5., 6. & 7. The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions and Functions of Local Authorities) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2020, The Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Restrictions) (Amendment) (No. 3) (Wales) Regulations 2020 and The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 4) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2020

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 4:02 pm on 15 December 2020.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Rhun ap Iorwerth Rhun ap Iorwerth Plaid Cymru 4:02, 15 December 2020

(Translated)

I'll deal with the regulations in turn. Item 5 first of all, the item that's been debated most. Indeed, it was the subject of a debate here in the Senedd last week, and because of that I will keep my comments brief. My views are on the record already, as are Plaid Cymru's, and I will speak more on our position on the latest situation regarding the pandemic in the debate on the new coronavirus restrictions under item 17 this afternoon.

Our views on the first set of regulations haven't changed. We abstained last week, not because we oppose restrictions—we can see the gravity of the situation in many parts of Wales, and I made it clear that we were supportive of taking serious steps to respond to that and to prevent further spread—but it was the lack of logic of certain elements that concerned us, the total ban on alcohol and the fact that places such as restaurants would have to close very early in the evening, where the evidence on the role of such places in the spread of the virus is not particularly strong. Our concern, simply—and this applies to all the regulations that we are discussing—is that if people can't see the rationale of the steps taken, that undermines trust in Government and the ability of Government to deal with the pandemic. The rationale is questioned most in those areas that have a relatively low number of cases. No area can consider themselves safe, obviously, but it does add to the argument in terms of varying the response from one area to another, and we can discuss that later on today.

In terms of item 6, we will support that. The evidence seems robust in terms of justifying the reduction in the self-isolation period after having travelled abroad from 14 to 10 days. There is clear justification for allowing a child that is self-isolating to move between the homes of two parents, for example.

Moving on to item 7, we will support—and I note that the Conservatives have said that they will abstain—we will support because we need these regulations in place in order to introduce changes that are entirely reasonable to my eyes: the need, although nobody would want to be in this situation, to close indoor attractions, cinemas and so on, galleries, museums and so on and so forth.

But I do have a concern about certain outdoor attractions, where I think that the evidence for fresh air and its role in the response to this pandemic is very strong now. I have an e-mail, as it happens it’s from my constituency, but it’s representative of what’s happening elsewhere too. I know of a business that runs boat trips from Anglesey that had sold a high number of tickets for trips over the Christmas period. They are now having to repay their clients and they say, ‘Well, yes, we’re playing our part’ and they understand the gravity of the situation, as do we all, but once again they make the point that they need more intensive support and financial support for businesses, that they need more notice, that they need more information about what’s happening. This business owner says that many businesses that he speaks to still don’t know that there is a requirement for them to close. So, this message is arising time and time again during this pandemic: 'There is a lack of clarity in this case. Why do we need to close? Surely we’ve done everything we need to do, but we accept that we have to close, so please make sure that the communication is better at all levels.'

But, as I say, there are parts of the regulations that are important, so we will support, but with that appeal once again, to the Government, that you must get the communication right.