6., 7., 8. & 9. The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 5) (Wales) Regulations 2020, The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 5) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2020, The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 5) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020 and The Health Protection (Coronavirus, South Africa) (Wales) Regulations 2020

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:16 pm on 12 January 2021.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Vaughan Gething Vaughan Gething Labour 5:16, 12 January 2021

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for his report on both the merits and technical scrutiny. It is always an important function to make sure that the law is as consistent as possible, and even where we don't agree, it is certainly, I think, a continually important function to make sure that the law is in good shape.

Turning to the Conservative health spokesperson, I'm pleased to have support for the regulations indicated, and the challenge about how we use the latitudes that the alert levels give us about the path to potentially stepping down in the future, well, there are some metrics within the alert levels in the plan that I know the Member will have looked at. We also, though, have to have a broader understanding of the system pressures that we face and of the movement that we see. That's why we are looking for a sustained improvement before looking to come out of alert level 4, either across the whole country or potentially, as I and the First Minister have indicated, within regions of the country as well.

Now, that can't be neatly described on a piece of paper in the way that some of the metrics in the plan can be. But we do know that, at present, it's unfortunately the case that our critical care units are operating at over 150 per cent across Wales. We know that we have a record number of people occupying hospital beds at this point in time. We know that we have field hospitals open in different parts of Wales. We know that we have a real challenge in getting recovering patients out of acute beds, and that is partly because, in significant part, we've got very real pressure in our social care system. So, without seeing a recovery in terms of staff in social care and our ability to put people into different parts of the system where they can be cared for appropriately, we have that whole-system pressure that colleagues within primary care will see in their day-to-day activity as well. And that is less easy to describe in the sort of metrics that we already have in the plan.

But, as we're going through each of the regular reviews that we undertake—I think this goes into some of the points that Rhun ap Iorwerth was making—we have regular advice from our chief medical officer, our scientific adviser and the technical advisory group, and I think it's a good thing that we're used to a regular pattern now of publishing the advice of the chief medical officer, alongside any choices that Ministers make in terms of the restrictions that are in place. So, I hope that will give the Member and others who are watching some assurance. It isn't simply a matter of Ministers choosing on a whim to do things; it is informed by direct evidence. It's also informed by the best available public health advice that we have and we'll continue to be transparent about that.

On the Member's point about vaccine passports, this is a matter of media briefing rather than policy. There's been no serious discussion at all. In fact, I haven't had a single discussion with health Ministers in other parts of the UK about vaccine passports. These matters are often floated before there is a serious discussion and it's not a serious matter for now. There may be something akin to that, particularly for international travel. I can foresee a time in the future when it's not just the policy choices that are being made across the UK to have pre-travel tests undertaken, but the potential for vaccination in the way that some of us are used to needing a vaccine stamp to travel to other parts of the world is part of what we're used to.

On your question, again, about lighthouse labs testing for the Kent variant within the UK, these are lighthouse labs that test for it. There are only a handful of those within the UK. Public Health Wales, as I said, is working with colleagues in England to have a more representative sample from south Wales sent through. We have a good understanding in north Wales.

As I'm sure the Member will have seen in the technical advisory group report that was published alongside our schools choices, we have provided a map of where the new variant has already seeded and is understood in Wales. The map in north Wales is more comprehensive than the one in the south, but the overall picture shows that it is seeded everywhere. However, all of the new variants, including the variants of concern, still show up positive in the positive coronavirus testing. So, people can have the assurance that, if they get a positive test, even if it is a new variant of concern, they will get an accurate positive test.

I know that the Member was unable to attend the committee briefing today with myself, the chief medical officer and the chief scientific adviser on health. But, again, we have had the indication that there are thousands of variations of coronavirus that are already identified. That, in many ways, isn't really an issue. As the deputy chief medical officer said in public, every virus mutates and changes and has variations.

The issue is where there are variations of concern and the reasons for that. Just as we did with the Danish mink variation, just as we have with the South African variation, just as we have with the Kent variant, these are variants of concern because there are particular properties. Prompt action in Denmark appears to have avoided the harm that the Danish mink variation could have caused in retransmission into humans, where it might have affected the efficacy of vaccines. That's a good thing. We all work together, not just within the UK but across Europe, to share information.

When it comes to Kent and the South African variants, the higher transmissibility is driving, certainly, the Kent variant spreading across the UK. There are much higher rates of hospitalisation in every UK nation, which is why Chris Whitty said at the start of this week that these are the most difficult days for the national health service within the course of the pandemic. As variants of concern are identified, information is shared promptly between officials and between chief medical officers. Indeed, there are proper and grown-up conversations between the health Ministers of all four parts of the UK, regardless of our differing political parties.

I'm pleased to have the broad support of Rhun ap Iorwerth and Plaid Cymru for the regulations as well. Again, the regional approach for the future: it really is for the future. We are not there yet, and it will take significant improvement to have a realistic prospect of moving out of level 4 at the end of this month. But, we take on board the point that, if there is that significant regional variation that is sustained, then we may be able to make different choices within different parts of Wales.

I recognise the points that he has made about whether exercise should be permitted if people are driving or travelling a bit further afield for exercise. But, just to reiterate, to be fair, the Member has attended all—or nearly all—of the briefings that we have provided with myself and the CMO to the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee members. In those, there's the opportunity to ask questions about where we are and about the advice that is given about the nature of the public health threat, and about whether there is something to be achieved in changing parts of the regulations or the regime that we have had.

The reason that we have a 'stay at home' requirement—not guidance, but a requirement at present—is because of the level of seriousness that we have. That will remain the case for the foreseeable future, and as we are able to make different choices—. You will recall that, coming out of the spring lockdown, we were able to make some different choices about people's ability to move from 'stay at home' to 'stay local'. We are not in a position to move to 'stay local' at this point in time, so it's really important that there is a very clear message from the Government and, indeed, all Members from all political backgrounds, that the rules require us to stay at home.

Exercise should start and end at your home whether you are on foot or on a bicycle. So, that's the requirement. When we have different choices available to us, I would be keen for us to be able to do so, because that would signal that we are in a different position again with the course of the pandemic and the protection that we can provide, with a different set of ways to all play our part in helping to keep Wales safe. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.