The following amendments have been selected: amendments 3 and 4 in the names of Gareth Bennett and Mark Reckless, amendment 6 in the name of Darren Millar, and amendments 7 and 9 in the name of Siân Gwenllian. In accordance with Standing Order 12.23(iii), amendments 1, 2, 5 and 8 tabled to the motion were not selected.

We reconvene on item 17, which is a debate on the new coronavirus restrictions, and I call on the First Minister to move the motion. Mark Drakeford.

Motion NNDM7523 Rebecca Evans

To propose that the Senedd:

Notes the Written Statement issued by the First Minister on 11 December 2020 about new levels of restrictions to respond to the coronavirus pandemic in Wales.

Motion moved.

Dirprwy Lywydd, thank you very much. As we, as a Senedd, prepare to go into Christmas recess, we are facing a very serious situation in terms of the spread of coronavirus in Wales.

A week ago, we were discussing whether the Government should impose restrictions on hospitality businesses in light of an increase in the number of cases. Now, the growth has now increased extensively. We have taken further steps, including the publication of a new control plan, which is before the Senedd today. We are also facing a new strain of the virus, which has appeared here in Wales. We will keep a close eye on this over the next few days and we will update the Senedd when more information is available.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the figures make bleak reading this Christmas week. More than 30,000 cases were confirmed in the last seven days, and one in five tests carried out in Wales were positive. In some parts of south Wales, we are seeing extremely high incidence rates—higher than anything that we have experienced this year.

We have passed another two sombre milestones in our pandemic in recent days. More than 100,000 people have now tested positive for coronavirus in Wales this year. On Friday, more than 2,000 people were in our hospitals because of coronavirus. Today, that has risen even higher, to more than 2,100, and by now, we have more than 90 people with coronavirus in intensive care—the highest number that we have seen in this second wave. Coronavirus is widespread and entrenched in our communities. It is affecting the normal running of many of the services that we take for granted, as more people fall ill or self-isolate and are unavailable for duty. All of that is, as you know, putting an intense strain on our front-line NHS and social care services.

Last week, we took further measures to protect people's health and to support our health service. Secondary school and college students are being taught remotely in this last week of term. If primary schools have to close for any reason this week, hub provision will be made available for vulnerable children and the children of essential workers. Outdoor attractions have been closed, and the NHS is now having to postpone some surgery and outpatient appointments to relieve pressure and respond to staff shortages.

Wales is not unique in facing such a rising tide of infection. We are seeing similar patterns right around the world. Germany and the Netherlands have introduced new country-wide lockdowns as coronavirus surges in those countries. Yesterday, the UK Government put London and large parts of the south-east of England into the highest tier of restrictions. In Northern Ireland, Ministers are warning of a third lockdown to come after Christmas.

Yesterday, here in Wales, we published our updated coronavirus control plan. This updates our original traffic light plan, which was published in May, and those, of course, were more optimistic times, when we were emerging from lockdown. Coronavirus cases were falling, and we were able—gradually—to relax our restrictions. The new plan updates the framework for local restrictions, which was published in the summer and guided us through the first part of the autumn. The plan sets out four alert levels, which are aligned to the level of risk and which outline the measures needed at each level to control the spread of the virus and to protect people's health.

Publishing this plan now will give people, public services and businesses clarity about how we move through the alert levels, and help them to plan as we move into the new year and through some difficult weeks ahead. We have drawn, as ever, on the expertise of the UK Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies, and our own technical advisory group. It's through their work that we have identified the interventions that work, drawing on what we have all learned during the pandemic. Our technical advisory group has told us that a national approach to restrictions is most likely to be understood, and therefore to be effective. But, if there is clear evidence of a sustained variation between some parts of Wales and other parts, the control plan allows for the alert levels and the corresponding levels to be applied regionally.

Today, across Wales, we are at alert level 3. The traffic light is red. The risk is very high. Dirprwy Lywydd, I said last week that if matters did not improve, a move to level 4 restrictions was inevitable. Since then, far from improving, the situation has deteriorated, and the pressure on our NHS and social care has intensified. In all seriousness, I say to Members that a decision on further restrictions cannot be long delayed. Now, we will review the regulations in detail this week. As part of that, we will look at the projections for the Christmas period and the steps we need to take to make sure we can keep Wales safe.

Turning briefly to the amendments, Dirprwy Lywydd, both the amendments from Gareth Bennett will be rejected by the Welsh Government. I've set out this afternoon, and earlier in the Senedd, why the alert levels are entirely proportionate. Nor will the Welsh Government be able to support the amendment in the name of Siân Gwenllian in relation to isolation support. We need to consider carefully what a system of different restrictions for the regions of Wales might look like. But we will support Plaid Cymru's amendment dealing with safe reopening. My officials are regularly engaged in detailed conversations with these sectors. And finally, the amendment from the Welsh Conservatives is consistent with the updated COVID action plan, so will also be supported this afternoon by the Government side.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I have said many times that the pandemic has turned all our lives upside down. This has been one of the most difficult years for us all. The promise of a better year ahead is on the horizon, as the vaccine gradually becomes more widely available. In just the first week, more than 6,000 people across Wales have had their first dose, and tomorrow, the first care home residents in Wales will receive the vaccination. But while all of that is taking place, we have to get through some very tough weeks that lie ahead, and we can only do that if we work together to do so. The difference is made by the accumulation of all those small changes each one of us needs to make in our daily lives. This is a Government determined to keep Wales safe. Together we can change the course of this terrible virus, protect our health service and save people's lives. Dirprwy Lywydd, diolch yn fawr.

I have selected five amendments to the motion, and I call on Gareth Bennett to move amendments 3 and 4, tabled in his own name.

Amendment 3—Gareth Bennett, Mark Reckless

Add as new point at end of motion:

Believes that the new levels of restrictions are disproportionate and damaging to businesses and livelihoods across Wales.

Amendment 4—Gareth Bennett, Mark Reckless

Add as new point at end of motion:

Regrets that the Welsh Government has consistently taken a different COVID-19 strategy from the UK Government.

Amendments 3 and 4 moved.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thanks to the First Minister for bringing today's debate. I do actually agree with most of the sentiments that he just expressed.

I think that everyone in this Chamber appreciates that we are in the midst of a public health crisis and nobody wants to downplay that situation. I'm sure we all appreciate that, during this crisis, Governments of countries around the globe are struggling to deal with the pandemic and are managing the situation with varying levels of success. And, as human life is at stake, we all want the crisis to be over as soon as possible, with as little human loss as possible, although we also have to balance the long-term economic consequences as well, because they can also be life damaging or life changing.

So, can I just ask the First Minister, who, I think, made his opening remarks in a good manner, that was promising, hopefully, a good debate—can I ask him to be reasonable in his dealings with the opposition at this time? We do need to have a democratic forum in which to debate his Government's measures robustly, and we don't want to be called 'disgraceful' or anything similar just because we don't always agree with his measures. So, I thank the Government for bringing today's debate, but now that they have brought it, I hope that they can play by the rules and accept that we don't have to agree with them all of the time. I also note that when, earlier today, Caroline Jones asked the First Minister about sharing the scientific advice, he did avoid answering that part of her question. It seems to me that the First Minister wants to be all powerful and all knowing, not sharing all of the technical advice he has received, but at the same time telling everyone else that we can't question what he's doing because we don't know all the things he does.

Now, I mentioned long-term economic consequences—they do have to be borne in mind—and we in the Abolish the Welsh Assembly Party do take a view that the decision to stop pubs and restaurants from serving alcohol was disproportionate and could spell the end for many businesses. So, people in Wales could be suffering the consequences of the Welsh Government's decisions long after this pandemic is over. We are already seeing effects in Wales in terms of rising unemployment, but not only has Wales already suffered the highest rise in unemployment, we are also experiencing the highest rise in infection rates. So, it seems to me that we are having the worst of all worlds here in devolved Wales: we have the toughest lockdown measures, but we also have a public health crisis that appears to be worsening. It is no surprise that the public confidence in the Welsh Government's handling of the crisis is plummeting, with a fall of around 20 percentage points.

We in Abolish have said from the outset that we need a UK-wide response to the pandemic, led by the UK Government. I stated in last week's debate that many people have told me that they believe the First Minister has used this crisis, in part, to try and accentuate the difference between what he does, and what the UK Government do, in an attempt to win more public attention and support for devolution. I think this was a foolhardy strategy, and it has come back to bite him. We are still experiencing problems precisely because of his determination to have a distinctly Welsh approach to the virus. Regardless of what he says about the alert levels, England has different areas in different tiers, which makes some sense. As I say, despite the alert levels, here in Wales, the First Minister still, it seems to me, wants to treat all of Wales as one unit, so if one part of Wales has to go into lockdown, then all of it does. This clearly makes little sense in places like Gwynedd and Ynys Môn where the infection rates are relatively low, but because they're in Wales, they have to be treated the same as every other part of Wales. Clearly, this is nothing more than politically motivated nonsense, and very little to do with public health.

So, we do oppose the Government's motion today. We do believe that the new levels of restrictions are disproportionate and overly damaging to businesses and to people's livelihoods across Wales, and we do regret that the Welsh Government keeps taking a different line from what the UK Government is doing. What we want is a united UK response with more co-operation with the UK Government. We also support Plaid's amendments 7 and 9 today. I urge Members today to support these amendments, and I hereby move the two motions tabled in my name. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I call on Paul Davies to move amendment 6, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. 

Amendment 6—Darren Millar

Add as new point at end of motion:

Welcomes the announcement of new alert levels in Wales that allow for the regional and local application of restrictions in response to the scientific evidence and differences in coronavirus infection rates in different parts of the country.

Amendment 6 moved.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move the amendment tabled in the name of my colleague Darren Millar. I'm pleased that the Welsh Government will be supporting our amendment this afternoon.

It's deeply worrying to see that cases in Wales are continuing to rise, and so I'm pleased that the Welsh Government has brought forward this debate and published a coronavirus control plan, so that communities and businesses can understand the measures that have been put in place to control the spread of the virus. We on this side of the Chamber welcome the Welsh Government's proposals to use levels as a benchmark to ensure the public safety of Wales, and I welcome the fact that the First Minister has confirmed that, once appropriate, these alert levels could be varied in different areas of Wales in adopting a more targeted approach, rather than just a one-size-fits-all approach. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, it's also important that the people of Wales have confidence in the Welsh Government's handling of the coronavirus pandemic going forward, and so the publication of this document is very welcome in explaining to the public the Welsh Government's decision-making processes. Now, of course, a recent YouGov poll showed that fewer people have confidence in the Government's overall strategy in managing the pandemic, and it's crucial that the public has confidence in the decisions that are made on their behalf. This opinion poll demonstrates the importance of engaging with the people of Wales and communicating clearly, so people understand exactly why measures have to be taken.

Now, we mustn't lose sight of the fact that there is a vaccine, and it's a really positive step to see health boards in Wales administering vaccines to priority groups such as front-line NHS workers. The deployment and administering of that vaccine is absolutely vital in eradicating COVID-19 from our communities, and as we see more and more people across Wales vaccinated, that too will have an impact on people's confidence and on the level of measures that may be in place. However, as the First Minister said earlier on, the current figures are bleak. Wales has the highest infection rate in the UK, and eight out of the UK's top 10 worst infected areas are here in Wales, and the top three areas are Merthyr Tydfil, Neath Port Talbot and Bridgend. Therefore, we're at a point where we must recognise that the current intervention is simply not stemming the transmission of the virus.

Of course, as the number of cases rises, the pressure on NHS capacity and resources also increases, and, as we've seen, health boards in some parts of Wales are under significant pressure and struggling to cope. As was referred to earlier, we know that over 2,000 beds in Wales are occupied with COVID-19 patients, and one in 10 NHS staff are currently off ill or self-isolating, which also has an impact on the delivery of health services. In the last week, we've seen two health boards suspend non-urgent services and treatments following the increase in transmission of COVID-19 and the usual winter demand on emergency care. And on top of all that, the confirmed case rate is significantly more than 300 cases per 100,000 people. Therefore, in light of all of this activity and pressure on NHS services, the Welsh Government must now tell us when it intends to make further decisions regarding the next steps it needs to take to fight this virus. What individuals, families and businesses require now is certainty going forward, so it's imperative that the Welsh Government make a decision on the next steps to stem the virus as soon as possible, because people, businesses and our front-line workers need to know what is happening as soon as possible so they can plan ahead.

Diprwy Lywydd, it's not just our health services that are struggling, it's our businesses too. Figures today have confirmed that Wales experienced the steepest rise in unemployment between August and October of any nation or region of the UK, and that really shows how the pandemic has affected livelihoods. That figure will only grow if further restrictions are introduced, and we don't entirely see the whole picture as the UK Government's furlough scheme has continued to keep people on the payroll, and so it won't be until a few months after that scheme closes that we'll be able to see, unfortunately, the full extent of job losses across Wales. In the meantime, businesses are struggling to survive, and it's absolutely crucial that they're able to access funding before January, as those few weeks between now and then without support are simply too long for businesses to wait.

Now, I welcome the news that there will be a freeze of the non-domestic rates multiplier for 2021-22, but let us remember Wales continues to have the highest rate of business rates in Great Britain, so this simply doesn't go far enough. I therefore urge the Welsh Government not just to freeze business rates, but to go further and do more to support businesses who are continuing to struggle against the backdrop of the COVID pandemic. Of course, underpinning this coronavirus control plan is the need for a strong financial package of support, so that when Wales moves between alert levels in the plan, the public can be confident that the Welsh Government has funding in place to support those people and businesses that need it. This is absolutely crucial.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we all want to see the back of this awful virus, and the deployment of the vaccine is the very start of that journey, but we've still got a long way to go. My colleagues and I will do what we can to constructively work with the Welsh Government where we can, and where questions need to be asked and further evidence needed, we will continue to call for it. Now is the time for genuine cross-party working to save lives and protect livelihoods, therefore, I welcome the publication of the coronavirus control plan, and I hope the Welsh Government will now communicate clearly to the people of Wales exactly when and how it intends to stem the number of cases in Wales, and I look forward to seeing more of that detail in the coming days and in the coming weeks. Thank you.

Thank you. I call on Adam Price to move amendments 7 and 9, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Amendment 7—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new point at end of motion:

Calls for restrictions and isolation support to reflect as much as possible the different sustained levels of infection in different regions of Wales.

Amendment 9—Siân Gwenllian

Add as new point at end of motion:

Calls on the Welsh Government to develop detailed plans for the safe reopening of key sectors such as hospitality, culture and sport venues based on direct engagement between sector representatives and the Welsh Government’s scientific advisors.

Amendments 7 and 9 moved.

Thank you. I'm glad to move those amendments and to respond to the debate. I think it is welcome that the Welsh Government has produced this plan. We called for a winter plan, and it's important that it's clearly understood, and, of course, it needs to be adaptable, because of the continuing dynamic nature of the pandemic. As well as having that medium-term strategy, which is absolutely essential in terms of public confidence, I think the key question now is: what are we going to do right at this moment? We heard the First Minister refer to the current picture as bleak, which I think is an accurate assessment, and he referred to the need to consider action without further delay.

The question, I suppose, at the forefront of many of our minds, the minds of our citizens, really, is: can we afford to wait until the twenty-eighth when this new tier system comes into place? Because the current situation is worsening apace. Looking at some of the data for today from the ONS suggests, clearly, infection is increasing. We've seen the figures, we're at the wrong end of the league table in terms of 15 of the top 20 local authority areas in the UK in terms of daily cases. Positivity rate is the critical one, but that has been increasing now since 24 November, and the saddest figure of all, of course, is that excess deaths are higher than they have been over the last five years.

There are some areas of uncertainty, clearly. We don't know what the impact of the measures introduced more recently have been, there'll be a lag in terms of those. The NHS has been doing some maintenance on its IT systems, so there's some lack of clarity about the daily case figures. Presumably, the Welsh Government has better access to the data than we have, but I think it certainly is the case that we have so many parts of Wales that are above all the criteria for the highest level, the very high-risk criteria in the plan, and surely the question must be: why not introduce, therefore, those measures earlier? Because the mantra has been, from the World Health Organization through to your own technical advisory group, hasn't it, First Minister, that you go early and you go hard. Nobody wants to see any more restrictions because of all the harms that are attendant with that, but there are some circumstances where, unfortunately, it is absolutely necessary, and are we not at that point again in many, many parts of Wales?

And similarly, of course, whatever happens in terms of potentially an improving situation as a result of the recent restrictions, then we have the Christmas question, which you referred to earlier in First Minister's questions, and of course we've seen a litany of voices—two leading medical journals, a range of medical bodies calling for a review; you've got the COBRA meeting—but we would urge you, whatever the four-nation consensus is, Wales now is in a different place, and I think you have to reserve the right, and indeed there's the responsibility, to take a different decision, if necessary. If the medical advice and the scientific advice points clearly at reviewing those Christmas arrangements, then you have to do that. And it's important that you take the people of Wales with you, and that's one of the issues where we've had some differences over recent weeks. I think we have to do it as a whole nation. It's a difficult decision for any leader to have to make of a country, as has been said. I think that one way that we could possibly build that consensus, and I've written to you this afternoon, First Minister, is to get the leaders of the leading parties together to try to see if we can find a consensus across the parties, for which hopefully we can get majority support across the whole of Wales.

I think the message, difficult as it is, that we may need to hunker down a little bit harder over the holiday period in order to regain control, in order then to recover and reopen, hopefully earlier in the new year, I think that is a message that actually would receive widespread support, as long as we ensure that any restrictions are combined with additional support, in terms of financial support for people isolating, particularly those on low incomes, in terms of the childcare issues that are often a result in terms of restrictions, and in terms of sorting out test and trace. I've been looking at the numbers, First Minister, and again we're going in the wrong direction in terms of the contacts, the proportion of contacts that are traced within 24 hours. We've got to sort that out as well as, if it's necessary, based on the scientific advice, sadly, to look again at the Christmas arrangements and, indeed, going into tier 4 earlier than you had planned.  

Thank you. I have 10 speakers. If you all take three minutes, I'll get you all in; if you go over the three minutes, then I'm afraid those of you at the bottom of the list may not get called. So, I ask you that. I asked last week, it didn't do an awful lot of good, but I'll ask again this week. So, if you all take around about three minutes, we'll be fine; if not, then, as I say, those at the bottom of the list may not get called. Dawn Bowden. 

Sadly, we are ending 2020 facing another tough chapter in the story of the relentless struggle with this dreadful virus. Coronavirus has a strong grip on our communities, and our public services are struggling with the scale of the pandemic. We continue to see large numbers of people fall ill and, sadly, many deaths. And who knows what this new strain of the virus may bring. It's a practical, economic and emotional crisis, and my thoughts go to all those families who have lost loved ones, to businesses that are struggling to keep afloat, to people who have lost their jobs, and to people who are struggling with their mental health in these most challenging times. I also want to place on record yet again my thanks to all those workers on the front line whose daily challenge of dealing with the ever-increasing pressures I can only imagine. 

But can I also thank you and your Cabinet, First Minister, for the difficult decisions that you've faced and that you've taken this year, often in the face of unkind, unfair and personalised criticism? As you know, I follow football, and as a fan on the terraces, I know how easy it is to shout criticism from there, but it's never quite as easy to deliver success on the actual playing field. But the actions that you have taken have been taken to try to save lives and protect the people of Wales as best you can, and I thank you for that.

Like others in this Chamber, I've attended a number of briefings over recent weeks with the health boards, councils, and the police services that cover my constituency. The briefings are stark and the situation we currently face is severe. The most recent briefing I attended on Friday last week was with Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board. It wasn't just sobering; it was distressing. To have such a dire situation laid out so plainly about what is happening in my community was something I never thought I would have to listen to. I've said this before, Dirprwy Llywydd, but when I stood for election in 2016, it was because I wanted to help improve the lives of the people in Merthyr Tydfil and Rumney. And yet, today, I'm facing the reality of 170 COVID cases per 100,000 population, and a test positivity rate of almost 30 per cent in Merthyr Tydfil alone, and the number of ICU COVID patients last week outnumbered the number of ICU COVID beds available at Prince Charles Hospital. So, what's clear is that our NHS is reaching that point that, in truth, we'd hoped to avoid, so we must act; doing nothing is not an option. One of the two health boards in my constituency has already announced that they're having to suspend some non-routine services, and I suspect the other health board will follow suit. That in itself will bring further problems down the line, but what choice do they have? The voices on the front line are telling us that they are at breaking point.

Dirprwy Lywydd, in my constituency, the mass test pilot seems to be suggesting that over 3.5 per cent of the population could be asymptomatic carriers of the virus. As a result, the partners delivering this pilot have decided to extend the testing programme for a further week, and I welcome that decision. I certainly hope we can do more of this testing, and it is without doubt an important tool in identifying cases and having a better opportunity to reduce the spread of the virus and to identify what is happening in our communities until we see the benefits of the vaccination.

So, what is my conclusion from all this? Well, I'm of the view that in a pandemic crisis, the best way that I can meet the needs of my constituents is to support all the actions that can drive down the infection rates. In that way, we might win back some of that space that allows people and our systems to cope. Only by driving down those infection rates will people be able to see normality return to their lives. Only by driving down those infection rates will many of those small businesses that have been struggling so badly—particularly in the hospitality and tourism sectors—be given the opportunity to recover.

What we need to do will not be popular with everyone. The right decisions are often not the popular decisions, but now more than ever, those right decisions have to be taken. That is why we've seen responsible Governments across the world taking very difficult decisions to deal with this. In many of those countries, lockdown has been harsh and immediate because they, like the Welsh Government, understand how serious this is.

Dirprwy Lywydd, at this point, I'm certainly not in this for popularity. I will do what I have to do to help the Welsh Government and others to save lives. So, my message to Welsh Government is clear: please take all the necessary actions that you can to help our front-line workers to cope with the months ahead. Please take all the necessary actions that you can to help our communities recover from this virus, and please take all the necessary actions that you can to help our businesses recover, so that when this is all over, people have jobs and livelihoods to return to. And for those actions, First Minister, you will have my full support. 

Thank you. You've had your five minutes. Thank you. David Melding.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. In south Wales, we are likely in the next few days to see infection levels of 1,000 per 100,000 population, and by Christmas, they could go up even higher and reach the so-far record levels seen in the Walloon area of Belgium in the early autumn. That's the scale of the crisis that we face. And there is a real chance, as the FM has said, that the NHS will be restricted more or less to just COVID services, with all the implications for general health.

The economic damage caused by the restrictions is real and requires active mitigation, but the economic damage caused by the virus will be more severe still, especially if it continues to rage out of control. Yet we have, Deputy Presiding Officer, the promise of deliverance, because a vaccine, or several vaccines, have been found. We may not have been in this position. It is a wonderful thing that we are, and that, by Easter at the latest, there's a real prospect that all those over 70 and all those with vulnerabilities and underlying conditions will have been vaccinated, and that alone is expected to reduce the death rate by about 80 per cent, enabling our front-line staff and the NHS to cope. However, if the virus rages on, we will be compromised in the vaccine roll-out quite profoundly, potentially. So, that's what we've got to remember—that's why it's such an imperative now to look afresh at the situation we're in.

It is clear to me, Deputy Presiding Officer, that the Welsh Government's regulations since early November have been warranted. There is now a question, however, in south Wales, whether they go far enough. I realise a difficult balance has to be struck, and I understand from the BBC news report at 5 o'clock that there is likely to be a change to the regulations—or the advice, rather—over the Christmas period, and I think that is appropriate.

I welcome the more constructive tone that has marked today's debate. I think that's a sign of maturity about where we are as a Senedd and where the nation is in this public health emergency. I welcome, too, the development of the Welsh Government's approach, so that parts of Wales may be able to exit the most extensive regulations that may now be required in much of Wales, and adopt something approaching a regional, tiered approach. I will support the Welsh Government's regulations debated earlier. I will support the Welsh Government's motion before us, as well as the Conservative group's amendments. Should the Welsh Government conclude later this week that a firebreak is needed, to be applied immediately in south Wales, and obviously before Christmas, I would also support that measure.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

Here we are once again, responding to a worsening situation. Wherever we look in Wales, everyone, I hope, would acknowledge that this is a crisis, whether we ourselves live in an area where the number of cases is low or in those very large areas that have seen a frightening increase in the number of COVID-19 cases over the past few weeks. We won't spend time today on what happened in coming out too soon from the firebreak, without having a sustainable strategy in place, perhaps, because we are discussing a new plan and the need to change direction once again.

In principle, I think the system of having levels of green through to black is a good idea, but deciding which level we should be on on a national basis, and in different parts of Wales, will be entirely crucial, and those decisions are not easy.

In terms of regional action, we will support the Conservative amendment today. Our first amendment refers to the same thing, but also refers to what this action could mean. There are two aspects that are referred to in that amendment, namely restrictions and support, and there is a value in having a basic fundamental level of national controls. No area is immune to this virus, but, where the cases are highest, it makes sense to me that there is scope to operate differently. That could mean restrictions, yes, but, along with that, the Government must be able to provide a higher level of support.

There are many countries, areas and cities and so on that have experienced success in controlling the virus and ensuring that people have the support that they need to self-isolate. The Welsh Government and the UK Government haven't been effective in this particular area, and studies show that it's a minority who are doing what's required in self-isolating successfully. So, provide financial support so that people make the right choice in remaining at home. Provide practical support—take crucial services to people's doors rather than them being tempted to leave home to seek those services. Put people in a hotel, as many other countries have done, so that their families are safe, and provide emotional support too.

On the second amendment, Helen Mary Jones will expand on that, but it mentions communication and having effective communication with businesses and other organisations to prepare for the day when we can start to reopen, and we're all looking forward to that day. But putting the right actions in place now is going to have a great influence on when that day will come. Now, I love the Christmas period, but I do very much hope that the Government will accept our offer to participate in cross-party discussions on what should be done around the festive period, how we can strengthen the rules and the messaging in the period leading up to Christmas, and that five days around Christmas itself. This will affect every one of us. 

If I can conclude by making reference to the plan published yesterday, simply stating that it's people's behaviour after the firebreak that was to blame—namely that people's behaviour didn't give us the outcomes we were looking for—that isn't good enough. Yes, each and every one of us has a responsibility to behave in a way that keeps ourselves, the people around us and our communities safe, but that behaviour happens within a context set by Government. And the steps taken by Government and the messaging of Government does have a very great influence on those behaviours, and let's bear that in mind too.

I thank the First Minister for providing us with a copy of the Welsh Government's updated coronavirus control plan. First Minister, Wales now has the worst infection rates in the UK, and, over the last seven days, the rolling infection rate per 100,000 was 450.4. Wales wide, the testing positivity rate was nearly 20 per cent, and this is despite Wales being under the level 3 restrictions outlined in the Welsh Government's plans, and despite coming out of a national lockdown just a few weeks ago, which we all thought would help keep the virus under control. However, infections continued to rise despite control measures. 

So, we have to ask ourselves why control measures are not controlling the virus. And there's nothing new in the plans, because we're being asked to support the same course of action that we have been pursuing for the past nine months: various stages of lockdown, the same thing that we have been doing since the summer with little apparent success; plans that have been tried and failed elsewhere—the same plans but different names, because where England has tiers and Scotland has protection levels, Wales will now have alert levels. I feel this will just add confusion to a public already struggling to understand the different rules and regulations in place in different parts of the United Kingdom.

As the Welsh Government point out in their document, a single national approach is more likely to be understood and more effective, so why, then, are we not pursuing a single UK-wide approach to this virus? Each part of the UK is trying to do their own thing, and what that has achieved is the confusion of the general public. Some people still don't know what the rules are, and, as a result, we are seeing falling levels of adherence to those rules. We will not control this pandemic without the engagement and support of the public, who are, at the moment, frustrated. 

All we have seen is business closures, job losses, massive Government debt that will take generations to repay. The business rates still remain the same, in many cases. We should be concentrating our efforts on having a world-class track and trace system, on population-level testing to find those who are infected and infectious, and on ensuring that those people are isolated and unable to infect anyone else. We need to ensure that we are fully backward tracing, not just finding those an infected person has already been in contact with, but finding where they were infected in the first place. We know that you're more likely to pick up COVID at a superspreader event, and we need to identify these events and all those who were present at that event. I feel this is the only way we can control the virus. We break the chain of infection by ensuring the infectious are not allowed contact with the uninfected, not by instituting lockdowns and praying people will abide by the rules. We have to keep the public on side. Thank you.

The situation that we face now in Wales is grave, and we are seeing exponential growth of coronavirus. When I spoke last week, I highlighted the huge pressure on the NHS and on social care in Gwent. Since then, the situation has worsened. On Friday, the Aneurin Bevan health board became the first in Wales to suspend all non-urgent treatment due to the immense pressure services are under. I've spoken to social care staff who have described to me the distressing pressure they are under as the rising number of care home cases makes discharge from hospital hugely challenging or even impossible. I therefore welcome the coronavirus plan that was published yesterday, but, given the frightening rise in cases we are seeing, I don't believe that we can wait until after Christmas to take further action to stem the spread of this virus. I believe further measures are needed now, as we have seen in places like Germany.

I also want to place on record my continued concern about the arrangements for Christmas mixing. I know that everyone has had a really tough year and that we all want some respite from this dreadful virus, but I fear that if the plans proceed as they are at the moment, then it will come at the cost of more hospital admissions and further deaths, and I just don't think that is a price worth paying when we have the light of a vaccine at the end of this very dark tunnel we're in. Last week, I paid tribute to the health and social care staff in Wales, and I readily do that again today, but they don't need us to pay tribute to them. They need those of us who sit comfortably in this Chamber to do right by them, to take the tough decisions, to work together to stem the spread of this virus, and to keep them and everybody else in Wales safe.

I'm grateful to be able to participate in this debate, and I will address my remarks mainly to our amendment 9, as Rhun ap Iorwerth has said. We're grateful for the Government's acceptance of that amendment. These are, of course, incredibly difficult times. Restrictions are inevitable to protect public health. We may even need, as Lynne Neagle has just said, to restrict further over Christmas, perhaps to two households, with compassionate inclusions for those living alone. People's lives are of paramount importance.

But we do need to look ahead. The beginning of the vaccination programme, of course, gives us all reason to hope. We will, as a nation, as a community of communities, survive this terrible crisis, and we will do that best, we stand the best chance of building back not just better but really well, if we work together as much as we can. The Government is rightly focused at present on the immediate public health crisis and, in fairness, on trying to mitigate the inevitable serious impact on jobs and businesses. Our amendment calls on them to work more closely, particularly with those sectors hardest hit—hospitality, sports venues and cultural organisations—to develop more detailed road maps setting out the steps that will need to be taken to enable those sectors to open safely when the time is right. I must stress again, Llywydd, that I am not talking about now; I'm looking here at the medium term. The Government says they are in constant discussion with these sectors, but that is not what these businesses and organisations tell us. It may depend, of course, with whom in different sectors the Government is currently consulting. Naturally, it's not possible for the Government to speak to every individual business, music venue or sports club, but I would urge Welsh Government to take a fresh look to ensure that their consultations, looking ahead to the medium term, are as wide and as comprehensive as possible. As Adam Price and Rhun ap Iorwerth have said, we welcome this new plan, but, in terms of looking ahead to the medium term, further work is needed.

Our amendments suggest the Government facilitating direct engagement between sector representatives and the Government's scientific advisers. The scientific advisers, of course, are best placed to advise on the health risks. The sectors know their operations best, and are well used to working in complex regulatory environments around health and safety. Surely it makes sense to allow direct communication to improve the sector's understanding of the risks and the scientists' understanding of the practicalities. Given the Government's welcome acceptance of this amendment, I look forward, in the new year, to updates on direct discussions between scientific advisers under the sections I have mentioned.

Never, Llywydd, have we in Plaid Cymru so wanted the Welsh Government to succeed so that lives and livelihoods can be protected. We will continue to engage constructively—scrutinising, making constructive suggestions, supporting where we can, opposing where we must. This is, I believe, what the people of Wales expect of us. I commend both Plaid Cymru's amendments to this Senedd.

We are in the midst of an international crisis. All Governments around the world are doing what they can, the best they can to deal with the virus, the likes of which has not been seen for over 100 years in Europe and beyond. Death and infection rates go up and down—even in the UK, not long ago, Northern Ireland was top, then parts of England and now it’s Wales. This is not a race, though, Llywydd, because all politicians, I believe, are trying to do the best that they can in the circumstances they find themselves in.

There was criticism last week that only a week's notice had been given to pubs in Wales before they could close. In London this week, 48 hours' notice was given. Now, I could easily say, 'Well, doesn't that show a level of double standards?' but I'm not going to do that because this is how difficult it is to make predictions. This is how difficult it is for Governments in Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland and beyond to take decisions to protect people when the virus changes behaviour so quickly. It's difficult for business; there's no question about that. There are businesses out there that are thinking, 'Will I survive? Will I still be here next year?' There are businesses out there that, despite the support from Government, will wonder whether they have a future. But it is delusional to think that we can simply go back to normal and ignore the fact that the virus is here. And I've heard that argument being made.

There are some who've used the example of Sweden. They don't do that now, do they, Llywydd? There are some who talk about herd immunity. Let me tell them what 'herd immunity' means: it means either (a) you vaccinate everybody, or (b) you allow the virus to run wild through the community, picking off the weak, the elderly and the vulnerable along the way until you get that immunity. That is not humanity, to my mind, Llywydd. We cannot pretend that this virus is not here.

I heard Gareth Bennett, who basically said that the Welsh Government's efforts are a crypto-nationalist plot. That's what he said, in effect, and then he said that he demanded respect from a Chamber that he does not wish to see here in the first place. This is not about politics. This is not about, 'England did this, Wales did that. Let's compete with each other, let's criticise each other.' This is not what this is about. Each part of the UK is doing the best it can in the circumstances it finds itself to protect its people. I support the Welsh Government in what it does. I support the UK Government in what it's doing in England, because I know that they're doing the best that they can.

I heard Caroline Jones speak. She seemed to be saying not that we should have a regional approach, but that we should have one approach across the entire UK. One set of rules across the entire UK, regardless of where you are, whether you're in Warrenpoint on the border with the Republic of Ireland, or whether you are in the Outer Hebrides or, indeed, in London. That's the impression I had from the argument. That is not the reality of the situation.

We face, in Wales, this crisis together. We have light at the end of the tunnel, we know where the journey ends: there's a vaccine. The question is how many more people are we willing to lose on the way. Eighty years ago, Llywydd, in the whole of Europe and in this country, a generation faced a level of deprivation for six years in war that we cannot possibly imagine. They did not know what the future held. They had rationing, but they got on with it. Are we saying that, for a few months, until the vaccine arrives, we cannot put up with a mild level of restriction? Because if we are, we are not fit to follow in their footsteps.

There are people who think that this virus is a con. There are people who have received positive tests who then go to work and infect other people. The question for us as a society is this: future generations will look back at us and they will say, 'How effective were these people in dealing with this virus?' We need to be able to look them in the eye. The virus doesn't care about politics, doesn't care about Brexit, doesn't care about where in the UK it is, doesn't care about the EU, and we must remember that co-operation is key to ensuring that more people live, that more people have a future, and that more lives are saved. And on that basis, Llywydd, I will give my support to the Welsh Government, I will give my support to the UK Government, and to all governments around the world who are looking to make sure that their populations are protected in the future. No matter what our politics, no matter what our parties, that surely must be our guiding light.

We're debating this afternoon a control plan. Well, it's certainly a plan, but what is uncertain is whether we will actually control anything very much. We saw with the firebreak, as indeed I predicted when it was debated, that the numbers might come down for a short period but, as soon as the restrictions were lifted, that they would start to rise again. So, unless we're prepared, as the former First Minister appeared to be saying a moment ago, that we should have a lockdown that is indefinite and will stretch well into next year, I think that what we're doing today is not proportionate to the circumstances in which we find ourselves. The one word that has been markedly missing from the debate this afternoon is the word 'winter', and it was predicted right at the start of this pandemic that, when we got to the winter, cases were bound to rise, as all respiratory cases rise in the winter, although what is interesting about the figures for this year—and I've got a chart in front of me that compares 2020 with the previous five years—is how the death figures for all respiratory diseases are very much lower this year than any of the previous four years. That's not to minimise, of course, the importance of any death that is avoidable. But the question is whether these measures, which are going to do such tremendous damage to the economy, as everybody accepts, are going to be matched by some countervailing benefit in terms of the number of people who are hospitalised and ultimately die.

And, on that, I think that what is lacking also from this debate is the question of humility on the part of the Government. Sometimes it's hard—always hard, perhaps—to admit that you don't have supreme power to control events, and governments often find themselves in these circumstances. What is marked about the international experience, which has been referred to by both the First Minister and his predecessor this afternoon, is that, despite the very, very wide variations in the way in which governments have reacted to the pandemic, the disease has not been stopped in its tracks anywhere, in fact, quite the opposite. Now, the First Minister issued a challenge in his speech, saying that those who used to look up to Sweden no longer mention it. Well, I'm going to mention it this afternoon, because Sweden's experience is actually very interesting. The death rate per million is Sweden is 757. In the United Kingdom, it is 946. So, Sweden has a very much lower death rate than we have, and Sweden's figures are very much front-loaded because they failed to protect people in their care homes in the spring, and so the bulk of the deaths in Sweden relate to that failure of policy on the part of the Swedish Government then. If we look at the figures more recently, the death figures for Sweden for COVID were three on 21 October. They rose to 69 on 25 November, and they've consistently come down from that date of 25 November, until yesterday, 14 December, they had been reduced to as low as 17. Sweden has introduced one new measure in the last couple of months to restrict movements in Sweden, and that is to impose a maximum of eight on public gatherings, although if you are 16 people and go out to a restaurant together, you can have two tables of eight next to each other so long as you socially distance and keep your 1m or 2m apart. And so, the Swedish death rate is no worse, and often is consistently better, than other countries in the northern hemisphere who are advanced. 

So, the problem we've got here is that we have a fate that is most unwelcome about which governments don't seem to be able to do anything very much apart from make temporary actions that affect the disease, which otherwise has a remorseless progress. Maybe the vaccines will free us from this terrible world in which we now live. But the performance of the economy is going to have long, long-term effects upon people, and they're not just economic effects, they're also in terms of health and well-being. These are points that have all been well made by even those who support the Government in what it's trying to do. I've every sympathy with the First Minister and his colleagues in the predicament in which they find themselves, but I do believe that these measures are disproportionate, and that it's obvious that, where infection rates are low in some parts of Wales, the restrictions are going to impose an unnecessary cost. It's true also that, in other parts of Wales—urbanised areas in particular—we've not made the restrictions tough enough. So, I say to the Government just one thing, 'Please, make your regulations proportionate.'

I thank you, First Minister. I think we've had a really good debate in most places here today, and I welcome the fact that we are focusing on what we can do together—that is really pleasing not only in here, but I'm sure to the people out there too. And we are walking a very narrow path here, but we do have, as many people have said, a vaccine—or rather, vaccines—in view, and there is light at the end of the tunnel. But I believe that we must be guided by two key things, and those are collective effort, which we're seeing here today, and personal responsibility. And I think it's in that spirit that we can all give a collective message to the people of Wales and support today's message.

We do have, and we're moving forward, a national strategy, and there will be new alert levels within that system that will be clear and consistent, and will underscore the collective effort that is critical to that strategy. So, it won't matter whether you live in Cardiff or Crymych or Criccieth or Carno, the message and the rules will be the same. And we do, there is no doubt, have personal responsibility to stick to them, to suppress the virus and prevent our national health service from being overwhelmed. That said, though, I'm very nervous about people moving around, in and out of the country next week. And I share Lynne Neagle's concerns about the virus moving between families, moving between friends, over Christmas. I know that there have been no decisions yet on what the final make-up will be of those configurations within households, but I think the message is clear—that we're going to have to revisit that, and I guess that that is what's happening.

But you only have to look at the story of the pandemic in our region to understand how precarious the situation is. And it only took a single event in Cardigan—and elsewhere—where we had a super-spreader situation, where schools had to be shut, where businesses were completely disrupted, and everything else was also affected. That was one event. Until that event happened, the virus was under control. So, things move very quickly. It's very easy to say, 'We're okay here', but it isn't the case that these things stay as they are. We know now that, in our local health board area of Hywel Dda, there are 930 health board staff either absent or sick or isolating. So, it isn't simply the numbers of people who find themselves unfortunately in hospital, but it's the people who are able and available to treat those people. And I've heard the argument about, 'Small numbers of infection, so leave us alone'. But they are actually served by small hospitals, with small numbers of staff as well.

So, end is in sight. I'm really pleased that the debate today did take on what I consider a much better tone. I welcome that. And I think that we all owe our health staff and other front-line workers a duty, and that is to try and give them some hope for the new year, so that we don't overwhelm them. Thank you. 

This has been an incredibly difficult year, as many have said, and Governments across the globe have introduced restrictions that they would never have wanted to introduce. People have made huge sacrifices in their daily lives, but, sadly, people have passed away, and I think it is right that the Government's put public health and our residents' needs at the forefront of their mind.

Llywydd, I'm always frank in this Senedd, and I always I speak up for my community, and it is in that spirit today that I support the steps of the Welsh Government and the steps they have taken, but I also seek the adoption of a regional Welsh approach as soon as it is safe to do so. The facts on the ground in north and south Wales should be paramount and, where those facts support a variance of approach, we should allow it.

Llywydd, I won't take up too much time, because I know many other Members wish to speak in this very important debate today, and this is the last chance I will get to address the Senedd this year, as tomorrow I'll be attending the funeral of my beloved grandad. So, I want to take this opportunity, if I may, Llywydd, to say thank you to the residents of Alyn and Deeside. You have been nothing short of superb, and the steps you have taken to slow the spread of the virus have saved lives. So, from me, please stick with us as we look forward to a better future. Diolch yn fawr. 

The Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate. Vaughan Gething. 

Thank you, Llywydd, and thank thank you to Members for their contributions in today's debate. I have been struck by the tone from the overwhelming majority of contributors in recognising the seriousness of the situation that we face.

It was unfortunate that the debate started in response with Gareth Bennett calling for fair play and respect, before going on to make a series of unnecessary, personalised and untrue comments. This Government has never acted to pursue a course of politically motivated nonsense. The pandemic that we have faced these last 10 months has tested all of us. People may disagree with the choices we have made. I respect Members' rights to disagree, including to do so in a passionate way. But the choices the First Minister has made, the choices I have made, the choices that every Welsh Government Minister have made, have all been motivated by how we save lives and livelihoods, and that will continue to underpin our approach for the difficult road ahead. 

I welcome the fact that both Paul Davies and Adam Price, and many Members, broadly welcomed the publication of the updated coronovirus control plan with the updated alert levels. Paul Davies indicated that there needs to be public confidence in steps that we are taking, and, of course, that underpins why we have always published, from very early days, a regular summary of the scientific advice that we've received.

I think we can take some heart from the fact that the recent survey done by Ipsos MORI showed about 61 per cent support for the measures this Government is taking. And, in First Minister's questions, of course, we heard the comparison between how the public feel about measures taken by the UK Government and a positive mark in favour of the Welsh Government. But none of that is a matter of complacency and, in fact, the Welsh Government's ratings took a fall, because the recent evidence was undertaken over the time of the difficulties around the hospitality measures that we introduced. So, we certainly don't take for granted the continuing support and confidence of the people of Wales. And, in doing so, we have to recognise the impact upon our staff, and the fact that that will have a bearing on choices the public make and how they feel about the measures this Government is prepared to take.

Paul Davies recognised, as did Lynne Neagle and others, that two health boards are already reducing NHS activity. That will have an impact on future harm, and I'm afraid that more health boards will follow over these coming days and weeks, as the pressure mounts.

Now, in terms of the opportunity to continue to share information, we will continue to offer briefings from this Government directly to the leaders of the Welsh Conservatives and Plaid Cymru, as we head towards any significant interventions. That courtesy will continue: the regular briefings and also the briefings as we approach particular decision points. 

We will also work with the local authorities and want to recognise the way that they have managed to process payments for business support. We have the most generous package of business support in the UK, but that only gets to many businesses because of the work that our local government colleagues have done. And I know that both the local government Minister and the economy Minister are very grateful to local government colleagues for enabling us to do so. 

I recognise the comments Adam Price made about whether we can wait until 28 December. Ministers are considering each day the choices that we make and when we need to make them. Adam Price, and a number of others, made comments about the harm that has already been caused. It is an undeniable reality that, more recently, excess death rates in Wales have been higher than in England and that's in contrast to the course of the pandemic, because over the whole of the pandemic, from Office for National Statistics figures published to date, there were 13 per cent excess deaths in Wales—that's more than 3,000 extra deaths above the average in Wales—compared to 19 per cent of excess deaths in England. On either calculation, that is a significant amount of harm already caused, and it underpins why the Government continues to have to consider future extraordinary action to keep the people of Wales safe. I haven't seen the letter that Adam Price says that he sent to the First Minister, but any constructive approaches about how we might reach a future settlement will be welcome and will be discussed.

Now, on test, trace and protect, I should point out that the test, trace and protect staff in the course of the firebreak did increase staff numbers by a third. We've managed to maintain an effective performance thus far and what is actually compromising our performance now and in the future is the continued wave of demand that continues to rise with each week. In the last week, we still got to 81 per cent of contacts, but our concern is how quickly we can get to those contacts, how long we can continue to perform at that high level, and the demand reflects the reality of transmission across our community. We can't simply demand that test, trace, protect continues to insulate people from the consequences of the rapid spread of the virus through our communities.

I want to thank Dawn Bowden and others for their recognition of the difficult choices that Ministers face. In terms of the point about mass testing, I think it is important the analysis that Dawn Bowden has already asked for about the impact of mass testing in Merthyr Tydfil. I look forward to seeing that sooner rather than later to help determine other choices that we may take. I recognise her point, and the point made by Joyce Watson too, on the collective action we need to take to improve our health and economic future, and that goes alongside personal responsibility.

I was grateful to David Melding for his measured and supportive response in terms of recognising the need to act with the regulations that we have introduced, and equally signalling that he and others indicate that they would contemplate supporting action before Christmas as well as afterwards. And also the prospect of future regional changes that, again, Jack Sargeant indicated he would wish to see, if and when it is safe to do so, and we do set that out as a real prospect and possibility in the updated COVID control plan that we've published.

Now, turning to Rhun ap Iorwerth, I think it's fair to say the firebreak did work: it significantly reduced infections. What didn't work was a new settlement on behaviour change after the firebreak had ended. We collectively returned to more normal patterns of behaviour before the firebreak and that is what leads us to the position that we face today.

I recognise the call for more support, including support for people isolating. And our constant challenge is what we do about messaging the support we've already provided, but also the reality that every extra piece of support we provide has to come from somewhere, and our budget challenge, the extra pressures that health faces, the extra pressures that businesses face, and our ability then to have more money to support individuals to do the right thing for them, their family, their community and, of course, the country. But I do recognise that the Government has a role in leading and shaping debate and in influencing behaviour, but we cannot determine the behavioural choices for every member of the public. That's why I welcome the points made by Members across the political divide within the Chamber about personal responsibility.

I respectfully didn't agree with much of what Caroline Jones had to say. I don't accept that the reason why we don't have a single, UK-wide approach is because the Welsh Government has refused to co-operate with other Governments—far from it. We have regularly called for more co-operation between the Governments of the UK to understand the context in which we all operate, to have as much commonality as possible, and that is still where we are as a Government. We want to see more common approaches to help the public to understand what we ask them to do and why, and it will continue to be the approach that we take in our engagement with every one of the Governments within the United Kingdom.

I thank Lynne Neagle for her vivid description of the health and social care pressures within Gwent. They're also being faced by Members within Swansea Bay, the Cwm Taf Morgannwg Members, and, indeed, Cardiff and Vale Members would also recognise those pressures. And I'm afraid that Hywel Dda Members, thinking again about Joyce Watson's comments, will see those as rising pressures within the west of Wales too. And we see coronavirus cases increasing in the north of our country. This is a genuine national fight that we face against the virus and not a local or regional one, and we all need to play our part.

I hope that Helen Mary Jones is content with the fact that we recognised that scientific advisers do need to have an engagement with different business sectors. In fact, that has happened already with the sector representatives we've discussed—they haven't just spoken to Ministers, they have had engagement with representatives from the chief medical officer's department or the chief scientific adviser on health's department to try to explain the evidence that underpins each of the choices we have made. But we're happy to confirm that is the approach we will continue to take as we have to make difficult choices.

I thank Carwyn Jones for his comments as well, and, as ever, there was a distinction between the comments Carwyn Jones made about Sweden as not a model to follow and Neil Hamilton, who continues to want us to do so. As ever, there was a failure to compare Sweden with the reality of what has happened in Finland, Norway and Denmark—countries that compare much more neatly with how those populations respond to their Government and the practical situation within them. I do not believe that Sweden is a model for Wales or any part of the UK to follow. I think, though, when we talk about herd immunity, it's important to recognise that herd immunity can come from protection from a vaccine, and when Carwyn Jones made his comments, I'm very clear he's saying that that should not come from a survival of the fittest, or an abandonment of our most vulnerable citizens to their fate. That has never been the approach of this Government, and it never will be. I want our people to be protected by the vaccine.

And that's where I think we need to finish, Llywydd. The action plan is a response to the crisis that we face, the reality that more action will need to be taken by the Government and by each of us, in our families and communities, in the weeks and months ahead. The vaccine does offer hope, but to get there, we all need to face the crisis together and to travel that road together, and all of us need to act so that we do not lose people on the way. We may have other life events to celebrate together, but we cannot replace those who are lost, those who are lost unnecessarily.

The pandemic will end. We will get to a position where we will protect our people through effective coverage with a vaccine, but the actions that we take, in every home, in every family, will determine how many of us finish this journey together to help rebuild our country. All of us have a part to play to keep Wales safe, and I hope that Members will feel able to support the Government with amendments to the motion today, but more than that, to support every part of our country in the difficult months that lie ahead. Thank you, Llywydd.

The proposal is to agree amendment 3. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections, and I will therefore defer all voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.