and his absolute sincerity in what he is saying today, but I would put it to the First Minister that, of course, action needed to be taken, but did it have to be this action? And, for many people, this just feels too hard, especially for people whose support networks are their friends, not their family. For many of us who are not in traditional family relationships, we spend our time with friends before Christmas, because those friends will be with their families at Christmas itself. First Minister, it just feels too hard. Now, you have had the support of the people of Wales because they've understood and they've been proud, I think, to support the cautious approach that you've taken, but this just does feel terribly hard for those people.

I just want to ask you what social science modelling have your advisers used to determine that banning all sale of alcohol in hospitality—. I'm not talking about enabling people to have—. You know, you could say that people can have two drinks each, so that the risks that come with drinking too much—. But saying to those people that they cannot see their friends, they cannot have one glass of wine at lunch time—what modelling have your advisers used to determine that bans of alcohol in hospitality won't drive people, maybe many of the people who've supported your approach so far, to socialise at home, against the rules, in ways that are much more difficult?

First Minister, I would love to be able to support this approach and to explain it to my constituents; I've done that all the way along, even when we haven't 100 per cent agreed. But, First Minister, for people who don't have traditional family relationships, this just feels too hard and I really, really want you to think about that again.

Well, Llywydd, surely Helen Mary Jones is simply wrong to say that people cannot see their friends. People can see their friends. Hospitality venues, cafes, restaurants can be open up until 6 o'clock in the evening. If you want to see your friends, then there will be opportunities to do that, and there'll be more opportunities in Wales under our rules than will be available to people in Northern Ireland, England or Scotland. So, we are actually more attuned to the point that Helen Mary is making about the need for people to get together at this period.

Here in Wales, four people from four different households will be able to meet, will be able to have a meal together, will be able to socialise. What they won't be able to do is to have alcohol. Now, I'm sorry that that is a significant deprivation for many people, but the evidence is that when people drink then their behaviour changes, and their behaviour changes in ways that makes them and other people more vulnerable to the virus. That is why pubs, restaurants, bars in England in tier 3 areas are closed altogether; that is why in Scotland—the model we have drawn on—when they are open, alcohol isn't served.

Ours is an attempt to balance those different interests. By keeping places open so that people can meet, then the need for people to see their friends, to have a social experience, can still go ahead. We're balancing that by not allowing the sale of alcohol because of the additional risks that that brings. We can't afford those additional risks in Wales, when the figures that we see in front of us tell us the harm that that would mean, and that's why we've arrived at the balance that we have. 

The First Minister talks of following the evidence, and yet in answer to David Rowlands earlier on he compared the transmission of COVID to that of cholera. The two diseases are completely different, because cholera is a bacterium, not a virus, and it's spread by ingesting contaminated water, not by social approximation.

Can I invite the First Minister to look at the evidence that is reported today in the media from Switzerland? Switzerland has halved the daily rates of infection in the last month, despite its pubs and restaurants, gyms and sports facilities remaining open. There have been national restrictions in Switzerland, but they're not of the draconian kind that we are going to have to endure in Wales. There's a limit of 10 on private gatherings and there's an 11 o'clock curfew on pubs and restaurants, and there is compulsory use of face masks in crowded areas.

But Switzerland has been flexible; it's allowed its cantons to choose for themselves how much the regime of restriction should be extended beyond those national measures, and Geneva has had a full lockdown, whereas Zurich and Bern have had almost no extra lockdown measures, and yet, on 5 November this year, Switzerland recorded 10,128 new cases, 26 per cent of them positive, and yet three weeks later, on 27 November, the figure was reduced to 4,312 and a 15.8 per cent positive ratio. So, why doesn't the First Minister follow the flexible approach of Switzerland, rather than the inflexibility that we associate more with the joyless socialist paradise of North Korea? 

Well, Llywydd, in most of his contributions, Mr Hamilton has been urging Sweden as a model on me. Now that Sweden has gone bad, he'd rather urge a different model on me again. I quoted earlier, in First Minister's questions, from the article that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster published on Sunday. Here's another sentence from that same article:

'In politics there is often a readier market for comfortable evasions than uncomfortable truths.'

That's what Mr Hamilton offers us in his many contributions: comfortable evasions, the idea that there's always some easy answer to a profoundly difficult problem, an easy way of avoiding uncomfortable truths. Well, Governments can't do that, not if they have the interests of their population at heart. Today's comfortable evasion is Switzerland—no doubt, next time, there'll be somewhere else that he'll be advocating to us. We make the decisions that are right for us here in Wales.

I think these are the most difficult decisions that we've faced over the last nine months, a series of extraordinarily difficult decisions forced upon all Governments as a consequence of this virus. And I hope that in approaching these decisions we will all share the same determination to do what is right for the people we represent—not to do what is easy, and not to do what is popular, but to do what is right. And I do regret the opportunism that we've seen here this afternoon from Conservative representatives, who condemn the Welsh Government for doing what they will be urging their MPs to vote for in England later this evening. We have to do what is right. And we must also explain, and we must also convince people about what is right and the decisions that are being taken. 

The First Minister has made a number of assertions this afternoon. I want to see the evidence for the decisions that are being taken. It is right and proper that the Welsh Government takes these decisions, and it is right and proper that they then come here to explain those decisions. It is right and proper then that we have an opportunity to debate and discuss those measures. But we can only do that if we are informed and if we have all the information that the Welsh Government has at its disposal available to us and the people we represent, to enable us then to adequately scrutinise Ministers, hold Ministers to account, and then explain those decisions to the people we represent, and to provide the leadership that the First Minister has done over the last few weeks.

For me, I want to see more enforcement, particularly in workplaces. I want to see more mass testing in Blaenau Gwent, particularly. I want to see a more holistic approach to policy. And if the First Minister wants myself and others to support him in these regulations, then he must provide to us the evidence and the advice that he has received from his advisers in order to enable us to do that. 

Well, Llywydd, I completely understand the seriousness with which Alun Davies approaches this, because he represents Blaenau Gwent, where the seven-day incidence is 431 and rising, the area in Wales where the need for action is greatest of all. So, I entirely understand the seriousness with which he takes all of this, and why he plays his part in explaining and convincing, as we all have to do. And his wish to see further action in enforcement, and for us to learn the lessons that we are learning from the mass testing at Merthyr Tydfil, and see what we could do elsewhere in Wales—those are ambitions that we all share. 

I believe that the Welsh Government puts more information into the public domain than in any other part of the United Kingdom, that we share that information on the basis not of what we think of it, but on the basis of the expert advice that we get. It's their responsibility, it's their documents; we share them with you. I believe that they provide a compelling case for the actions that we are taking, and I think, when the Member has a chance to study what SAGE has already said, what the TAC reports will tell him, what the figures of positivity, transmission, hospitalisation and death in his part of Wales tell him, that he will see very plainly why the actions we are taking are necessary, and necessary now. 

Of course, in England, the proposals for pubs and hospitality are not the same with an absolute ban. It's a tiered approach based upon pragmatic considerations and real evidence. Typical amongst the deluge of messages I've received since your announcement are, and I quote, 'I appreciate this is a serious risk to ill or vulnerable people, but the measures put in place are far more worrying. Mr Drakeford has destroyed the well-being of a nation. My family runs two hospitality businesses, and we really can't afford any more restrictions. We've invested so much to make our establishment COVID safe. So, this is a final plea to you—please speak to our First Minister.'

And perhaps the cruellest blow is to weddings. How do you therefore respond to the bride who wrote to me last Friday, 'I was meant to get married on 30 October and reduced the guest list to 30. But due to the Welsh circuit breaker, our venue closed. We've now pushed it back to 19 December and reduced it to 15 guests. I'm now playing "guess the date I can get married"', or to her father, who wrote to me today, stating, 'My daughter's wedding ruined for the second time'?

Llywydd, the Member is entirely disingenuous in trying to pretend that restrictions in England are somehow not as strict as they are here in Wales. If you're in tier 3 in England, you will be in a far greater level of restriction than you will be here in Wales. And the position in Wales is as serious as that, and getting more serious by the day. That is the point that the Member needs to grasp, and that is the point, I'm afraid, that he needs to explain to people who are being directly affected by that decision. And I know how difficult it is for people who are having now to adjust to what is required. But the argument that we have to put to them is that we are living at an extraordinary time, when the risks to us all are growing every day and that the actions we have to take are there to protect us all. And while not everybody will understand and not everybody will accept that, that is the basis of what we are doing, that is the reason why we are asking these extraordinary sacrifices of people. As a result, those people will be there next year—there for their businesses to resume, there for their weddings to happen. The Member just cannot evade the fact that if we don't take these measures, then hundreds and hundreds of people in Wales, who otherwise would have been alive, will not be alive in 2021. That's what, I think, we have to explain to other people, and when we do that, I think people will understand.

I want to thank the First Minister for this very important statement. The situation, as he describes, is very serious. A vaccine will come along in a couple of months, but not yet. The vast majority of people have stuck rigidly to the guidelines and made sensible decisions, and Government must continue to take the people with them. I recognise the huge responsibility that lies with the First Minister—it falls to few to have responsibility for life and death. People, by and large, accept necessary infringements of liberty, as they have seen the pictures of people in hospital beds, in intensive care bed units, and deaths from COVID. But we still need test results back in a day; that's still not happening everywhere.

Now, students of Welsh history will doubtless be aware of the strong temperance history in Wales. But as to a total ban on pubs selling alcohol, First Minister, I need a rebuttal to inform my constituents. People want to know why, in one short sentence. Diolch.

Can I thank Dai Lloyd for what he said in that contribution? I'm glad that he pointed to the fact that next year can be different, but it's going to be months away by the time we have a vaccine, by the time people have their two doses, by the time we have enough vaccine to spread into the whole of the population. It's not going to happen in weeks, it's not going to happen this year, but it is coming. And what we have to do is we have to persuade people to stick with it, to do the difficult things now, so that we are able to take advantage of the new possibilities that will be there for us in 2021.

We invested a lot of effort during the firebreak period to improve the testing regime in Wales. This week, 90 per cent of all those tests that needed to be back within one day were back within one day, and that's largely because of a significant improvement in the performance of lighthouse labs, which we now need to see sustained, but, this week, the performance has been much more where we need it to be, and I agree with him that we need it to be there.

My one-sentence explanation to people as to why we are asking them to do what we're asking them to do: it's because, if we don't do it, our NHS will not be there for them when they need it, and the risk, to themselves and people who they love, will be beyond what any of us will be prepared to tolerate. 

First Minister, you attended the Chamber for First Minister's questions earlier. I'm sorry it's not convenient for you to attend now. [Interruption.] 

I'm sorry, just to cut across, I just need to say what I said at the start of this Plenary, and every Plenary, that all Members are able to contribute to the Plenary fully both here and from their homes or offices.  

And the first sentence of my contribution is, I would have preferred to see the First Minister here physically. That's my own view—[Interruption.] I totally accept—[Interruption.] I have my own view. 

Allow the Member to carry on, now, please. Thank you. 

Good. Now, First Minister, you said, 'If only we do this, we can get through to Christmas', but that's what you said about the firebreak, and it didn't work, did it? And there's been a little too much self-congratulation about that firebreak: bring it in, a stitch in time, comparing Wales to England over the operation of that, but it doesn't quite look like that now, does it? You keep on going on about tier 3 in England, but along the whole of our border, except for south Gloucestershire and the two motorway bridges, it is tier 2, and pubs are reopening and they're going to be serving alcohol. And, unfortunately, because of this 'it's Wales, therefore, pubs can't serve alcohol', it brings the whole policy into disrepute, and when people, whether they're on the Conservative or the Plaid benches tell you, 'Actually, there's a risk people will go and have house parties, rather than be in a regulated environment', they're not encouraging people to break the law, they're just making a sensible observation. Closing pubs after 6 p.m. but saying, ' You can open before, but you can't serve alcohol', is like telling butchers they can open but they can't serve meat.

Now, what went wrong? When we came out of that firebreak, you had to have a Wales-wide approach. State building first, public health second. You allowed people from high-incidence areas—from Merthyr Tydfil, in my region, to go to Monmouth, where incidence was low, but you insisted on enforcing a border between Wales and England. That is the problem that you've had, and you keep on having measures that just have to be a bit different because it's in Wales, and people no longer want to follow the measures. You lost the Conservative support on the firebreak, you've lost Plaid support now, you're even hearing a measure of opposition from your backbenchers.   

Llywydd, I disagree with the Member every bit as clearly remotely as I would if I was in the Chamber with him. He manages to get hold of the wrong end of every stick that's offered to him. He's done it again this afternoon. There's nothing I will ever say that will convince him that it is possible to come to decisions in Wales that meet the needs of people in Wales. He simply doesn't believe in the basic premise. That's why it will never be possible to convince him of any sensible observation, as he put it, and we didn't hear any of those from him this afternoon. 

I have three Members that I still wish to call. We are way over time on this statement, so, if I can ask all Members to be as succinct as they possibly can and no longer than a minute. Laura Anne Jones. 

Well, we'll try, Llywydd. In response to the—

You will do more than try; you will do. 

In response to the First Minister's responses to my esteemed colleagues earlier, yes, this is a public health emergency, yes, lives are at stake, and yes, these are difficult decisions. We all recognise this and we all understand this. So, rather than wasting time making ridiculous accusations across this Chamber earlier, when you were here, First Minister, we could have found time today to debate and vote on these important restrictions. It is disgusting that we haven't voted on this before they come into force on Friday. And I wholeheartedly support Andrew R.T. Davies's call for a debate tomorrow.

These restrictions will have a devastating impact on our small businesses in the run-up to Christmas, with Christmas events already being cancelled—that's revenue that businesses were relying on. We need to protect lives—we all agree with that—but please explain to our nation the difference between having dinner out and lunch out? You're penalising small businesses and medium businesses by not allowing them to sell alcohol, but, again, you're giving all the money to the supermarkets, and people will have these house parties. You only have to look at social media to see what's going on amongst people my age and younger—it's going to happen, and I doubt whether these restrictions are going to have any effect. In fact, they're probably—

Okay. I've been very generous. Thank you. First Minister.

Well, Llywydd, there'd be more credibility for the Member and her colleagues if they had offered one single positive suggestion for how we should deal with the public health crisis that we face in Wales this afternoon. They have condemned and they have criticised and they have complained about the actions we are taking while claiming to recognise that there is a public health emergency. But not once in the hours now that I have been answering questions from Members have I heard a single suggestion about what they would do to respond to the position that we face and there would be more credibility in their contributions if they could manage to find one.

First Minister, thank you for the statement and also the measured and stoic way that you and your Cabinet are leading Wales through this pandemic. They say it's always darkest before the dawn and we do face now a season of Advent without parallel in peacetime. And as has been said, from Friday 4 December, Welsh pubs, restaurants and cafes will close by 6 p.m., although you can still meet. And additionally, our cinemas, bowling alleys, bingo halls and museums and galleries will shut. But this heavy action is Wales's further and right and proper and necessary attempt to save preventable deaths—real lives from the COVID-19 pandemic and it's what necessitates these strict regulations. Without these changes, Llywydd, there is predicted to be between 1,000 and 1,700 preventable deaths over the winter. That's your parent, that's your sibling and that's your friend. And we have travelled too far in 2020 and we've sacrificed too much—some, the ultimate—to let go of our discipline in this final stretch. 

So, First Minister, now that we are on the cusp of a vaccination programme starting, are you able to offer any further words to the people of my constituency of Islwyn as to when and how a vaccine programme is likely to be rolled out and why the people of Islwyn should stay the course and all of us in this place equally hold our nerve?

Llywydd, thank you to Rhianon Passmore for that. She's right in her point that these are not theoretical lives that we are talking about—they are real lives, they are people we know, they are people who live in our communities, they are people in the families that we are connected to. That's why we have to be serious about the decisions that we are making and discussing here today. 

I'll offer two reasons to Rhianon Passmore's constituents: first of all, on a four-nation basis, we have agreed a five-day period of relaxation over Christmas. The advice from UK scientific advisers on the pandemic influenza modelling group tells us that we need to go into that period with the circulation of the virus as low as we can possibly make it. Otherwise, not only will we see the results that I have set out for Members this afternoon in terms of the impact on our NHS and the number of avoidable deaths, but we will see an even bigger rise because it is inevitable that when restrictions are relaxed, people meet together more and the virus will circulate even more widely. So, the need to act now is to protect the period that we are providing over Christmas, which we hope people will enjoy and enjoy responsibly. 

The other reason is the reason that Rhianon Passmore herself pointed to: that there are new possibilities coming our way in the new year. And we mustn't throw away, we just must not throw away everything we have done together now, just at the point when we are beginning to see some new way out of the dreadful difficulties of this year. Here in Wales we will be ready to move on a vaccine as soon as the regulators give it approval. As soon the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation agrees on a prioritisation list for the delivery of that vaccine, we have things in place here in Wales to take advantage of it. I think Rhianon Passmore put it very well, Llywydd: 'Let's hold our nerve.' Let's do the things we know that are right to do, because that way, we lay the groundwork for a different and better future.

Now, First Minister, as a result of your draconian restrictions on our pubs, bars, restaurants and hospitality industry, it is fair to say, you know from letters received, that West Conwy Pubwatch are exercising their right to not allow you entry to their premises. You are barred. And the move is being supported by over 100 pubs and 300 hospitality businesses. In fact, should you try to enter, they will now seek police assistance on this.

You told the nation that the restrictions will be strengthened to focus on places where we meet and where coronavirus thrives. Yet, you have ignored stats proving where coronavirus is thriving and where it is not. Last week, Wales had 211.3 cases per 100,000 whilst Conwy county had 19.6 cases. On Saturday, Conwy had a rate of 9.3, and on Sunday, just six per 100,000. Today, zero cases are being recorded. So, do, after all, provide this Chamber with the evidence proving that the devastation that will be caused to our hospitality and leisure sector in Conwy is fair, balanced and proportionate, to which I always thought regulations were based on.

Now—

You'll have to finish there. I've been generous.

The hospitality sector has spent thousands making themselves—

You're carrying on, Janet Finch-Saunders. You need to finish there. Thank you.

Can I ask my question, please? [Laughter.] My question is—

Only very quickly.

My question is, and it's very positive: you managed to do a partial lockdown in Bangor to do the deal with Plaid Cymru during the county lockdown. Would you please consider looking at those figures again? And in areas like my constituency and my colleague Darren Millar—Conwy county—will you look at those again and see whether, perhaps, you could have a look at those rules again and actually work through science and evidence rather than just the ease of doing a full-scale lockdown? Thank you, Llywydd.

Well, if the Member thinks it's easy to do a full-scale, Wales-wide lockdown, she hasn't been listening to the debate that I've been involved in. There's nothing easy about this at all, I can assure her of that. I said in my statement that we'll review the regulations by 17 December, and every three weeks after that.

What I will do is to make sure that we protect the Member's constituents. She knows, because the evidence from England is that tier 2 restrictions do not work. It's as simple as that. Hefin David set it out very well in his contribution earlier this afternoon. There's the evidence, there's the science. What she is asking me to do does not work and will not protect her constituents. Why would I possibly be willing to do something that I know, and she knows, would not protect people who live in that part of Wales? I won't do it, Llywydd, and neither will this Government.

Thank you, First Minister. We will now take a short break in preparation for voting time.

Plenary was suspended at 18:19.

The Senedd reconvened at 18:24, with the Llywydd in the Chair.