Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Tom Giffard.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I start by welcoming the written statement issued by the Deputy Minister that was provided to all Members last week on the Football Association of Wales's proposals to restructure the women's league in Wales? I'm sure all of us in this Chamber agree with the vision of developing and improving the women's game in Wales, but, unfortunately, in order to achieve this goal, the FAW have decided to reorganise the league structure of the women's game in Wales in a way that many of us have serious reservations about. 

Sport is, and should be, about merit, and promotion and relegation is a part of the game, but it should be decided on results on the field. So, with that in mind, I wanted to express my disappointment that Briton Ferry Llansawel Ladies, Cascade YC Ladies and Abergavenny Women FC were all relegated from the top division of the women's game as part of the restructure. Whilst I know it's a decision made, Minister, by the FAW and not by Welsh Government, can I ask what discussions you've had with the FAW on this matter and what support is the FAW and Welsh Government offering to those clubs that have been unfairly affected by the change?

Can I thank the Member for that question and for the meeting that I had with him on 24 June, when we discussed this issue? Subsequently, I did meet with the FAW and they made several commitments that I expect them to deliver on. Firstly, they agreed to meet the clubs affected by the changes and to discuss any further support that they may need. And I understand that a positive meeting has already been held with Cascade Ladies, and the FAW have also said that they're going to be setting up a players' forum for tiers 1 and 2, which will meet monthly and will enable the FAW to better understand issues from a player's perspective. And they are also giving feedback to FIFA that women players need to be more involved in the decisions that affect their game. 

The FAW do accept that they need to reflect on how they communicated these changes publicly and they are also committed to closer dialogue with Welsh Government through monthly meetings with officials and with myself as well. But ultimately, the matter of the restructuring of the women's game in Wales is a matter for the FAW, but I do expect them to deliver on the commitments that they've given to me.

Can I thank you for that answer, Deputy Minister? So, keeping to the theme of sport, I'd like to now turn to sporting pilot events that have taken place in Wales. In a question to the First Minister a month ago, I asked for an update on sporting pilot events that have taken place across Wales over the previous few weeks. In his reply, he said there would be a further set of pilot events. But, unfortunately, since he answered that question, no further timetable has emerged and he was not specific about when this timetable would emerge either. So, can I ask you when the Senedd can expect more information on the further set of pilots the First Minister promised?

And, secondly, we've also seen in England, with the Events Research Programme, where over 58,000 participants attended indoor and outdoor events, including matches at Wembley stadium, that no substantial outbreaks were linked to these events. So, we know that sporting events can be conducted safely in England. Whilst we've seen detailed findings from these phase 1 events, we're yet to see the findings from the Welsh Government's pilots. So, can the Minister confirm what support there is for clubs that are still having to limit the amount of fans that enter their stadiums? And will the Welsh Government publish the findings from its initial events pilot so that we can see whether these sporting events can be run safely in Wales, as they have been in England, and so that Members of this Senedd and the public can understand the rationale for any future decisions?

As the Member knows, phase 2 of the pilot events involved nine events here in Wales, including Eid and Tafwyl at Cardiff castle, We Need Bees in Brecon, and Wales versus Albania. All of those were completed successfully and work on the final report will be completed shortly. Ahead of that, many of the findings have informed some of the revised events guidance. We're still in detailed discussions with events organisers regarding a third phase of pilot events, with a focus on indoor events. So, the decisions on the way forward on any further relaxation of restrictions on events are going to be taking place at the 21-day review and we fully appreciate, of course, that the value of events to our visitor economy is significant and, therefore, we need to continue to support the sector throughout the next phase.

I think it's probably important to say that, when we are looking at the report that we've had from the English test pilots, they don't yet give us as much information as we need about the transmission of the virus at those events. The post-events testing was very, very small. There's a lot that we need to take into account when we are still dealing with the rise in the delta variant at the moment. But the programme for the third phase is ongoing, there are further test events planned, and the details will be published as soon as we're in a position to do so.  

Thank you for that answer. Unfortunately, there's still a bit of inconsistency when it comes to the return of spectators to sporting events and sports clubs across Wales. So, as fans return to stadia in smaller numbers, it's also been raised with me some of the inconsistencies of the COVID regulations surrounding sport. Whilst it's a welcome sight to see some Wales fans returning to support the Welsh rugby team at the Principality stadium for the most recent set of internationals, as well as some fans returning to other sporting events, the rules around them remain unclear. So, for example, at the Principality stadium, fans are being asked to wear masks around the venue but they can be removed in their seat. Meanwhile, the Football Association of Wales has announced that up to 100 fans can return to the Welsh Premier League fixtures. They have also said that masks must be worn at all times, as well as a temperature check and a medical questionnaire upon entry, none of which the Welsh Rugby Union deems are requirements for its fixtures. Glamorgan Cricket have said that masks do not need to be worn whilst seated but, like the WRU, do need to be worn whilst walking around the stadium, whilst temperature checks are being undertaken upon entry, like the FAW but unlike the WRU. So, there's also an issue of a clear inconsistency there. 

There's also an issue around household bubbles. The FAW in its Welsh Premier League guidance and Glamorgan Cricket have both said that those not living in the same household cannot sit together, whereas the WRU website for ticketholders for Saturday's game says, 'As per Welsh Government guidelines, there is no restriction on who you can attend with', which is different again from the rule of six, for example, in pubs and restaurants. Whilst I understand the designing of the COVID regulations are the responsibility of the health Minister, your role as the Deputy Minister responsible for sport is to ensure that sporting organisations have a consistent understanding of Welsh Government regulations and, at the moment, some of our biggest sporting organisations in Wales have vastly different interpretations of Welsh Government regulations in this area. So, can I ask: what action are you taking to ensure not only a consistent understanding of the regulations by all sporting bodies, but also that fans attending sporting events are treated equitably as people attending other venues, such as pubs and restaurants? 

I think the guidance that has been issued to all of these organisations is consistent. What is a matter for the organisations themselves is to undertake their own risk assessments based on their venues, their numbers and how they are going to mitigate against the infection. So, whether it's an indoor or an outdoor event. So, the guidance is consistent. What are not, necessarily, are the decisions that the organisers of those events make in terms of the venues and the numbers involved, because that is dependent upon the individual risk assessment for each event. 

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Luke Fletcher. 

Diolch, Llywydd. The Minister will know that I welcome the extension of current business support until the end of August, and I was grateful for the opportunity, of course, provided by the Minister for a briefing before the announcement was made. But of course, some of the hardest-hit sectors are those that depend on members of the public mixing together both indoors and in close proximity, all of which are activities that have been either severely restricted or prohibited in law for much of the past year. For example, the effects of these restrictions have fallen heavily on businesses and organisations in the culture sector, such as theatres, live music venues and nightclubs. The night-time industry is the UK's fifth-biggest industry but it's estimated that by the time nightclubs can reopen, there will be 40 per cent to 50 per cent fewer operating compared to pre-COVID figures. Whilst nightclubs understand they are closed to protect public health, they feel like there's a significant lack of clarity regarding reopening.

Of course, the pandemic is unpredictable and we can't fall into the trap of giving arbitrary dates for reopening but, as things stand, the culture sector have no idea what reopening will look like. Whilst the financial support provided to the sector is, of course, welcome, businesses will need time to prepare to operate them; from personal experience, that's often around four weeks' notice and, in some cases, several months. Even if they can't fully open right now, it would be very helpful to know some details. So, could the Government provide an outline of what exact conditions will allow for reopening, and would it be linked to the vaccination programme and/or the infection rate, for example, and what will reopening look like for venues that require close proximity?  

I think the challenge in giving an honest answer to that question is that we don't know all of the issues around that, and we've just got to be honest about this. We know that we're in the midst of a significant spike in coronavirus infections. We know that there is a different relationship between infections and harm. It's why the hospitalisation and the death rate have not climbed in the way that we've seen in the past. And, to be frank, with the rates we see today, if we didn't have the success of the vaccination programme, we'd have already gone into reverse. Now that's good news, because it shows we have got more latitude. What we can't say, though, is, 'We have an exact formula now that tells us about the amount of harm that would be caused and the extra latitude we have.' We're working through that, though, and what I can't do is pre-empt the conversations that we have not finished within the Government with the advice we have still not had finalised from our scientific advisers, and indeed our public health advisers too. We do, though, understand right across the Government that we're in a phase now where the balancing of the health harms and the economic harms and others we've always had to look at is now shifting towards the greater harms in terms of economic activity. That doesn't mean to say there's no balance to be struck, but we do think we're in a different relationship.

So, yes, we will continue to look at the emerging evidence on the changed, not broken, relationship between infections and harm. We will continue to look at pressure within the NHS. We will continue to look at the impact on the economy. And we will continue to look at the success of the vaccination programme. That will allow us to have the conversations that are already taking place with the events sector, with hospitality, with others. Nightclubs are one of the few sectors that still remain closed, and we're looking to give them the sort of perspective they will need to allow themselves to reopen safely and, as the Deputy Minister said in answer to previous questions, to think about their own processes for the guidance that will be in place, for their own risk assessment that they will need to undertake for their staff and their customers.

Thank you, Minister, and I'd hope, of course, that conversations continue with the night-time industry so that they can gain some clarity as we go forward. If I could move on to the job retention scheme, of course the Minister again will be aware that we've had several discussions outside this Chamber on this subject. The UK Government has begun the gradual process of winding up the retention scheme. As of 1 July, the Government will drop its contribution to furloughed workers' salaries from 80 per cent to 70 per cent, and from 1 August it will pay 60 per cent of a furloughed employee's wage, leaving employers to pick up the missing 10 per cent for the first time—a decision with significant consequences for thousands of Welsh firms across Wales. While young people made up the majority of workers initially placed on furlough, the reopening of shops, bars and restaurants has allowed many under-25s to return to work or find new jobs in those sectors in recent months, but many workers and businesses are still struggling. Older employees could face an increased risk, given that around half of those still on furlough are 45 or over, according to the Resolution Foundation, which has said in its annual living standards audit for 2021, that this pattern of younger workers more swiftly returning from furlough has resulted in older workers on full furlough bearing the highest risk of having been out of work for long time periods. It's estimated that as many as one in four staff who are still reliant on the scheme are aged 55 to 64. What analysis has the Welsh Government made of the demographic breakdown of people in Wales who remain on furlough, and does the Minister share the concerns of the Resolution Foundation that it is older employees who could face higher levels of unemployment with the end of the furlough scheme approaching?

Our position on labour market intelligence and relationships that we have not just with the broader surveys but from business sectors themselves is one that we continue to look at, as we discuss the further path to opening up parts of our economy, as restrictions, we still think, can be eased in the future. That's the incomplete conversation that I referred to in your first question.

I don't think it's quite as simple as saying that it will be older or younger workers who will be affected, because actually we know that lots of younger workers have been hit extremely hard during the pandemic as well, and in the sectors you mentioned some people are going back to work, but also those sectors face a real labour challenge in that some people have moved on to different industries and different jobs. So, we have a challenge across a range of ages, and the risk for younger people is that if they're not able to re-enter the world of work, that can have a scarring effect on their future potential and ability to achieve. And older workers, if they're out of work for a long time, and if firms do make choices of either reducing head count or closing their business, as we see the stepped down support from furlough, then there is a real risk, and we've seen this many times with economic shocks in the past, that it can be very difficult for people, particularly higher skilled people, to return to the world of work on salaries that are commensurate, and that in itself has a real impact. So, at more than one age range, we recognise there are significant risks that we're managing in the economy at present. It's why we've called for the UK Government to reconsider its approach to furlough and to think about a more agile way of supporting businesses as those choices are made, and the opening up of our economy is not complete in any part of the UK, and we're equally not entirely certain what will happen in the pandemic and what that may mean about future economic activity as well.

Of course, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has also warned that an extra cost being assumed by struggling businesses could result in tens of thousands of workers facing redundancies. To ensure the possible outcome outlined by the IFS of a reduction and ending of furlough does not occur in Wales, has the Welsh Government undertaken any contingency planning to enable them to continue supporting Welsh workers and businesses through furlough if support from Westminster is cut off?

And further to this, of course, in Wales, despite the number of people on furlough reducing steadily over the past few months, as of last week, there are still 88,000 jobs in Wales still furloughed. Of course, you yourself have warned that furlough should not be withdrawn before the Welsh economy is ready, and at Westminster, my colleague Ben Lake has accused the UK Treasury of rigidly sticking to dates with regard to financial support even though uncertainty continues to loom large over the economy. With a continued risk of economic instability as we emerge from the pandemic, it is crucial that the Treasury keeps maximum flexibility to its approach if it is to truly support people and businesses out of this crisis.

The TUC has also warned Ministers not to pull the plug on the UK's economic recovery by cutting off support for workers and businesses too soon. Should the public health situation unexpectedly deteriorate as we approach autumn and winter, is the Welsh Government prepared to step up to the mark and support Welsh workers and businesses? And with the Chancellor's decisions weaving in with the Prime Minister's announcement this week of England easing all restrictions from 19 July, will the Welsh Government be modelling not only how this will impact the public health situation in Wales but the economic environment as well? Does the Minister also agree that if Westminster gets this wrong, with both the economic and health situation deteriorating, this could end up costing us in the long run?

Obviously, if the UK Government don't take proper account of what will happen next with the pandemic that we all want to see come to an end, then it could have significant public health and economic consequences, and there's plenty of commentary about that and about the balance of risk in the choice the Prime Minister has made for England in terms of its reopening and what that may mean for infections, which they themselves have modelled will rise significantly.

Now, here in Wales, we have made deliberate choices about supporting businesses with more generous business support to get through the pandemic. It's why I was able to announce the further stage of business support to get through to the end of August, so there's a bit more certainty for businesses as we still make choices about reopening. And I was happy to provide a briefing to yourself and, indeed, the offer was made to the Conservative spokesperson as well.

Our challenge, though, will be to think about how we're able to do that more successfully in the future and the resources that we still have retained to support businesses. Now, we're in this position because we have managed other parts of the pandemic in a different way. So, we have more latitude because we've managed our PPE acquisition in a different way, with less cost and more efficiently and you haven't seen any kind of a whiff of a VIP lane in Wales because it doesn't exist. We've also got a test, trace and protect service that is much more efficient and doesn't cost anything like as much as the system in England. Those have given us more latitude to be more generous in our support to businesses. I'm already working through with officials and having conversations with business sectors about how we might support them during the recovery with the resources that we have available.

Of course, all of those things could take a different point. Rather than investing in the recovery and investing in future skills and innovation, we may need to return to investing in more emergency support. We have some ability to do that, but if the pandemic does take another unexpected course, then we would, of course, expect that the UK Government would provide UK resources for businesses right across the UK if that's the position we were in. But I am optimistic that we will be able to make positive choices in the future and properly balancing public health together with our economic future.