I’d like to thank the Member for his questions. I was very clear, last summer, when I said that the project developers needed to ensure that 50 per cent of the finance and 50 per cent of the risk fell on the shoulders of the private sector to ensure that we have value for money and to ensure that it didn’t come on balance sheet. It’s the due diligence process, which was only completed just a few weeks ago, that revealed the weighting risk. It’s because of that due diligence that we were able to discover the high risk of it coming on balance sheet. But the Member, I think, is then conflating the long-term liability over 33 years and the immediate risk of it being brought onto balance sheet.

Now, insofar as due diligence is concerned, let’s not forget that the Member, again, urged me not to embark on a thorough process of due diligence, but it is my belief that this has demonstrated the value of due diligence. I am seeking agreement from the Heads of the Valleys Development Company and the consultants who carried out the due diligence to publish a summary document of the documents. However, the fit-and-proper-persons test and also legal due diligence will be excluded from the publication. As soon as I have that agreement from the consultants and the Heads of the Valleys Development Company, I will move forward with publishing that document and I will place it in the Assembly Library.

I would urge the Member as well, and all Members who are critical of Government today, of me today, of the developers today, to now work constructively to ensure that the technology park—the £100 million that we’re going to be investing in it and in the skills of the people within the Heads of the Valleys area—is a success. We need to make sure the technology park utilises new and emerging technologies, that it employs people closer to their homes, and delivers the sort of prosperity that I think we all wish to see in the Valleys communities.