Chamber and committees

I will try, as briefly as I can, to address and engage with those points in substance, because they are important. However, I ask Douglas Ross to do similarly. Repeatedly, he stands up and puts into my mouth words that I have not said. That is okay for politics, but if we are genuinely—as I sincerely am—trying to find consensus on matters that are so serious, we all have a duty to try to put some of the politics to one side.

People are working across the country, including at grass-roots level, to deliver excellent services for people who have problems with drug misuse. I see it in my constituency. That is why it would not be fair for me to say that the system is “broken”; to do so does a disservice to their work.

However, that does not mean that I am denying that we have much more to do and that often in the past—I am being very frank—our response has not matched the response of the people at the grass roots. I am trying genuinely to engage on the issue.

In that spirit, I note that I understand that the Conservatives have raised the idea of a right to recovery bill. I met Annie Wells to discuss it a couple weeks ago. I said at the outset of this session that we would look at it in detail; we are doing so. Many of what I understand to be the key strands in the proposed right to recovery bill are being taken forward as recommendations of the residential rehabilitation working group. We can go into that in more detail.

My mind is not closed to there being a statutory underpinning. However, we have to be cautious about waiting as long as it takes to pass legislation before getting on with the work. Work is already under way on each strand that would be in the proposed bill; I want to take that work forward as quickly as possible. That does not rule out there being a statutory underpinning, but we all know how long it takes—rightly and for good reason—to get legislation through Parliament. Therefore, for goodness’ sake let us not put other things on hold while we talk about legislation.

I am serious about wanting to engage in good faith across the chamber. I hope that others will join us in doing exactly that.

We continue to consider—on a four nations basis but also with regard to global considerations—what role vaccination might play in future in easing international travel. The impact on the tourism industry is understood, and we will continue to do everything that we can, within the resources that we have available, to provide support for affected sectors, including tour operators and tourism businesses. As I said in response to an earlier question, we will continue to urge the United Kingdom Government to make more support available.

The situation around international travel is really difficult. Unfortunately, that difficulty inescapable if we want to avoid in future what we have not been able to avoid now, which is the importation of new variants. I understand how difficult it is for those in the sector, and we will continue to do everything that we can to support them to get back to normal. Vaccination might have a role to play, but we have been clear that we have to be careful about some of the considerations around that.

It will give me great pleasure to move the motion seeking Parliament’s agreement to recommend to Her Majesty the Queen the appointment of a new Lord Advocate and a new Solicitor General for Scotland. Those posts have a very long history indeed. The position of Lord Advocate was established long before the 1707 union of Parliaments. Today, those roles remain crucial to the rule of law in Scotland.

The current combined prosecution and Government advisory functions of the law officers have endured since the establishment of this Parliament, under all Administrations. However, as members will be aware, the Government made a commitment at the recent election to consult on whether those dual functions should, in future, be separated. I believe that there is a strong prima facie case to be made for that. However, it is important that Parliament considers carefully the precise detail of any reform. Depending on the nature of it, change may require primary legislation, including possible amendment to the Scotland Act 1998. There are complex issues involved, but I can confirm that the Government will take forward a consultation in due course. Whatever the outcome of such a consultation, it will remain hugely important that Scotland has law officers of the very highest calibre. I have no doubt whatsoever that the individuals whom I am nominating today fulfil that requirement. Before I turn to the nominations, I take the opportunity, on behalf of Parliament, to pay tribute to and thank the departing Lord Advocate and Solicitor General.

James Wolffe has served as Lord Advocate in extraordinary times. The issues thrown up by Brexit and then the emergency legislation necessitated by the Covid pandemic have been complex and largely unprecedented. During this time, the Government has benefited enormously from his intellect and from the clarity, expertise and—at all times—scrupulous independence of his advice. James Wolffe has also represented the Government at several important hearings, including the Supreme Court cases on article 50, the UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill and the prorogation of the United Kingdom Parliament. Those are among the most significant constitutional cases of recent times and will surely take their place in the history books.

I also pay tribute to the way in which James Wolffe represented the Scottish Government when he was defending, in the Supreme Court, this Parliament’s legislation on minimum unit pricing for alcohol. In addition, he has worked to reduce the amount of time that it takes for the Crown Office to investigate deaths, and he has continued its work to improve the handling of cases relating to domestic abuse and violence against women. Any of those challenges and achievements in isolation would be significant; taken together, they represent a remarkable achievement and legacy.

For Alison Di Rollo, her time as Solicitor General has marked the end of 35 years as a first-class public prosecutor, including a spell as head of the national sexual crimes unit. For the past five years, she has served with distinction as Solicitor General. Her role, during that time, in establishing the expert group on preventing sexual offending involving children and young people will, I am sure, contribute to further improvements in the prevention and handling of such cases. She also represented the Crown Office in the Supreme Court, in the highly significant Sutherland case, which concerned evidence that was used to convict paedophiles.

For all that and so much more, Alison Di Rollo and James Wolffe have my thanks. They have both been outstanding public servants, and I am sure that they leave office with the very best wishes of members on all sides of the chamber.

I turn to my nominations for their replacements. My formal recommendation for Scotland’s new Lord Advocate is Dorothy Bain QC. Dorothy is, without doubt—I think that I can say this without fear of contradiction—one of Scotland’s most senior and highly respected lawyers. She has extensive experience in both civil and criminal law and has appeared in cases at all levels, including in the Court of Session, the High Court, the UK Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. Dorothy is currently counsel to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in Scotland and chair of the police appeals tribunal. She also spent nine years, from 2002 to 2011, as an advocate depute at the Crown Office. During that time, she made history by becoming the first woman to be appointed as principal advocate depute. She has conducted many complex prosecutions and appeals, including the first prosecution of Peter Tobin and the prosecutions relating to the operation algebra investigation, which resulted in the conviction of eight men for offences relating to the sexual abuse of children. From the comments that have been made since news of her nomination became known, it is very clear that Dorothy Bain is also highly respected, rightly, for her determination to speak up for the rights and the interests of the victims of crime. I believe that she will be a Lord Advocate of the very highest calibre.

My nomination for Solicitor General for Scotland is Ruth Charteris QC. Ruth is also a lawyer who commands respect, rightly, across the legal profession. She has been an advocate for more than 20 years. For eight of those years, she was a standing junior counsel for the Scottish Government, advising and representing the Government in a number of cases.

For the past year, she has served as advocate depute at the Crown Office. She also chairs the fitness to practise panel of the Scottish Social Services Council. Ruth will bring to the role of Solicitor General a valuable combination of public law and prosecution experience, and I am absolutely delighted to nominate her today.

Dorothy Bain and Ruth Charteris are both individuals of the highest ability and integrity and I believe that, together, they will make an outstanding and formidable team. It is worth noting that, if these appointments are approved by Parliament today, it will mark the first occasion on which the roles of Lord Advocate and Solicitor General for Scotland have both been held by women at the same time. That would represent a further welcome step towards more equal representation at the most senior levels in the legal profession and in public life more generally.

However, while that may be a welcome additional benefit of their appointments—and I think it is—it is not the reason for their appointments. Fundamentally, I am nominating Dorothy Bain and Ruth Charteris because they are both supremely well qualified for the roles that they are being asked to do. They have a wealth of professional experience that I am sure will benefit the Scottish Government, the Crown Office and the justice system in Scotland more generally.

It is with great pleasure, therefore, that I move,

That the Parliament agrees that it be recommended to Her Majesty that Dorothy Bain QC be appointed as the Lord Advocate and that Ruth Charteris QC be appointed as Solicitor General for Scotland.

I will try to answer all those questions in turn as briefly as possible—if I can read my own handwriting with my glasses on.

I will do my best, as I have done all along, to communicate as clearly and as regularly as I can with the public in what, as we start to ease restrictions more, will become an increasingly complicated environment. As an aside, I would just point out that, at regular intervals during the pandemic, Anas Sarwar’s deputy has tried to stop me communicating directly with the public, so perhaps he should have a word with her as well as with me. The easiest message in the world to communicate is: “Don’t do anything—don’t leave the house.”

As we try to lift restrictions, two things arise, the first of which is the potential for genuine contradictions that we just get wrong. We have to be prepared to fix those as we go, and I give an assurance that we will seek to do that. The second thing that arises is the potential for measures for which there is a rational explanation to appear contradictory. The example of the fan zone in Glasgow has been used. People are going to watch football over the coming period, and the fan zone provides a relatively safer way for some people to do that outdoors, with lots of physical distancing, in a highly regulated environment.

Over the past few days, I have asked the advisory sub-group on education to look again at nursery graduations. Its advice is still to continue with the current position. One of the reasons for that is that we know that, if cases are identified in an educational setting, that can often disrupt the whole setting, with many young people and teachers having to isolate. Of course, many early years establishments run right through the summer. Often, there are rational reasons for apparent contradictions, but that does not make it easier for people to understand them.

I do not have the magic solution to all of this, but I will do my utmost to make sure that our decisions are consistent, that we set them out as clearly as possible and that, if we get things wrong, we fix that as we go.

We will continue to give as much business support as we have the wherewithal to give. We are making representations to the United Kingdom Government on furlough and the provision of further support in other ways, but we will continue to maximise the support that we can give within our own resources.

On vaccination, we are literally going as fast as supplies allow. If we cannot reach milestones on vaccination, that will be only because we do not have the supplies to do that. In response to the previous question, I set out the milestones that we are working to. All over-18s will have had their first dose, or an appointment for their first dose, by the end of next week. We will then bring forward second doses and will go as fast as supplies allow, while planning for extending the vaccination programme into other cohorts.

I will certainly look to publish any protocols. These things are sometimes highly technical, but we will publish what we can to give as much transparency as possible.

Anas Sarwar also asked about learning to live with the virus. I am always a little bit hesitant to use that language because, for some people, the virus has resulted in the loss of loved ones, while others will experience long-term health complications. If those of us who are lucky enough not to have had the virus or not to have had close family members affected by it use language such as, “We just have to learn to live with it,” it can sound as though we are oversimplifying things.

If the link between cases and serious illness continues to weaken and—we hope—to break as we vaccinate more people, we will move to a fundamentally different way of dealing with the virus, which will involve having far fewer restrictions; in fact, I hope that we will have no meaningful restrictions at all. That is what the paper that I referred to on life beyond level 0 is designed to look at. We will publish that paper next week, to coincide with the statement that I will make then.

This is the first opportunity that I have had to welcome Michelle Thomson to the chamber.

I assure her that we are working closely with the UK Government, Glasgow City Council, public health bodies and the UN itself in order that we deliver a safe, successful and—as far as it is possible—in-person COP26 in November. We recognise that there are significant public health challenges, but there is an urgent and overriding need to agree action to tackle climate change.

All possible Covid security measures are being explored. Vaccination and test and protect will be key. At the G7 summit just a few days ago, the UK announced provision of vaccines for COP26 delegates who are otherwise unable to access them, and it has also engaged delegates on Covid plans.

Scottish Government ministers and officials are closely involved in planning for all COP26 Covid measures and all aspects of event delivery. As we get closer to the time of COP26, we will keep Parliament fully updated on arrangements.

I will ask the advisory sub-group what more we can publish to explain the basis of its advice to ministers. We are going by its advice. If I did not do that, Jackie Baillie would no doubt be questioning that, perfectly legitimately.

I do not know whether the tone of Jackie Baillie’s question was intended to suggest that somehow I do not care about any of this; I care deeply about it all. Very few things are more upsetting for parents than missing milestones in their children’s lives; we all understand that. We are trying to get as much as we can back to normal and we will continue to do that, but we have to do it in line with advice—for reasons that everybody understands.

The local public health teams in Dundee will be deciding on the appropriate response in exactly the way that the local public health teams in Glasgow did. Those teams have the Scottish Government’s support in relation to assistance or resource that they need to implement their response.

Although people can already go on to the NHS Inform website to bring forward their second-dose appointment, from next week—as I said in my statement—as part of our efforts to speed up second-dose vaccinations, all health boards will routinely bring forward appointments that are on a 12-week cycle so that they meet the eight-week cycle.

Local health boards will use surge testing and walk-in clinics as they think appropriate. I am sure that, as local health teams in Glasgow did so effectively a few weeks ago, the local health teams in Tayside will keep local members updated, and will be happy to answer more detailed questions from them.

At the outset, I want to confirm that there will be no changes this week to the Covid levels of protection that currently apply to different parts of the country. I will say more about that later and also look ahead to the more substantive three-weekly review that I will set out to Parliament a week from today—which is, as scheduled, ahead of 28 June, when the next scheduled change and a move to level 0 for the whole country was expected to take place.

First, I will give a general summary of the current course of the pandemic, starting with today’s statistics. The total number of positive cases that were reported yesterday was 974—5 per cent of the total number of tests—which means that the overall number of confirmed cases is now 248,515. One hundred and thirty-seven people are currently in hospital, which is nine more than yesterday, and 17 people are receiving intensive care right now, which is the same as reported yesterday.

I also regret to say that two further deaths were reported yesterday, which takes the total number of deaths registered under the daily definition to 7,683. Once again, I send my condolences to everyone who has been bereaved over the course of the pandemic.

I will also provide an update on the vaccination programme. However, because of a technical issue at Public Health Scotland this morning, I ask members to note that it is likely that the figures that I am about to give underreport yesterday’s vaccination performance. On the basis of the information that I have at this stage, I can confirm that, as of 7.30 this morning, 3,531,461 people in Scotland had received their first dose of the vaccine, which is an increase of 13,793 since yesterday. In addition, 23,347 people received their second dose yesterday, which brings the total number of second doses to 2,470,181. However, I ask people to remember that it is likely that those figures underreport the number of vaccinations that were carried out yesterday. We will update the figures as quickly as possible.

As is clear from the update that I have just given on the range of statistics, case numbers continue to rise. Over the past week, 6,651 new cases have been reported, which compares with a total of 5,475 cases in the previous week, so the number of cases has risen by more than one fifth in the past week and is now more than five times higher than the number in early May. That reflects the fact that the faster-transmitting delta variant is now common across Scotland and accounts for the overwhelming majority of new cases that are being reported.

Given the risk of, for example, long Covid, it is important to point out that we should never be complacent about a rising curve of infections. However, as I have indicated previously, we hope that vaccination is increasingly protecting people against serious illness. If that is indeed the case, our experience of the virus will become different and our ability to cope with it in a less restrictive way will become much greater. That is why we continue to very closely monitor the extent to which the rise in the number of new cases is, or is not, leading to a commensurate rise in the number of people who fall seriously ill and require hospital treatment. Our early data on that point is encouraging—I will say more about that shortly—but we still need further analysis, particularly to more fully understand the impact of the delta variant.

To that end, a new study that was published yesterday by the University of Edinburgh was instructive, and I recommend that members read it. On the one hand, it suggests that the delta variant is associated with a higher risk of hospitalisation than other variants but, on the other hand, it suggests that double-dose vaccination continues to provide a high level of protection against infection with, and hospitalisation from, the virus. That was underlined by another study that was published yesterday, by Public Health England, which shows that there is extremely strong protection against hospitalisation after two doses of the vaccine.

In short, all the evidence so far suggests that, although the link has not yet been completely broken, vaccination is weakening the link between the rise in the number of new cases and a rise in hospitalisations and serious illness, so there is much for us to be optimistic about in the studies about the impact of vaccination.

As I indicated earlier, that is reflected in our hospital data, which is published daily. The number of people being admitted to hospital with Covid has fallen from about 10 per cent of reported positive cases at the start of the year to about 5 per cent now. In addition, since around the start of May, the number of new cases has increased at a much faster rate than hospital admissions.

We are also now seeing some evidence that the people who require hospital care are, on average, younger than those who required it during previous stages of the pandemic. For example, in the latest week, the highest number of new admissions was among people in their 30s and 40s. The next highest number was of people in their 20s. Before the vaccination programme started, people over the age of 50 usually made up the highest number of new admissions to hospital.

Let me stress that we should not be complacent about hospitalisation for anyone—no matter their age—but the fact that more of the recent hospital admissions are in younger age groups might mean that fewer of the people being admitted to hospital are becoming seriously ill or requiring intensive care. That might also help to explain my next point.

Hospital occupancy, which is the total number of people with Covid in hospital at any given time, is not rising at the same rate as hospital admissions or cases of Covid. Indeed, although there has been an approximate fivefold increase in the number of cases since the start of May, hospital occupancy is about just double what it was at the start of May. That suggests that people are being discharged more quickly and are spending, on average, less time in hospital than patients in the earlier phases of the pandemic. Although that is encouraging, it is important to stress that further analysis is needed to confirm it.

That brings me to the judgments that we require to make now and next week. In short, we are hopeful that vaccination is changing the game in our fight against the virus, and that it is doing so in a perhaps fundamental way. However, the emerging evidence still needs close analysis.

More fundamentally—and this may be the most fundamental point of all—we need time to get more people vaccinated with both doses. In the race between the virus and vaccines that we have often spoken about, we are increasingly confident that the vaccines will win, but we must not allow the virus to get too far ahead.

The vaccination programme is going exceptionally well and is being rolled out as quickly as supplies allow, but a significant proportion of the population is not yet fully vaccinated with two doses. To be blunt, that remains our biggest vulnerability at this stage, and it is a significant vulnerability when cases are rising at the pace that they are. Therefore, we must buy sufficient time for vaccination to get ahead and to stay ahead of the virus. That is the reason for exercising caution at this juncture.

Those issues are of course also being weighed up by the United Kingdom Government and by other Governments across the UK, and the UK Government yesterday announced a four-week delay to its plans for lifting Covid restrictions in England.

The Scottish Government will also continue to adopt a cautious approach. I have already confirmed that no changes will be made this week to the levels that apply in any part of the country. Our next full scheduled review of the protection levels will take place next week. That will consider whether any changes are possible from 28 June onwards, which is the date when we had hoped that we would see the whole country move down to level 0.

I will confirm our decision to Parliament next week, following that review. However, given the current situation, and the need to get more people fully vaccinated before we ease up further, it is reasonable to indicate now that it is unlikely that any part of the country will move down a level from 28 June. Instead, it is more likely that we will opt to maintain restrictions for a further three weeks from 28 June and will use that time to vaccinate, with both doses, as many more people as possible. Doing that will give us the best chance of getting back on track later in July and of restoring the much greater normality that we all crave.

To that end, we will also do three other things next week and I will report on all of this when I stand here to make a statement this time next week. If our decision is to retain current levels for a further three weeks—and we must go through a proper process to arrive at that decision—we will consider whether any minor changes are possible. I am aware that perceived anomalies have arisen as restrictions have eased. I understand how frustrating that can be, even though there will often be a rational explanation for what may appear to be contradictory. I assure members that, as part of our on-going review of the rules and regulations that are in place, we will consider whether any changes could or should be made to address such issues.

More fundamentally, we will publish two pieces of work next week to coincide with the outcome of the review. Those will look ahead—hopefully not too far ahead—to the restoration of a far greater degree of normality. That work will be of interest to everyone, but it will have particular interest for the businesses and sectors, including much of our arts and culture sector, that still face the greatest uncertainty about what the future looks like.

First, we will publish a paper setting out what we hope life will look like beyond level 0, as we get to the point where we can lift all, or virtually all, of the remaining restrictions. That is important because, although we have had to pause the route map, I emphasise that we still hope that vaccination will allow us to move beyond level 0 over the summer and back to a much greater degree of normality.

Secondly, related to the first publication, we will also publish the outcome of our review of physical distancing. Given the uncertainties of the current situation, in particular the greater transmissibility of the delta variant, we have taken a bit longer to consider that than we had originally planned. However, I know how important that is for many businesses, including those in hospitality and also for theatres and cinemas and the arts more generally, as they all consider how they can operate sustainably over the medium to long term.

In summary, next week we will in all probability, although it has to be confirmed after our full review, pause the further easing of restrictions while we press ahead as fast as possible with vaccination, particularly with double doses of vaccination. However, we will also look ahead in more detail to what we still hope will be possible later in the summer.

I know that the current situation is difficult and frustrating for everyone. We all want to see the back of all restrictions as soon as possible. However, although this setback is not easy and not welcome for anyone, it is worth remembering that we are living under far fewer restrictions now than we were just a few weeks ago. The current situation is not what any of us wants but, equally, it is not lockdown as experienced at earlier phases in the pandemic and vaccination is, with every day that passes, helping us quite literally change the game.

On that point, as well as doing all that we can as quickly as we can to vaccinate fully the adult population, we are making preparations for the possible vaccination of 12 to 17-year-olds should the advice that we get from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation recommend that. I can tell the chamber that we also expect advice from the JCVI in the coming weeks about whether booster vaccinations will be needed during the autumn, so plans are also under way to deliver those if necessary. The Government has an obligation—one that we take very seriously—to ensure that the vaccination programme is delivered as quickly and as fully as possible and I give an assurance that we will continue to work with health boards and others to meet that obligation. Despite the difficulties of the current situation, it is vaccination that still offers us real hope for the weeks and months ahead.

Getting people vaccinated is the responsibility, first and foremost, of the Government. However, it is also one of the ways in which we can all play a part, so I will end by highlighting again the three key things that we all need to do to help keep us on the right track overall as we emerge from the pandemic. The first of those is vaccination. Please make sure that you get vaccinated when you are invited to do so and please make sure that you attend for both doses. All the evidence tells us that that is crucial. If you need to rearrange an appointment or you think that you should have had an invitation by now and want to check up on that, you can go to the vaccinations section of the NHS Inform website. If you had your first dose of the vaccine eight weeks or more ago, check on the website to see whether you can bring your second dose appointment forward. From next week, health boards will start to reschedule routinely second doses to bring them into the eight-week cycle rather than the 12-week cycle. Getting vaccinated is in our own best interests—it makes it less likely that we will become seriously ill from Covid—but it also helps us protect one another, so when it is your turn, please get the jags.

Secondly, please get tested regularly. Free lateral flow tests are available through the NHS Inform website so that you can take a test twice a week. You can have them sent to you in the post or you can collect them from local and regional test sites. In addition, lateral flow devices can now be collected from community pharmacies. If you have not ordered the tests yet, I strongly encourage you to do so. The more of us who take tests regularly, the more cases we will find and the more we can break chains of transmission. Of course, if you test positive, please make sure that you self-isolate and get the result confirmed through a PCR test—that is important.

If your children are asked to self-isolate by their school, please ensure that they do that. That means staying at home, not just away from school. I know that it is hugely frustrating when that happens, but I assure parents that, as part of our wider work, we are considering whether and to what extent the requirement for young people to isolate can be significantly reduced in future, particularly as we look ahead to a new school term. However, for now, to anyone who is currently helping a child to self-isolate, I say thank you. I know that it is frustrating and hugely disruptive, but it is also an important way at this stage to help keep schools as safe as possible and keep as many of them as possible open as we head towards the summer holidays.

Finally, I ask everybody to continue to stick to the rules where you live and follow the public health advice—that is still important. The virus is still out there and, for all the success of the vaccination programme, it is still resulting in hospitalisation for some people and, of course, long Covid is still a risk. Please meet outdoors as much as possible. No environment is ever entirely risk free, but we know that meeting people outdoors poses much less risk than meeting indoors. If you are meeting people indoors, please stick to the limits and make sure that the room is as well ventilated as possible. Obviously, that includes meeting indoors to watch the football over the next few weeks. Please also continue to follow advice on physical distancing, hand washing and face coverings.

We continue to ask everybody to get tested, to get vaccinated when asked to do so and to follow the public health guidance. If we all do that—it is not easy; it is tiresome for everybody—we will help to get things back under control, while the vaccination programme continues to do its work. That will help us to keep ourselves and each other safe. I really hope that, notwithstanding the current frustrations, that will allow us to move to much greater normality with far fewer restrictions as we go further into summer.

I ask members and, indeed, those watching, to pay attention to what I have said. I think that the situation that we are in is frustrating and difficult enough for people without—inadvertently, I am sure—words being put into my mouth that I did not use. At no point today did I say—this is relevant to Douglas Ross’s question about September, too—that I thought that restrictions would be in place for a period of further months. I did not say that.

I have tried all along not to commit to firm dates, way into the future, that nobody can be certain can be delivered. Earlier this year, I was criticised for not saying that 21 June would be “freedom day”, but I did not think that it was responsible to do that. I am not going to give false guarantees. Equally, it is important not to suggest that I have said something that I have not.

Today, I have said that we are not lifting any restrictions this week and that it is likely that—though we have to go through the proper process of arriving at this decision—next week, we will pause further easing for a further three-week period, to allow more people to be vaccinated. I hope that that greater vaccination will allow us to lift restrictions and not just get to level 0, but get beyond level 0 later this summer.

Can I stand here and give a 100 per cent guarantee of that? No, because this virus is unpredictable and, at times, behaves in unpredictable ways. However, that is what we are working towards, and we know that vaccination is the best route for getting there. It is important to understand that these situations are difficult enough without any of us trying to suggest that I have said something that I have not said.

On vaccination, we have set the target of offering everybody in the adult population a first dose by the end of July. In fact, by the end of next week, everybody in the adult population will have been offered their appointment for a first dose; many 18 to 29-year-olds will already be getting those appointments by text and email, with letters to the remainder going out next week. In other words, by the end of next week, appointments will have been scheduled for the entire adult population who have not already had their first dose. Of course, we are now seeking to give second doses within eight weeks of the first dose, and people can work out from that the outer limit with regard to seeking to get the adult population vaccinated with a second dose. Obviously, all of this is subject to getting sufficient supplies, which remains our biggest constraint, but we are doing this as quickly as supplies allow.

With regard to weddings, I have said that we will look next week at whether we can make any changes, albeit we might have to stay at the same levels. I absolutely understand the heartbreak of people wanting to get married who have planned and then might have to reschedule their weddings, so we will look at what flexibility we can give within the clinical advice. I will say as much as possible about that next week.

As for NHS care remobilisation in general and cancer in particular, the health secretary will set out the remobilisation of the health plan, as we have committed to do in the first 100 days of our Administration. Of course, many cancer procedures were kept going during the pandemic, given their urgency, but we know that some people will not have come forward with concerns about symptoms and we need to get that back on track.

Finally, I would simply highlight a reason for being cautious right now. When, earlier in the pandemic, we talked about not overwhelming the NHS, we assumed at that time that almost the entire capacity of the health service would be available for dealing with Covid-19. We do not want to get anywhere near that now, because we want our NHS to get on with non-Covid treatments, to catch up with the backlogs and to get treatment back to normal. That factor will be really important as we take the decisions that we will face over the next couple of weeks.

On essential travel, I think that people are told that it can take up to 21 days to get a certificate, so they should make sure that they apply in good time. I am not aware of any delays beyond that, but I am happy to look into that. As I said earlier, we are encouraging people not to travel overseas unless that is essential. However, in cases in which that is essential, they have the ability to do that. Only a relatively small number of countries are still asking for proof of vaccination. We are continuing to work with and to have dialogue with other UK nations on the further development of solutions to that issue.

I apologise that I did not quite pick up the last part of Rachael Hamilton’s question, probably because I was conferring with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care. I think that it was to do with the technology that is in place and how we are developing that. I will check the record and get back to her as quickly as possible.