London Underground

HC Deb 19 December 2001 vol 377 cc497-511W

Chris Grayling

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) how many new carriages will be ordered by London Underground by 2006 under PPP; [21941]

(2) how many new carriages were ordered by London Underground between (a) 1992 and 1997 and (b) 1997 and 2001. [21966]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground (LU) who inform me that since 1992 carriages have been ordered and brought into service as follows.

	New carriages ordered	New carriages brought into service
1993	354	—
1995	636	—
1997	—	First Jubilee line stock
1998	—	First Northern line stock
2001	—	Last Jubilee and Northern line stock
1 59 Jubilee line trains
2106 Northern line trains

Under the modernisation plans, three infrastructure companies will work under contract to London Underground and will be required to deliver a comprehensive programme of investment to improve track, signals and stations as well as trains. The infrastructure companies will be responsible for ordering new carriages required for them to achieve the standards set by London Underground. I understand that details of the infrastructure companies' plans will be made public once the competitions have been completed.

Chris Grayling

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what advice his Department has received from the Treasury about the phasing of infrastructure projects on London Underground under PPP. [21948]

Mr. Jamieson

Treasury and DTLR officials are in regular contact about various aspects of the PPP. London Underground are responsible for negotiating the PPP contracts, including the phasing of infrastructure projects.

Chris Grayling

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many trains are running per hour on the Jubilee line at peak times. [21848]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground, who inform me that, in peak hours, 24 trains per hour are running on the Jubilee line.

Chris Grayling

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if the Jubilee Line is operating at the service levels originally envisaged; and if he will make a statement. [21967]

Mr. Jamieson

The original contract between London Underground and Westinghouse Signals Ltd. was to deliver a signalling system with a long term operating capacity of 36 trains per hour (tph) and a fallback capacity of 27 tph in the event that the development of the advanced signalling system failed to meet the contract programme. It was necessary to implement fallback arrangements utilising existing technology to deliver a system capable of supporting 24 tph.

Miss McIntosh

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what assessment he has made of the cost of additional rail inspectors under the PPP arrangements for London Underground. [21960]

Mr. Jamieson

Under the underground modernisation plans, the infrastructure companies will be required to bring all assets up to a satisfactory standard, including rails. London Underground will be responsible for managing the contracts with the infrastructure companies. The Health and Safety Executive will be responsible for

London Underground—scheduled journey time (minutes) and excess journey time (minutes), by line
	1998–99	1999–2000	2000–01	12001–02
	Schedule	Excess	Schedule	Excess	Schedule	Excess	Schedule	Excess
Bakerloo	24.08	5.17	24.24	5.77	27.09	7.28	27.15	7.36
Central	33.58	6.98	33.50	6.35	32.56	5.53	32.55	4.42
District	27.88	3.74	27.60	4.58	27.73	5.67	27.72	5.35
East London	22.78	3.09	24.89	3.91	20.93	2.83	20.83	1.83
Jubilee	24.30	3.26	23.77	4.64	25.40	6.04	25.43	6.17
Metropolitan, Circle and Hammersmith and City	31.17	5.49	31.67	6.71	31.18	7.91	30.85	8.48
Northern	29.01	5.47	29.03	4.68	28.83	4.76	28.83	5.14
Piccadilly	30.72	6.50	30.47	5.89	30.54	6.22	30.89	6.51
Victoria	22.17	4.77	22.40	5.13	22.38	6.48	22.38	5.56
Waterloo and City	9.81	0.48	9.41	0.52	9.40	0.73	9.41	0.95
1 From 1 April to 10 November

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 13 November 2001,Official Report, column 623W, on London Underground, for what reason his Department allowed London Underground to give a waiver to senior LU managers in regard to a legal challenge by infrastructure companies and bidders; and if the waiver will extend to such a challenge by a member of the public. [22740]

Mr. Jamieson

London Underground is responsible for managing the competitions for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure.

I understand that, as is common in such transactions, the legal documents for effecting the transfer of the infrastructure companies to the bidders contain various limitations on the bidders' ability to make claims against London Underground, including in relation to information disclosed by London Underground as part of the bid process. Although considered unlikely, it is possible that a bidder could seek to make a claim against an employee of London Underground rather than the company itself. Since employees are insured against such claims by London Underground, the effect would be to circumvent the intended cap on London Underground's liability. London Underground therefore intends to include a waiver in relation to claims by a bidder against employees of London Transport, London Underground or the infrastructure companies.

safety regulation and enforcement, through HM Railway Inspectorate. The Secretary of State has therefore made no assessment of the cost of rail inspectors.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 19 November 2001,Official Report, columns 37–38W, on London Underground, if he will publish line-by-line figures for London Underground (a) predicted average passenger journey time and (b) passenger excess journey time for (i) each year since 1998–99 and (ii) the whole of 2001–02 to date. [22750]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground who have provided the information in the table showing scheduled journey time and excess journey time for each full financial year from 1998–99, and for the period 1 April to 10 November 2001.

As stated in my answer of 13 November 2001, Official Report, column 623W, the wavier will not prevent legal action by London Transport or London Underground against their own employees. Nor will it extend to potential claims by a member of the public.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 19 November 2001,Official Report, column 38W, on London Underground, if he will publish the average annual percentage of peak hour trains that ran on each line of the London Underground for the whole of 2001–02 to date. [22746]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground who have provided the information set out in the table, showing the percentage of trains in peak service for the period 1 April to 10 November 2001. The figures take account of all cancellations including those due to factors beyond LUL's control, such as security alerts and passenger action.

Percentage of trains in peak service (1 April to 10 November 2001)
Line	Percentage
Bakerloo	93.0
Central	96.0
Circle	91.3
District	93.0
East London	96.8
Hammersmith and City	93.8
Jubilee	96.0
Metropolitan	93.7
Northern	98.7
Piccadilly	91.8
Victoria	98.5

Percentage of trains in peak service (1 April to 10 November 2001)
Line	Percentage
Waterloo and City	97.8
Total LUL	95.0

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what assessment he has made of the merits of establishing a not-for-profit company to run London Underground. [22821]

Mr. Spellar

The Government considered all of the options for the future of the tube prior to the Deputy Prime Minister's announcement of the way forward in March 1998— including the possibility of a not-for-profit private sector trust.

There is no need for a not-for-profit solution for the underground. Public sector London Underground will continue to be responsible for running the railway. The operation of track, signals, trains and stations will remain in public hands. The public sector will also be responsible for managing the contracts to maintain and improve the tube.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many potential bidders for the London Underground PPP(a) asked for documents to consider bidding and (b) sent in a bid. [22704]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the Tube infrastructure. I understand that six applications to pre-qualify were received for the BCV and JNP contracts, and that four bidders submitted bids (two for both contracts). Four applications to pre-qualify were received for the SSL contract and three bids were submitted.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions who will be responsible for safety in the PPP plan for London Underground. [22818]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure. London Underground, in the public sector, will remain responsible for safety across the single unified system. As the operator of the trains and the infrastructure controller, London Underground is required to have a statutory safety case in accordance with the Railway (Safety Case) Regulations 2000. In addition to general health and safety law, the infrastructure companies will be required to comply with a contractual safety case. The independent Health and Safety Executive will remain responsible for safety regulation and enforcement.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what his estimate is of the costs incurred by the bidders for the London Underground PPP in preparing the bids. [22711]

Mr. Spellar

No such estimate has been made.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans the Government have to build new underground lines. [22822]

Mr. Spellar

This is a matter for the Mayor for London to consider in the context of his transport strategy. He will need to liaise closely with the Strategic Rail Authority to ensure that plans for London Underground effectively complement the development of the national rail network.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what public money the Government are promising in each of the first three years to each of the planned infracos for London Underground. [22816]

Mr. Spellar

I refer the right hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin) on 11 May 2001,Official Report, column 379W.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if the costs of preparing bids for the London Underground PPP are an allowable cost against corporation tax. [22707]

Mr. Spellar

The costs of preparing bids are treated for taxation purposes in the same way as any other cost.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what alternative to a PPP the Government are evaluating for London Underground. [22824]

Mr. Spellar

I refer the right hon. Member to the answer given to my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Eltham (Clive Efford) on 19 November 2001,Official Report, column 33W.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many firms of consultants(a) the Government and (b) London Underground has used on London Underground matters in the last two years. [22703]

Mr. Spellar

As to part(a) of the question the Department has used Ove Arup (advice in respect of Jubilee Line extension project), Herbert Smith (legal advice), Maggie Leates (pensions advice) and Ernst & Young (currently reviewing London Underground's value for money evaluation of the tube modernisation plans).

As to part (b) this is an operational matter for London Underground.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions who has overall responsibility for(a) policy, (b) performance and (c) funding of London Underground. [22694]

Mr. Spellar

The London Regional Transport Act 1984 sets out the framework for the current operation of London Regional Transport, the parent company of London Underground Ltd., and its subsidiaries.

Responsibility for London Underground Ltd. policy lies with the board of London Regional Transport, which is appointed by the Secretary of State. The board's policies must accord with principles from time-to-time approved by the Secretary of State.

Responsibility for performance also lies with the board of London Regional Transport, and is encapsulated in its general duty to provide a rail service for Greater London with due regard to transport needs, efficiency, economy and safety of operation.

In respect of funding, the Secretary of State may, with the consent of Treasury, make grants to London Regional Transport (for any purpose and on such terms and conditions as the Secretary of State thinks fit). It is the duty of London Regional Transport to apply those sums to aid capital investment or operating costs in respect of the public passenger transport services it provides (including its subsidiary— London Underground Ltd.).

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what is in the Public Expenditure budget for London Underground in(a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03; and how much of the total is provision for capital spending. [22823]

Mr. Spellar

Parliament has approved provision of £520 million for London Underground in 2001–02.

The financial requirements of London Underground in 2002–03 will not finally be known until negotiations with bidders for the Tube modernisation plans have been completed. The Government have made it clear that, as long as the final bids represent value for money, Transport for London will receive the appropriate level of central Government grant to allow for London Underground's need to make payments to the contractors.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what requirements the Government have requested of bidders for London Underground with respect to new capital investment. [22819]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the Tube infrastructure. The contracts will require the infrastructure companies to deliver increased capacity, improved reliability and higher quality infrastructure.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if the Government will reimburse part of the costs of(a) unsuccessful and (b) successful bidders for the London Underground PPP. [22706]

Mr. Spellar

The Government will not reimburse the costs of either unsuccessful or successful bidders. However, the successful bidder on each competition will reimburse 90 per cent, of the eligible costs of unsuccessful bidders, up to a maximum of £7 million. In addition, London Underground has agreed to compensate bidders if the competition should be terminated for reasons other than bids not representing value for money. On the two deep Tube competitions, the preferred bidder will receive up to £12 million, with up to £7 million available for the reserve bidder. On the sub-surface line competition, where three bidders were short-listed, they will receive up to £7 million each.

In the event of the competitions being terminated because no bid is adjudged to represent value for money, then no compensation is payable.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how much has been spent to date by the Government on advisory fees for the PPP for London Underground. [22696]

Mr. Spellar

The Department has employed Ernst and Young to carry out a review of London Underground's value for money evaluation of the Tube modernisation plans. No payments have yet been made under the contract.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what are the respective roles of(a) the Secretary of State, (b) the Mayor's Office, (c) Transport for London, (d) the Government Office for London and (e) London Underground Ltd. in the creation of policy and management of the London Underground. [22695]

Mr. Spellar

Under the London Regional Transport Act 1984, the role of the Secretary of State is to set principles from time to time, with which London Regional Transport's general duty— to provide rail services— must accord. In addition, the Secretary of State has other roles including specific purposes such as issuing approvals, consents, determinations and directions to London Regional Transport. The Secretary of State may also with the consent of Treasury, make grants to London Regional Transport, which in turn can be applied to aid capital investment and operating costs in respect of its subsidiary, London Underground Ltd. The Government Office for London is part of the Government.

Under the Greater London Authority Act 1999, in the transitional period until London Underground Ltd. is transferred to Transport for London, the Mayor of London, Transport for London and London Underground Ltd. are required to consult and co-operate with each other.

The role of London Underground Ltd. is to provide such railway services as London Regional Transport requires in pursuance of its statutory duty under section 2(1) of the London Regional Transport Act 1984, to provide or secure the provision of public passenger transport services for Greater London by railway".

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what is the length in pages of an infraco franchise agreement for London Underground. [22708]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure. I understand that the core contract for each of the three infrastructure companies is approximately 100 pages long. In addition there are a number of detailed supporting and related documents.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what financial guarantees the Government will seek from bidders for the London Underground infracos. [22817]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground has carried out a thorough evaluation of the bidding consortia to ensure that they are financially robust and capable of meeting their obligations under the tube modernisation contracts.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the deadline was for submitting bids for the London Underground PPP; and what the Government's estimate is of when a decision on the bids will be announced. [22710]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure. Bidders are required to submit final pricing early in January and London Transport will take a decision in principle whether to proceed with the modernisation plans, subject to consultation with the Mayor and Transport for London, in February.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what requirements the Government have placed on bidders for London Underground with respect to safety. [22820]

Mr. Spellar

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure. In addition to general health and safety law, the infrastructure companies will be required to comply with a contractual safety case.

The independent Health and Safety Executive will be examining these contractual safety cases as part of the assessment process for the next revision to London Underground's statutory Railway Safety Case. The Government have always made it clear that the plans for modernising the tube will only go ahead if the Health and Safety Executive are satisfied that London Underground has made an acceptable case for safety.

Mr. Rosindell

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many criminal incidents were reported as occurring on the London Underground in the past 12 months; and how many arrests there have been. [22940]

Mr. Jamieson

The British Transport police (BTP) have provided the following information. During the period December 2000 to November 2001, 12,787 notifiable and 5,013 non-notifiable offences were recorded by the BTP area responsible for the London Underground. The term "notifiable" refers to those offences that police forces in England and Wales are required to report to the Home Office. The term "non-notifiable" refers to those offences that are not reportable, and are generally of a less serious nature. The number of arrests is not recorded by the BTP.

Ms Buck

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will place in the Library correspondence he has had with the(a) Health and Safety Commission and (b) Health and Safety Executive on the London Underground PPP. [14481]

Mr. Jamieson

The Secretary of State has not personally written to the Health and Safety Commission or Health and Safety Executive in relation to the plans for the modernisation of London Underground.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many trains per hour are timetabled to run on each section of each London Underground line during peak hours; and what the maximum number of trains per hour to have run on each equivalent section in peak hours was in the past. [22699]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground who have provided the information set out in the table showing scheduled trains per hour for the trunk sections of each line. Trunk sections are the busiest core sections of each individual line which carry the heaviest peak hour traffic.

London underground-trains per hour in morning peak hour on trunk sections of lines
Line/section	1980	1990	2001
Bakerloo
Elephant and Castle to Queens Park	18	21	22
Queens Park to Elephant and Castle	20	22	22
Central
White City to Leytonstone	24	24	22
Leytonstone to White City	29	29	29
District and Circle
Gloucester Road to Tower Hill	25	30	29.5
Tower Hill to Gloucester Road	26	29	29.5
East London Line
Surrey Quays to Whitechapel	1—	1—	10
Whitechapel to Surrey Quays	1—	1—	10
Jubilee
West Hampstead to Charing Cross	22	23	224
Charing Cross to West Hampstead	20	20	320
Metropolitan
Baker Street to Harrow-on-the-Hill	17	16	23
Harrow-on-the-Hill to Baker Street	23	23	25
Metropolitan, Hammersmith & City and Circle
Liverpool Street to Baker Street	22	25	29
Baker Street to Liverpool Street	29	30	30
Northern
Kennington to Camden Town (via Charing Cross)	18	20	19
Kennington to Camden Town (via Bank)	18	20	19
Camden Town to Kennington (via Charing Cross)	18	19	18
Camden Town to Kennington (via Bank)	18	19	18
Piccadilly
Acton Town to Amos Grove	28	27	27
Arnos Grove to Acton Town	30	24	27
Victoria
Brixton to Seven Sisters	26	27	28
Seven Sisters to Brixton	27	29	28
Waterloo & City
Waterloo to Bank	1—	1—	18
Bank to Waterloo	1—	1—	18
1 Data not available
2 Figure for 2001 relates to Willesden Green to North Greenwich
3 Figure for 2001 relates to North Greenwich to Willesden Green

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 13 November 2001,Official Report, column 623W, on London Underground, what discussions took place between his Department and London Underground about the (a) recent and (b) continuing advertising campaigns to promote the public-private partnership for the underground, giving details of which (i) Ministers and (ii) officials were involved. [22722]

Mr. Jamieson

DTLR officials have regular contract with London Underground on a wide range of issues. DTLR Ministers have occasional meetings with London Transport and London Underground directors, but have not specifically discussed London Underground's advertising campaign.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if(a) the companies and (b) their subsidiaries, including ones that have subsequently been taken over by other companies, that make up the consortia that are the preferred bidder infracos for London Underground, have at any time in the past 10 years provided London Underground with (i) trains, (ii) signalling equipment and (iii) other (A) infrastructure and (B) service that has failed to achieve the level of performance required by the contract originally signed. [22697]

Mr. Jamieson

London Underground is responsible for managing the competition for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure. I understand that each of the bidders has previous experience of supplying goods or services to London Underground and that such experience was considered by London Underground. Detailed information on performance of its contractors is a matter for London Underground.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 19 November 2001,Official Report, columns 37–38W, on London Underground, if he will publish the (a) predicted average passenger journey time and (b) passenger excess journey time for the whole of 2001–02 to date. [22749]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground (LU) who inform me that the weighted scheduled journey time and weighted excess journey time for the period 1 April to 10 November 2001 were 35.4 minutes and 7.30 minutes respectively.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will publish(a) in which year new escalators were most recently installed at Angel station, (b) on how many occasions since these new escalators were installed the station has had to be closed because of escalator problems, (c) the length of time of each closure and (d) the name of the manufacturer of the escalators. [22698]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground who inform me that:

1. (a)new escalators were installed at Angel station in August and September 1992;
2. (b)and (c) they do not collect information in the form requested;
3. (d) the escalators at the Angel were manufactured by CNIM.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the private companies, consultancies and partnerships that have provided(a) his Department, (b) London Transport and (c) London Underground with consultancy advice concerning the public-private partnership for London Underground since the PPP negotiations began. [22752]

Mr.Jamieson

The principal firms employed by London Transport and London Underground are:

• PricewaterhouseCoopers (financial)
• Freshfields (legal)
• Ove Arup (engineering)
• Arthur Anderson (restructuring)
• PA Consulting (infraco structuring)
• Marsh (insurance)
• Pugh Roberts (modelling)
• Bacon & Woodrow (pensions)
• KPMG (review of public sector comparator).

The Department is currently employing Ernst & Young to carry out a review of London Underground's value for money evaluation of the tube modernisation plans.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) if he will give details of the improvements that will occur for passengers using the Northern line between Morden and Kennington as a result of the public private partnership for London Underground in the first five years of the PPP, giving output targets to be achieved for(a) stations, (b) track and (c) trains; [22718]

(2) if he will give details of the improvements that will occur for passengers using the Jubilee line between Wembley Park and Baker Street as a result of the public-private partnership for London Underground in the first five years of the PPP, giving output targets to be achieved for (a) stations, (b) track and (c) trains; [22716]

(3) if he will give details of the improvements that will occur for passengers using the Central line between Marble Arch and Liverpool Street as a result of the public-private partnership for London Underground in the first five years of the PPP, giving output targets to be achieved for (a) stations, (b) track and (c) trains. [22717]

Mr. Jamieson

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on 13 November 2001,Official Report, column 622W.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 15 November 2001,Official Report, column 831W, on London Underground, if he will publish the annual change in the gross operating costs of London Underground for each year since 1997–98. [22742]

Mr. Jamieson

The gross operating costs of London Underground are set out in London Transport's annual report documents, which incorporate their audited annual accounts.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answers of 13 November 2001,Official Report, column 622W, on London Underground, whether his Department has undertaken a consultation exercise specifically to discover what (a) outputs and (b) outcomes the London public wishes to see achieved as a result of the public-private partnership for London Underground; and if he will place the results in the Library. [22756]

Mr. Jamieson

London Underground is responsible for managing the competitions for the contracts to modernise the tube infrastructure. London Underground regularly undertakes consultation exercises and surveys of customers attitudes. I understand that the performance requirements in the modernisation contracts have been developed to deliver the improvements customers want, in particular increased capacity, improved reliability and higher quality (including safety and security).

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 13 November 2001,Official Report, column 622W, on London Underground, which year will be used as the base-line against which performance by PPP Infracos will be measured; and what penalties will be incurred if an Infraco achieves a performance 5 per cent, (a) above or (b) below this base-year starting-point. [22759]

Mr. Jamieson

The reliability, capacity and quality of travelling environment delivered by the infrastructure companies will be measured against benchmarks that are based on performance in the current year.

On reliability, an infrastructure company that performs 5 per cent, better than current performance will be penalised at a rate of £3 per lost customer hour for any deterioration in that performance level. If it performs 5 per cent, worse than current performance, then the penalty rate doubles so that a further deterioration in performance is penalised at a rate of £6 per lost customer hour.

A similar mechanism is used to incentivise improvements in capacity and the quality of the travelling environment. On these measures, the payment rate varies according to the line in question, but in every case the benchmark is set so that the marginal payment rate doubles if performance deteriorates below the current level. I understand that London Underground intends to make details of the contracts available once they have been signed.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will publish the annual service performance targets set for London Underground by his Department and its predecessors(a)for each year since1996–97, showing the actual performance achieved in each and (b) for 2001–02, showing actual performance achieved so far. [22700]

Mr. Jamieson

The annual service performance targets set for London Underground, and their actual performance, are set out in London Transport's Annual Reports. The performance targets set at the start of 1999–2000 were, however, two-year targets to be achieved by the end of March 2001.

The Government targets for 2001–02 were announced to the House on 19 July 2001, Official Report, column 367W. London Underground's actual performance will be published as soon as possible after the end of March 2002.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 13 November 2001,Official Report, column 622W, on London Underground, if he will state, for each London Underground line, the last year in which it carried (a) 10 per cent, and (b) 25 per cent, fewer passengers than it does today. [22741]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground, who inform me that they do not hold the information requested in a readily available form and that it could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 19 December 2001,Official Report, column 36W, on London Underground, in which months since they were introduced the trains on the (a) Central, (b)Jubilee and (c) Northern lines have failed to achieve their original contractual requirements; and what the mean distance between failure figure for the most recent month available was. [22754]

Mr. Jamieson

London Underground inform me that they do not hold readily available information on the months when contractual requirements were not met and that this could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Detailed in-year operational information such as monthly figures for mean distance between train failures is a matter for London Underground.

Mr. Redwood

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what discussions Ministers have had with the Mayor of London and the Transport Commission for London about the London Underground in the last month. [22712]

Mr. Spellar

Ministers have frequent meetings with the Mayor and Commissioner of Transport for London. The Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions most recently met the Mayor on 12 December to discuss a range of issues, including London Underground, and I last met him on 13 December.

Chris Grayling

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 10 December 2001,Official Report, column 560W, on London Underground, (1) if he will provide comparable information on signal failure for the remaining underground lines; [23212]

(2) if he will provide comparable information for the remaining parts of the lines. [23658]

Mr. Jamieson

This is an operational matter for London Underground who have provided the information set out in the following table showing the number of signal failures causing delays to services for each underground line. The data relate to the period 1 January to 10 November 2001 unless otherwise stated.

Service delays arising from signal failures (by line)
Underground line	Number
Bakerloo	133
Central	402
Circle	125
District	343
East London	54
Hammersmith and City	106
Jubilee1	232
Metropolitan	372
Northern1	166
Piccadilly1	94
Victoria	256
Waterloo and City	9
1 Data for the Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly lines relates to the period 9 December 2000 to 8 December 2001.

Mr. Page

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, (1) pursuant to his answer of 6 December 2001,Official Report, column 443W, on the Underground environment, what are the relative weights ascribed to the passenger ambience factors by the PPP contracts for London Underground in respect of (a) graffiti, (b) litter, (c) scratched windows, (d) broken lights and (e) dirt; [24249]

(2) pursuant to his answer of 6 December 2001, Official Report, column 443W, if he will publish each weight applied to each attribute covered in the PPP contracts. [24251]

Mr. Jamieson

This is a matter for London Underground. I understand that London Underground intend to make details of the contracts available once they have been signed.

Mr. Page

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 6 December 2001,Official Report, column 443W, how many mystery shoppers are employed on the London Underground; and how the findings are reported. [24250]

Mr. Jamieson

This is a matter for London Underground and for NOP who conduct the mystery shopper survey on their behalf.

Tom Brake

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he will publish the Ernst & Young report into the value for money review of PPP. [23940]

Mr. Jamieson

[holding answer 18 December 2001]Ernst & Young's report will be published as part of the consultation process and before decisions are taken on whether to sign contracts for the Government's tube modernisation plans.