The next item is item 5, the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 5) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 19) Regulations 2021, and I call first on the Minister for Health and Social Services to move the motion, Eluned Morgan. 

Motion NDM7822 Lesley Griffiths

To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 27.5:

1. Approves that the draft The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 5) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 19) Regulations 2021 is made in accordance with the draft laid in the Table Office on 29 October 2021.

Motion moved.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and I move the motion before us this afternoon. I stand here in sadness today in bringing forward regulations to increase the use of the COVID pass. However, I must once again emphasise that coronavirus has not disappeared, and unfortunately the situation in Wales remains very serious. The number of cases of COVID-19 is still very high and has been increasing in some areas. In the current wave, we have seen the highest number ever of cases confirmed in Wales. At the moment, the transmission rate is 527 for every 100,000. These consistently high rates do lead to serious illness for increasing numbers of people. This is also putting pressure on our health service, which is already under huge pressure.

Although the link between cases of COVID-19 and hospital admissions has been weakened by the vaccination programme, the link has not been entirely broken. The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 5) (Wales) Regulations 2020 did introduce the legislative framework for the alert levels in the coronavirus control plan. Members will now be highly aware of the process for reviewing these restrictions on a three-weekly cycle. After the last review on 28 October, and in response to an increase in the number of cases across Wales, the First Minister, Mark Drakeford, announced our intention to expand the requirement to show a COVID pass.

If the requirement to present a COVID pass is passed today, it will mean that from 15 November, people over the age of 18 in Wales will need to show a pass before they are allowed entry to cinemas, theatres and concert halls. This will prove they are either fully vaccinated or have had a negative lateral flow test in the last 48 hours. Now, I'm aware that this decision has not been universally welcomed by stakeholders, but let me tell you that this decision was not taken lightly, and these venues have been chosen because they are indoors and they see large numbers of people congregating closely together for a prolonged period of time. As we know, the longer large numbers of people are close together, especially indoors, the greater the risk of transmission. I must stress that these measures have been designed to keep these businesses open during the difficult autumn and winter months ahead, and the alternative in the current climate will mean a return to more stringent controls and restrictions in the run-up to Christmas.

Members will be aware that since 11 October people have been required to show an NHS COVID pass to enter nightclubs, similar venues and events. Officials have been working closely with stakeholders in these sectors, and I think it's important that we acknowledge that the service is working well and that we have received largely positive feedback from a range of businesses and organisers of major events, including following the recent rugby internationals. It is also clear that the majority of the public support the use of the COVID pass and the added assurance that the system provides for them.

Wales currently remains at alert level 0, and our aim is to avoid having to close sectors or reintroduce restrictions. However, the situation is serious, and in order to remain at alert level 0, it is critical that organisations and businesses comply with the baseline measures at this alert level, and what that means is that wearing face coverings in most indoor public places remains a legal requirement. We're asking employers to do more to help people work from home wherever possible. When case rates in the community are high, contacts in the workplace can be a significant driver of transmission. Businesses must also continue to carry out a specific coronavirus risk assessment and take responsible measures to minimise risk.

Vaccination remains our most effective defence. Our aim is to reach as many people as possible with the first, second, and booster doses. To keep Wales safe and open over the winter, we need a concerted effort from all parts of Welsh society, and I urge Members to support this motion. Diolch.

I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and I speak as the committee Chair now. We considered these regulations at our meeting yesterday, following a request from the Welsh Government to expedite our scrutiny, and our report was laid immediately afterwards.

Our report raised what Members will now recognise as quite familiar merits points under Standing Order 21.3, namely highlighting any potential interference with human rights, and the lack of formal consultation and equality impact assessment for the regulations. We acknowledged the Welsh Government’s justification in relation to these points, as set out in the explanatory memorandum. However, for the purpose of today's debate, I would like to highlight our subsequent discussion on the regulations and in particular, on the wording used in the accompanying written statement from the Welsh Government. I know that the issue of what is guidance and what is law was raised with the Minister for Health and Social Services in this Chamber last Tuesday. If I draw attention of the Chamber to the written statement, it says that, and I quote:

'Fully vaccinated adults and children aged five to 17 must self-isolate if someone in their household has symptoms or tests positive for Covid-19 until they have had a negative PCR test result.'

However, neither these regulations, nor the No. 20 regulations, which we also considered yesterday, require isolation as described in the statement. Now, our committee thinks that this presents a concerning lack of clarity over what is law and what may, indeed, be sensible Government advice. Similar concerns were raised by our predecessor committee in its scrutiny of some COVID-related regulations during the fifth Senedd, and they were noted in the legacy report.

So, on this occasion, we agreed to write to the Welsh Government to seek clarification, and to highlight the importance of Welsh citizens being able to understand the law that applies to them. Thank you very much, Llywydd.

The Welsh Conservatives warned that the introduction of COVID passports in Wales would set a dangerous precedent, and it gives me no pleasure today to say that we were right.

It's just a few short weeks since the introduction of COVID passports here in Wales, and yet, in spite of no clear or credible evidence that they have an ability to stop the spread of coronavirus, we find ourselves today debating yet another proposal to extend their use beyond the large events and night-time economy, now to cinemas, theatres and concert halls, and this is in spite of the fact that there's no evidence to suggest that these venues are the hotbed of virus infection.

Llywydd, as you are well aware, the Welsh Conservatives have been opposed to the introduction of vaccine passports from the outset. The mandatory use of domestic vaccination passports has wide-ranging ethical, equality, privacy, legal and operational ramifications. We, like other Members of this Senedd, are absolutely committed to protecting lives and livelihoods. We understand that the final stages of unlocking society and the economy have to be done carefully. But, with the vaccination rate in Wales being so high and the link between cases and hospitalisations being severely weakened, we do not believe that the introduction of barriers that impact on people's freedoms and privacy is the right thing to do.

Vaccine passports are not a route out of restrictions, they are restrictions. They should not be expanded into other premises when they should never have been introduced or put on the table in the first place. Vaccine passports are coercive, ineffective and anti-business; they limit our freedoms but they do not limit the spread of COVID-19.

Now, we're often told by Labour Ministers that they are listening to the experts, so let's consider what the experts have been saying. The Welsh Government's technical advisory cell on coronavirus said that COVID passes will have a minimal impact on the spread of the virus. And Dr Frank Atherton, the Welsh Government's own chief medical officer, said just last week that the actual direct impact of COVID passes is probably quite small. And he went further than that, he actually said that the evidence is still building around COVID passes, and that the bigger impact was over messaging and using COVID passes alongside other restrictions such as face coverings. Now, if the Welsh Government's own chief medical officer is not convinced that they make a real difference, then how on earth can you expect Members of this Senedd today, along with the public and businesses the length and breadth of this country, to be convinced that they are? The idea of a COVID pass was outlined and implemented in Wales at very short notice, and these latest proposals are similar, with very little consideration of how it will actually impact those businesses and organisations that will be affected. The entertainment industry has already been ravaged by COVID-19 restrictions, and the extension of COVID passports to cinemas, theatres and concert halls will only punish them further. The chief executive officer of the UK Cinema Association has warned that this move could lead to the closure of many smaller venues, stating that, and I quote,

‘where similar schemes have been introduced in...European territories, we have seen admissions drop by as much as 50%.'

This is people’s jobs and livelihoods on the line. 

And lives.

And the chief executive of the Creative Hospitality Group had said that there was a huge lack of trust in the Welsh Government, and that, despite employing 10 per cent of the Welsh population, the industry feels belittled by the First Minister. Why is an industry that is so important to the Welsh economy being singled out by the Welsh Government? Why are Ministers failing so spectacularly to work with these important stakeholders?

Our first duty as Members of this Senedd, as legislators, is to make good law and to strike down bad law. [Interruption.] Yet we are being asked today to extend the use of COVID passports to other settings without any evidence that they’re actually saving any lives, Mike Hedges, without any detailed assessment of their impact. So, it is wrong.

So, what would we do differently? Well, we would focus on getting the jabs—the booster jabs—into people’s arms. We’ve always been clear that the way out of this pandemic is through vaccination, and that still remains the case. [Interruption.] The Government’s energy, every single bit of your energy, should be focused on delivering the vaccination programme to those who are eligible.

Yes, I’ll happily take an intervention.

You've spoken passionately about the importance of liberty and freedom of choice of individuals, and you've spoken about vaccination. Your colleagues across the border in England are making vaccinations mandatory. Would you go down that route? Would you support that?

I don't support that. I don't support that, and we’ve been clear on these benches that we don't support it, and that’s why we’ve supported the First Minister in his position not to make compulsory vaccination a requirement of workers in care homes or the NHS here in Wales.

So, we should be looking to expand that vaccination programme and make it easier for people to get those vaccines. Let’s talk about establishing walk-in centres for those who are eligible, for example. We don’t have them here in many parts of Wales. [Interruption.] Well, we certainly don’t in my neck of the country, and perhaps if you went up there more regularly you’d be able to see.

So, to conclude, Llywydd, there are many ethical and equality issues with COVID passes. Alongside their impact on civil liberties, the Labour Government has failed spectacularly to provide any evidence whatsoever that these COVID passes actually limit the spread of the virus or increase the uptake of the vaccine, and meanwhile the loophole of self-certification, in terms of lateral flow tests, is nonsensical, it’s open to abuse. You can swab your dog and put its result in that system and still get your vaccine passport to be able to attend any event, nightclub, cinema, theatre, or anywhere else. It is ridiculous. So, given this, there’s absolutely nothing that we can do but vote against this extension to the COVID pass regime.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Well, once again today, there is great interest in what we're discussing here, and I'm very pleased about that. These, like everything we've discussed over the last 20 months, are very difficult decisions that have been taken, and very important issues. I said last week that Plaid Cymru would likely vote in favour of these regulations today. We will do that, and it's important that there is an explanation not just of how we're voting on issues like this, but why.

When we discussed the first regulations on COVID passes on 5 October, you'll remember that Plaid Cymru voted against them. We supported the principle, as we made it clear, of insisting on evidence that people are less likely to transmit the virus to other people before having access to some places—not to vital services, but some settings. But we did ask for evidence about the effectiveness of the specific policy that had been presented by the Welsh Government. We were concerned, for example, about the element of self-certification for the results of lateral flow tests. We offered further discussions with the Government on how to strengthen those regulations, but for very well-known reasons at that time the regulations were approved. So, COVID passes based on this model are what we have in Wales, and, even though we voted against those, for the reasons that I've outlined, in the hope of being able to bring another model in, a stronger model, possibly, we do accept that this is better than nothing, of course.

The question before us today is whether we should extend the list of settings where you have to show a pass. Again, we asked for evidence. For example, there was one piece of specific research that was drawn to my attention, and it was very important to give that consideration, and I'm very grateful to people who do pass on evidence to me. It was research done by Imperial College, which was published in The Lancet, about how transmissible the virus is in people who have been double vaccinated, compared with those who haven't been vaccinated. And we have to ensure, after all, that there is a benefit to the vaccine in terms of helping to prevent transmission. And one of the findings of the research was that transmission by a vaccinated person was nearly as much as someone who hadn't been vaccinated, but only when they're at their most infectious. And, from discussions with the Minister—and I'm grateful for those discussions—and asking the opinions of the Government's scientists and through further studies, one weighs that against the finding that the viral load of a person who is vaccinated does reduce more quickly than someone who isn't vaccinated, and that does show the value of the vaccine in terms of reducing transmission. That was the evidence that was presented to me. I've read another study by the Dutch health administration, which comes to a similar conclusion.

In addition, the Minister notes very correctly that people who have been fully vaccinated are less likely to be infectious in the first place; I'm grateful for a letter explaining that. That is also something that is confirmed in the Imperial study, and I am still convinced, like many of the experts and scientists internationally, that vaccines are the best barrier to being infected. It is voluntary, of course, but I do encourage people to have the vaccine, and measures that can influence people's decisions to have the vaccine or not, in my opinion, can be very valuable.

A quick word about the practical support that will be needed by broader groups of organisations, if these regulations are approved today. I do think that it's vital that the Government recognises, whatever the Minister says in terms of how smoothly the passes have gone so far, that this does create concern. Voluntary organisations will be among those included—community theatres and cinemas and so forth—and we have to ensure that every support is available in terms of implementing the passes.

And to close, let us remember that trying to avoid further restrictions is what the aim of this is. The Government would agree with me on that, I'm sure. But if the Government does feel, for example, that we need to make the case for extending COVID passes further in the future, something that could offer further challenges in terms of implementation, then we will again insist that the evidence is stronger again. None of these decisions are easy, and while it's important to be able to justify any further restrictions, we have to keep our eyes on the prize, namely keeping people, including very vulnerable people, as safe as possible. And, remember, passes and other things don't work in isolation, and now, like throughout the pandemic, we have to emphasise the importance—and the Government has to enforce it as best it can—of those basic things, such as wearing face masks, social distancing and ventilation and so forth, which are vital in the battle against this virus, and I ask the Government to strengthen its work in that area.

Well, good luck to Darren Millar trying to swab their dog. It's difficult enough getting a child to do it, so I think swabbing your dog might be difficult. It doesn't mean to say that your dog won't have COVID. Remember, this disease came from bats, so this is not a completely ridiculous idea. But I think the point that you are trying to make, that this is in some way an authoritarian Government, who is trying to protect our public from the worst ravages of this disease—the case is not made, in my view.

Will you take an intervention?

Okay.

The point I was making was not so much about this being an authoritarian Government; I don't think I used those words. The point is that the system has a big flaw in it, and that is that you can self-certify in terms of your lateral flow test result. That is the problem with the system. It basically means that anybody can put anything into the system, even if they haven't had a test of their own. And that, quite frankly, is a ridiculous system.

Okay. I acknowledge that that is a flaw in the system, but the alternative is to ban those who cannot have a vaccination from attending any of these events where a COVID pass will be required. And I don't think that's right, because there are people who simply cannot have a COVID vaccination for one health reason or another. So, we have to just acknowledge that that is a small, tiny minority of the population, but, nevertheless, one we need to consider. So, I understand completely what you're saying, but it's always possible, if a hostelry is concerned about that, or an organisation is concerned, to lay on lateral flow testing outside the venue that they want to control people going into. So, that is an option open to people.

But I think—. We heard earlier from the First Minister just how difficult the situation is in the health service, with ambulance crews not being able to turn up to work because they've got COVID, and that will also apply to other health professionals, who are therefore making life much more difficult for their colleagues. And it seems to me that we have to do everything possible to ensure that we have a suite of things. As Frank Atherton pointed out in his recent media interview, this is about a series of initiatives that help remind people that the pandemic is not over.

So, of course, top of the list comes vaccination—and the Government seems to be doing absolutely everything possible to ensure that the maximum number of people are taking it up, certainly in Cardiff and the Vale health board—but also things like this, masks, which were not worn on the train that I went on to England last week, and there was no reminder on it as well. I know, on other trains, there are reminders and people are wearing them. The social distancing is, obviously, the second thing. Every time we meet in close quarters, we are risking transmitting COVID. That's just a fact. So, it is a balance between the liberty of being and the need to meet other people with suppressing the disease. And it seems to me that it is a pretty minor thing to ask people to present a COVID pass or to do a lateral flow test. In fact, businesses—

Jenny Rathbone, if I can just intervene, there's an intervention on Zoom. If you wish to take it—

I'm happy to take it.

—it's Janet Finch-Saunders.

I'm happy to take it. Thank you, Llywydd. Yes, Janet, I'll take it.

Thank you, Member Jenny, for taking the intervention. But given that the Chief Medical Officer for Wales has described these passes as having quite a small impact, as well as the Welsh Government's own NHS COVID pass impact assessment warning that it could provide an additional barrier to accessing those events for those on low incomes, and our smaller establishments really are not prepared or geared up for this, we could be looking here at sustaining and creating greater well-being inequality. So, do you honestly stand there with all courage and conviction, Jenny, that you can actually support this and you wouldn't support holding back on this vote today—in fact, voting against it—until we've had more evidence as to how the COVID passports have worked in some of our bigger venues? Because the First Minister was not convincing at all earlier regarding this.

Thank you. Listen, people on the lowest incomes are not able to go to the matches, either the rugby, the football, or the cinema; let's get real on this one. The fact is that it is a suite of measures that is what enables us to have the maximum impact on bringing down the infection rates, and that is what we're trying to do here. I do not think that the Welsh Government is going to continue with these regulations any longer than they are required, but, in the meantime, businesses are missing a trick. I do not regard it is anti-business, I think this is pro-business, because businesses are at liberty to adopt COVID passes, say in their hostelry or in their restaurant, and then parade it as a unique selling point for why people might want to go to their restaurant or their pub, because they would be comfortable, just as the First Minister described. People at the matches said, 'I felt better able to come here with confidence today, because I knew that everybody would either have had their jabs, or they would have been tested.' So, I think you are looking at it down the wrong end of the telescope on this one, and this is something that does no harm and does plenty of good. Frank Atherton supports this as part of a suite of measures to enable people to realise that the pandemic has not gone away and people are still dying of it.

Minister, at the beginning of your statement, you outlined the extremely high case rates that we still unfortunately have here in Wales, and these rates are still continuing to impact education. Over a month ago, I asked the education Minister if the Welsh Government would be making provision for free loop-mediated isothermal amplification non-intrusive saliva tests for those additional learning needs learners who cannot undertake intrusive swab testing. The Minister said he would write to me on the point, but I haven't yet received an answer, and parents of additional learning needs pupils in my region have therefore asked me to urge you to facilitate this as a matter of urgency in order to ensure that these children who have suffered months of lost education—. Because let's remember not many of these children can learn at home, and they've also lost, of course, all-important development during the pandemic and they are continuing to do so, because every day these children are being sent home for 10 days to isolate, missing even more school and crucial educational support, because they can't currently take the available free tests. So, I'd ask you: can you please provide clarity on this matter? Diolch.

Darren Millar, in his contribution, said that the Conservatives had argued a month ago that this would set a precedent, and that was the argument that they pursued. Actually, the argument that was pursued by Russell George a month ago was that the introduction of these COVID passes would be a 'disaster'. That was the word he used, and he based his analysis on the experience of Scotland. He argued that we couldn't cope with any of these additional passes. The experience has been entirely different, of course, and the experience of introduction of the COVID passes, as Rhun ap Iorwerth has explained in his contribution, has been relatively smooth, has been implemented relatively easily, as far as I can see, by the institutions and organisations who've been required to do so.

Like Darren, I enjoyed the rugby on the weekend, and I showed my COVID pass on the way in and it caused no difficulty at all for me. I've also used my COVID pass, I regret to say, to watch Cardiff City—[Laughter.]—in recent weeks, and it's been far easier to get in than to stay in my seat and watch. I have to say that there haven't been the difficulties that were expressed in the debate we had a month ago, but it's right and proper that those potential problems are pointed out to Government, and Government should respond on how they're dealing with that. I feel far more confident now, having seen the COVID pass in action over the last month or so, to be able to vote very easily to extend its use, because we have the experience and the knowledge that we didn't have a month ago, and the experience and the knowledge have been positive and have demonstrated that organisations and businesses can implement these requirements with the minimum of difficulty.

But the other argument that was pursued a month ago, of course, was that of civil liberty and personal freedom, and we argue these things, and to some extent Darren Millar has done so this afternoon, on the basis of my freedoms, of my rights, of my entitlements. Why don't we think of other people's rights? Why don't we think of other people's freedoms? Why don't we think of other people's entitlements? We're used to selfishness from the party opposite, but when we talk about the rights of Government and the rights of Government to impose restrictions upon us, Government must prove its case to do so, and I think the Government has proved its case. It proved it a month ago, and the experience we've had over the last month has actually demonstrated the power of that argument. I give way.

Thank you, I'm grateful for you taking the intervention. You say that the duty is on the Government in order to demonstrate the need to take action in this respect, but, of course, there is no evidence that these are actually making a significant difference in terms of reducing the rate of COVID infection. If there was evidence, then our position might be significantly different, but there isn't that evidence at the moment; there's not that weight of evidence saying that when you have these COVID passes, it reduces the rate or spread of infection. We've seen the current situation in terms of the COVID wave that's currently upon the whole of the UK, and where they don't have these COVID passes the infection rate is actually dropping much more quickly than it is here in Wales. So, I just think we need to see the evidence, and the evidence isn't there.

The Member will know that I've argued in this place throughout the last period that Government needs to demonstrate the evidence for its proposals, and it must do that on all occasions. I argued a month ago, and I'll argue today, that I believe this proposal is proportionate, both to the evidence available and to the nature of the threat that we face, which it is trying to overcome. And therefore it is a proportionate use of the responsibilities of Government and supportable by Members, I would argue, on all sides of the Chamber. 

And this brings us back to the fundamentals, because the debate we're having here is about personal liberty as opposed to the rights of government. And, in quoting John Stuart Mill a month ago, I tried to argue very clearly that government can impose these restrictions only where government can demonstrate that they are doing so to prevent harm to others. Government has done that, and I believe it is incumbent on all of us to recognise that. [Interruption.] I will give way in a moment, but I just wish to make my case here. Because liberty for some, unless it is liberty for all, is not liberty for anyone. Liberty is something that either exists equitably, equally, to everyone in society, or it doesn't exist in that society. Your freedom to watch the rugby on Saturday, my freedom to watch the rugby on Saturday shouldn't be any different to anybody else's freedom to do so as well. And it's by creating the sense of safety and creating the sense of purpose and protection for people that means that everyone can enjoy the game that we did on Saturday. And it's that social solidarity that perhaps the Conservatives find difficulty in understanding. I'll give way.

Thank you for allowing the intervention. I wanted to intervene mainly because you mentioned in your argument—you phrased it as selfishness, the nature of it, why we're opposing that. I'm opposed to these proposals, but ultimately if they go through it's a minor inconvenience for me and it's a minor inconvenience for you. But the issue is, ultimately, for those who have disabilities, mental health issues, the elderly, this will be used as another reason for not going out. So, what impact do you think this will have on them then?

It's not an inconvenience for me because it guarantees that people who are in exactly that position can attend these events and activities on the same basis as you and me, and that is why equality of liberty is so important in this debate.

And the final point I'll make is this: it might not always appear on social media, but let me say this, these passes are actually very popular. They're very popular. I certainly have people writing to me, e-mailing me saying that this is the end of our democracy, this is the end of our society, that this is the end of the society that we've known in its current form because of the imposition of this. They make ludicrous comparisons with events of the middle part of the last century and the rest of it. But, let me tell you now, the majority of people, both in my constituency and I would guess in Clwyd West as well, will be supporting this, will be wanting to see this, because they understand the argument that your liberty is my liberty is everybody's liberty. And the equality and indivisibility of liberty is something that nobody here should be arguing against. Thank you.

Good evening, Minister. Firstly, I'd like to make clear my concerns at the high COVID rates here in Wales, and I totally agree that COVID has not gone away. We have all been willing to accept during the course of the pandemic what would in normal times be unpalatable, restrictive and illiberal measures, such as lockdown, mandatory face masks and so on, but these are measures that have been proven to work and have saved lives. You will not be surprised to hear that I continue to object to the use of vaccine passports for the following five reasons, and I'll briefly outline them.

First and foremost, it's about the lack of evidence here in Wales. I have been presented, and still have been presented, with no evidence that vaccine passports work to reduce transmission or to improve the uptake of the vaccine. Whilst the public health challenge remains clear, the Welsh Government have failed to produce the evidence to prove that they are working. The Minister must have access to the test, trace and protect data since the introduction of COVID passports on 11 October, and I have written to the Minister to request this information and have yet to receive a response. I am open to hearing that evidence, as I can hear others are as well, when the Minister can provide that.

I'd like to challenge Plaid Cymru on this issue too. Just over a month ago, as we've heard, Plaid Cymru voted—like me—against domestic vaccine passports, because as Rhun ap Iorwerth said in the Chamber, the evidence was not forthcoming. I am still unclear what evidence Plaid Cymru have from Wales that COVID passes are lowering transmission and that they encourage the take-up of vaccines. And as for my colleagues in the Conservative Party, it seems that their opposition to vaccine passports is rooted far more in opportunism than principle, given that Boris Johnson himself toyed with this very idea.

The second reason I will not be supporting this are the people who will be definitely affected negatively: those who are working in the arts sector. Their predominant concern is that costs will increase due to the extra layer of door staff needed to check COVID passports upon arrival, but with little to no financial help being available. I was contacted by a Plaid Cymru community councillor in the region of Mid and West Wales, whose local community-run cinema is likely to be forced to close due to the disproportionate pressure being put on volunteers who run the cinema to police COVID passports.

My third objection to vaccine passports is the matter of principle. Quite simply, I don't think that people should have to provide medical data to a complete stranger who is not their clinician.

The fourth reason is that there is no end to this, no deadline. The Welsh Government are leaving open the possibility of extending vaccine passports to even more hospitality settings. So, it does beg the question: when will it end? Are the Welsh Government considering widening the scope of vaccine passports to include cafes and restaurants? Are there other venues and sectors that we will be considering in four weeks' time?

Lastly—you'll be glad to hear—it is my view that these measures demonstrate poor law making on the part of the Welsh Government. There is no sunset clause.

I am aware that the vote for the extension will be successful today, unlike the previous vote being passed by accident, by just one vote. Therefore, please could the Welsh Government abide by their mantra, which is about evidence-informed decisions? And could they also outline how they might be able to support the affected businesses and venues financially, so that they are able to stay open? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Point of order. Could you confirm that the last vote was not passed by accident?

Well, yes, since it's such a straightforward point of order I'll allow it. There are no accidental votes in this Senedd. Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you, Minister.

You will be aware that I raised with you last week the issue of people with autism, and I subsequently followed up with correspondence. I wondered if you had any clarity on that situation, because I have yet again been contacted by people within my region where this would affect them, pointing out the difference with England, also the fact that the guidance at the moment says that premises should—rather than must—recognise exemptions, which is not included within the regulations. We're aware that this affects a small number of people in Wales who are not able to receive a vaccination or able to take a lateral flow test, but I believe, from the situation in England where there is much greater clarity and the ability to have a digital pass, even with an exemption, that this would provide assurances that nobody will be excluded on the basis of this being introduced and extended further.

I've heard a lot about absence of evidence is not evidence in itself, but where there is evidence of absence, that is evidence in itself. So, if you have a lateral flow test, it is proof of absence of COVID. So, I just want to turn that on its head and maybe allow some on the benches that side to reflect on it. It is a fact, and it is evidenced, that those who are vaccinated are less likely to spread COVID around them. So, while the data on COVID passes and the latest restrictions are collected, logic and common sense do support this action. [Interruption.] In a minute, because I heard quite a lot of you earlier on. And they are popular—these COVID passes are popular. I don't know who you're speaking to, but the vast majority of my constituents get it, they understand it. If everyone at a venue is either vaccinated or COVID-negative, then it has to be safer for all of us to go there. That's what people are telling me—people who won't normally go out are saying to me, 'Actually, we will feel safer now'. They're good for businesses as well—not something I've actually heard you say—because the disease destroys economic confidence. That is not a cure. The vaccine passport does actually mean that it will be a cure for businesses, because people will have confidence in those businesses to go to those businesses. Without these measures, fewer people will attend those venues, fewer people will attend those events—certainly the people who speak to me. 

Joyce Watson, there's an intervention on Zoom if you want to take it. It's from James Evans. It's your decision. 

No, I'll take this one over here. [Laughter.]

Darren Millar, are you still wanting to intervene?

Yes, I am. You were talking about facts earlier on. The facts are these: you can have both COVID jabs and still catch and spread COVID. You can enter into the COVID pass system a negative result even if you've had a positive one. That does not protect people, that undermines confidence in the system, and that's why this is the wrong way to go about trying to shore up confidence. If it was so popular with businesses, why are they all objecting to it? Why are businesses not—

This is too long an intervention now, Darren Millar. 

That wasn't an intervention, that was an attempt to take over my time. 

He didn't succeed. Carry on, Joyce Watson.

The point is this, okay? It seems to me that you have a problem—that you don't trust people to take a lateral flow test and give their own result. It seems to me that you can't trust people. Well, we are prepared to trust people here to do the right thing.

But let's go back to where we are. In terms of fairness, they are fair because they give people more confidence to enjoy more freedoms. You talk about freedoms—I've heard that word here—and they actually extend civil liberties, not restrict them, because they allow people to feel safe, they allow people to be freer. Therefore, those people's civil liberties are being extended. So, I absolutely support your decision, Minister, to extend the measures to cinemas, concert halls and theatres. It is, after all, and it has been said many times, one more way to keep Wales safe at alert level 0, because the alternative will be, if we carry on, having to look at other measures that might be more restrictive. 

I am somehow at odds to understand how the Tories here can on the one hand be in Government in Westminster requiring, mandating NHS workers to have vaccines before they can work, and yet won't support what is a very, very simple process of COVID passes in Wales. I'm just a little bit staggered. I just think somehow what you're doing here in your objection today is voting against just for the sake of doing it, not for the sake of looking at the safety and the freedom of people to carry on doing what they want to do in places where they want to go, knowing that they have an element of safety and security that we are hoping here today to deliver for them, giving them their freedom, giving businesses their freedom to operate. Thank you. 

The health Minister to reply. 

Diolch yn fawr. Thank you very much for this debate. It has been a very interesting one, as we expected. I think first of all it's probably worth pointing out that we know that this virus spreads in confined spaces when people spend a lot of time there. That's exactly what we're trying to do. There's plenty of evidence to support that and that is what we're suggesting, and why we're keeping this restricted to those areas. I make no apologies for proposing this restriction when rates are so high and we are just entering our winter period. We don't make these decisions lightly. We know that we're in a situation where our NHS is really struggling at the moment, and we have over 800 people in hospital with COVID. Anything we can do to try and alleviate the situation and the pressure on the NHS at this point is something that we need to consider very seriously. You'll be here next week complaining about how we can't get people into hospitals. Well, this is a measure to enable to us to get fewer people in hospitals. 

Experts tell us that we should go early and they tell us that every little contribution adds to our ability to contain what is a deadly virus. It's no surprise that the evidence is still building—this is a new virus, and it's constantly changing. The delta variant spreads 1,000 times faster than the alpha variant, and now we've got a sub-group of the delta variant, the AY.4.2, and we don't know much about that. So, of course the evidence is always going to be building—let's not be surprised by that. Certainly, this negativity is not the response that we're seeing from the general public, as so many of my colleagues have emphasised. Our first duty as a Government is to keep the population of Wales safe. You tell us to focus on the vaccination programme; well, I can tell you, we are going flat out and we're going a damn sight faster than the Government in the United Kingdom, although we know that it's not a race. 

Certainly, when we talk about self-certification, it is important that it is about trust, and individuals are required to honestly reflect their vaccine status or the result of a test. It's the same system as the UK Government is asking people to use when they return from travel abroad, and it's an offence to falsify information to gain entry into a venue. 

Thank you very much, Rhun, for highlighting the article in The Lancet by Imperial Colleage, and I'm pleased that that information helped Plaid Cymru to come to their conclusions on the regulations today. It's true that the passes won't work in isolation, and every small step does add to our efforts to limit the spread of this virus. 

Two of the Plaid Cymru speakers asked about the situation in relation to those people who find it difficult to have vaccinations or to take tests. We have been looking into this and taking it very seriously, and thank you for persevering with that questioning. The Welsh Government did approach Public Health Wales for advice on suitable alternatives to swabbing back in June, and Public Health Wales advice was that buccal swabbing, which is swabbing inside the cheek, could be a viable alternative for some people. Public Health Wales have conducted work on creating a protocol. They've been evaluating a comparison of throat swabs in a paediatric department, and there have been really encouraging results. Public Health Wales will now move forward with a real-world comparison of buccal swabs versus the traditional swab with two special schools in Wales that have agreed to take part. So, all of this work is advancing, and I'm hoping that if all that works out, we'll be able to roll it out as an option early in 2022. So, there are advances there. 

Can I just finish by saying that this pandemic is absolutely not over? The NHS is struggling and winter hasn't started properly yet. Our rates are the highest in the United Kingdom, and we would all like a more normal Christmas this year. That is unlikely to happen unless we all take these measures seriously. Our experts are telling us that those marginal interventions help, but they help if we go early. We know that the vast majority of the Welsh public are with us on this. They're comforted knowing that people around them are also conforming with our rules. The one thing we've learnt over the past 18 months is that, as John Donne said, no man is an island, but we stand and we fall together. The people of Wales are happy to demonstrate their solidarity with one another and will, on the whole, welcome this new intervention, these minor restrictions, so that we can have the best chance of keeping these venues open during these difficult winter months ahead. I think the people of Wales will come with us on this, and I do hope that the Senedd will vote for these regulations today. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection. Therefore, we will defer voting until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.