None of these important questions have been settled yet, and they will all need to be carefully considered. They'll need to be consulted upon and agreed before the inquiry can start its work, which, hopefully, will be next year.

I've listened very carefully to the points that have been made in this debate, and I will ensure that those points are fed into consideration as discussions continue between the United Kingdom Government and the devolved administrations on the establishment of the inquiry. And, of course, there will be further opportunities for these matters to be considered in the future.

I know there have been calls for an urgent inquiry in Wales to enable us to learn lessons that we can apply immediately in respect of the pandemic. But it's really important for us to remember that the pandemic is not over. We're all familiar with the rising numbers that we see now as we're entering the third peak. The very people who need to be focused on keeping people safe, on continuing to make difficult decisions to steer Wales through the pandemic, would be the people needing to contribute to the inquiry, and now is not the time to divert their attention and to add to their load.

We should remind ourselves that public inquiries are not the only, and sometimes not the best, way to improve practice swiftly. Public inquiries are many things, but they are not urgent, I'm afraid. They have to be set up in accordance with specific legislation that governs inquires, it takes time to identify a chair, to decide on scope, to consult on terms of reference and then to get the work up and running. The inquiry, then, has to call for evidence and listen to oral evidence, and then sift and consider all the information presented to it before it reaches its conclusions and recommendations. That's not going to happen overnight.

There are many other feedback and learning mechanisms through which the Government and the NHS can adapt approaches in the light of experience. We're drawing on these mechanisms in real time to adapt practices as we go along. Setting up a Welsh inquiry, as has been proposed in some quarters, and I'm sure for the best of motives, is, I appreciate, important for some, but it would actually slow us down from our agile approach of drawing on experience to develop our approach in dealing with the next phase of the pandemic. It would, as Jane Dodds has pointed out, also distract attention from addressing the waiting list backlog. 

We recognise the impact that the COVID pandemic has had on everyone, and the loss of loved ones that people have experienced. We are committed, absolutely, to learning and improving outcomes. For example, the NHS in Wales has put a framework in place to review all incidents of COVID-19 transmission within hospitals, so that they can identify any learning, and, importantly, help to answer questions families may have. There are also established arrangements in place, called 'Putting Things Right', to raise concerns about patient care and treatment, and we would encourage individuals to contact their individual health board directly if they have concerns. There are established mortality review processes in place for the review of all deaths in hospital. In addition, the new medical examiner service is in the process of being rolled out across Wales, and that will increasingly involve the independent scrutiny of all deaths. 

There is much agreement in the Senedd today. We all share a conviction that it's appropriate that there should be a thorough, independent and professional inquiry into the preparedness of the UK for a pandemic, and how the pandemic has been managed, so that lessons can be learnt for the future. The Welsh Government will go into the forthcoming inquiry with a positive and constructive approach, so as to assist the inquiry to do the best possible job, and to help enable the nation to be properly equipped to deal with future global health emergencies. But now is not the time for a Welsh public inquiry.