One of the most interesting factors to come out of the committee's scrutiny of enterprise zones was the disparity between them. Deeside and Cardiff enterprise zones were already well developed in their respective sectors, whilst Anglesey, Snowdonia and Ebbw Vale were effectively starting from scratch, with Port Talbot coming late to the fray. We, therefore have to be very guarded in our analysis of the success of one zone against another. What other factor we have to take into account is the relative crudity of the figures given, actually, in the first instance, for the cost per job created. For instance, Ebbw Vale, it was suggested, received £94 million to achieve just 390 jobs, or £241,000 for each job. These figures are very misleading as, in the Government's analysis of where money was allocated in the enterprise zone, the figure for transport for Ebbw Vale enterprise zone was £88 million. As this was clearly referring to the extension of the railway line from the festival park site to the town centre, it should therefore be viewed as an overall infrastructure improvement for the whole region, not for the enterprise zone itself. So, contrasting this figure for cost per job created or safeguarded as against, say, Deeside, where the cost was just £4,822, is very misleading. So, could the Cabinet Secretary outline how he proposes to analyse the effectiveness of EZs in the future?

It became apparent to the committee, and, indeed, to those who made up the enterprise boards, that the original aims of the zones would have to be considerably amended. The boards of most of the zones realised their roles would become enablers to economic growth rather than that of direct job creation. In many instances, they put in place the infrastructure, both physical and spatial, to allow this growth to take place. Many of them referred to the time factor involved in bringing some of these projects to fruition. Mark Langshaw, of the Ebbw Vale enterprise zone board, which the Government Secretary says will close this year, said that it had many projects in the pipeline and expressed his concern as to who would take these to completion. So, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could inform us as to how these projects, and, indeed, the general work undertaken by the enterprise zones that are to close, will be safeguarded going forward.

If we ask ourselves, 'Have the enterprise zones been a success?', it is difficult to extrapolate a firm answer because of the disparate elements involved in the zones and their overall objectives. Perhaps one of the real positives has been the input from the boards themselves, who seem to have worked well with many stakeholders and created very positive networks and initiatives on a local basis.

To conclude, I think we all have to consider their achievement against the question, 'What would have happened if they had not been created?' There are instances of those, especially with those close to the English border, that would have been disadvantaged if they had not been made enterprise zones. Deeside and, to a certain extent, Ebbw Vale are such examples. However, we must recognise that the enterprise zones up to the 2000s were very different projects to those of the 1980s, and therefore their achievements or failures must be viewed from a very different perspective. So, is the Cabinet Secretary still convinced that enterprise zones that will be remaining will still have a part to play in the economic development of Wales, and is he willing to supply them with the resource that they need in order to deliver on what should now be their clearly defined goals?