§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many work days were lost due to stress-induced illness in London Underground staff broken down by(a)station staff, (b) train drivers, (c) managerial staff and (d) signal/points operators in each financial year since 1994–95 for each line of the London Underground. [5002]
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground, which informs me that it records staff absences and the reason for the absence if possible. Absence due to stress-induced illness could be declared as several different conditions. In addition, information on staff who have left the company is archived and not easily retrievable. Therefore a reply to this question could be obtained only at excessive cost.
London Underground is currently specifying a much improved enterprise resource planning IT system which should, once installed, be able to produce such information with much greater ease.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many driver working hours are needed to run the current level of trains on London Underground each week day, broken down by line. [5005]
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground, which has provided the following information which shows the total train operator hours required on any one week day to operate the current scheduled service:
Underground line Driver hours needed each weekday Bakerloo 811 hours 19 minutes Central and Waterloo and City 1,692 hours 27 minutes Circle and Hammersmith and City 943 hours 34 minutes District 1,879 hours 22 minutes East London 183 hours 17 minutes Jubilee 1,181 hours 05 minutes Metropolitan 1,094 hours 23 minutes Northern 1,930 hours 56 minutes Piccadilly 2,026 hours 14 minutes Victoria 904 hours 20 minutes
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many London Underground trains were delayed more than 10 minutes in each year since 1994–95 broken down by line. [5012]
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground. It measures train delays of 15 minutes or more, rather than 10 minutes—in line with 365W the Customer Charter. London Underground work to 13 our-week periods in a year, and performance information is gathered on this basis. The following table
1994–95 1995–96 1996–97 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 Bakerloo 22 25 14 17 20 25 23 Central 50 37 42 55 43 37 38 Waterloo and City — — — — — — 3 District 28 29 23 19 21 24 32 Jubilee 18 9 7 8 32 34 16 East London — — — — — — 8 Metropolitan 39 35 22 22 18 27 31 Circle and Hammersmith 16 17 8 15 15 16 22 Northern 30 33 23 26 24 23 17 Piccadilly 21 19 15 19 18 18 21 Victoria 13 8 8 14 10 11 7 Total 237 212 162 195 201 215 219 1. Waterloo and City included with Central to 1999–2000
2. East London closed 1995–96 to 1997–98; included with Jubilee 1994–95 and 1998/99 to 1999–2000
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the companies used by London Underground Limited to(a) install, (b) maintain and (c) replace London Underground signals, line by line, in the last five years. [5011]
Line Install Maintain Replace Jubilee WSL LUL/Infraco1 LUL/Infraco1 Northern LUL/Infraco/Kvaerner LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco Piccadilly LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco Bakerloo LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco Central WSL/LUL LUL/Infraco1 LUL/Infraco1 Victoria LUL/Infraco2 LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco Waterloo and City LUL/Infraco2 LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco District LUL/Infraco2 LUL/Infraco and AMEC for Wimbledon branch LUL/Infraco and AMEC for Wimbledon branch Metropolitan LUL/Infraco2 LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco Hammersmith and City LUL/Infraco2 LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco Circle LUL/Infraco1 LUL/Infraco LUL/Infraco East London LUL/Infraco and Bombardier LUL/Infraco3 LUL/Infraco3 1 Second line maintenance support provided by WSL 2 Only minor works 3 Second line maintenance support provided by Marconi Notes
WSL = Westinghouse Signals Ltd. (now known as Westinghouse Rail Systems Ltd.)
AMEC = AMEC Rail Ltd. (subcontracted to Balfour Beatty BBRM)
In providing this information, London Underground have assumed that "replace" means like-for-like renewals. Where external companies are named, these are the prime contractors and no details of their subcontractors are given. LUL/Infracos also receive front-line support for some signalling control systems from:
Line Central Line WSL Jubilee Line Alcatel and Marconi East London Line Marconi
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what is the average length of time London Underground staff stayed working for London Underground, broken down by(a) station staff, (b) train drivers, (c) managerial staff and (d) signals and points operators, for each line of the London Underground in each of the last five years. [5001]
366Wshows London Underground's figures for the average number of trains delayed for 15 minutes or more in a period for the years requested:
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground, which has provided the following information on companies used as prime contractors for signalling in the last five years:
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground, which has informed me that it does not hold data in a format which allows the question to be answered in precisely the form asked. However, it has been able to provide information on the average length of service of all those employees who left the company over each of the last five years. It has also provided information on the average number of years' service of staff currently still employed by London Underground.
367W
Years Station staff Train operators Managers Signal operators 1996 8.7 15.8 13 17.1 1997 7.8 13.6 21.7 15.1 1998 7.9 16.6 16.6 14.4 1999 6.5 16.2 8.9 12.9 2000 7.4 16.6 11.2 25.6 Still employed 9.3 13 17.1 17.2 This information cannot be broken down by line without incurring disproportionate cost.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many trains ran per hour in(a) peak time and (b) other times in each year since 1994–95 broken down by line. [5009]
§ Mr. JamiesonThis information is not held centrally and could he obtained only at disproportionate cost.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) if he will make a statement on performance figures for the shadow running by the infraco companies in preparation for the partial privatisation of London Underground; [5015]
(2) if he will list the performance targets set out for the shadow running by the infraco companies in preparation for the partial privatisation of London Underground. [5016]
§ Mr. JamiesonThe Government do not set specific targets for the performance of the individual infrastructure companies. Their performance is, however, reflected in the targets set for London Underground itself.
The table shows the performance targets that have been set for London Underground Ltd. in 2001–02, together with the corresponding actual performance at the end of March 2001:
Actual performance at end March 2001 Targeted performance by end March 2002 Capacity1 63.8 65.6 Reliability2 3.69 3.63 Customer satisfaction measures:3 Train service 75 75 Information 76 77 Customer safety and security 80 80 Staff helpfulness and availability 68 69 Cleanliness 67 67 1 Train lams run in millions 2 Unweighted excess journey time in minutes 3 Average scores out of 100 The Government will set stretching, longer-term performance targets for the London Underground as part of our proposals for a 21st century tube.
In addition to these performance targets, London Underground Ltd. has also been set the following specific investment targets for 2001–02:
Total investment expenditure of at least £410 million.Specific investment to he completed:
- 19.5 km of track renewals
- five station upgrades
- five escalators replaced
- 15 escalators refurbished or repaired.
A number of other works on escalators, rolling stock, signalling, stations and track will also be started, progressed or completed during the year.
368WThe Government do not set specific safety related targets. London Underground operates services under the terms of the railways safety case approved by the Health and Safety Executive. The executive now has a double lock on safety. Before the tube modernisation plans can proceed, the executive must accept, firstly, London Underground's safety plans and, secondly, its revised safety plans to reflect the role of the private sector bidders.
The Government do not provide grant to London Transport for achieving individual targets, nor does London Underground Ltd. record actual expenditure on this basis. By the end of March 2002, a total of £2.781 billion of grant will have been provided to London Transport since April 1997, of which £2.399 billion will have been internally allocated to London Underground. The remainder has been utilised to provide other transport services, such as bus and river services, and Croydon Tramlink, before responsibility for these was transferred to Transport for London in July 2000.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what proportion of the first year of public-private partnership funding of London Underground will be spent on(a) stations, (b) escalators, (c) signals and points and (d) track improvements. [5007]
§ Mr. JamiesonThe Government's plans for the London Underground will deliver £13 billion of investment over the first 15 years, giving London the 21st century underground that it deserves. The contracts to deliver this investment remain under negotiation. However, London Underground estimate that in the first year of the contracts, approximately 50 per cent. of investment spending will be on train systems including rolling stock and signalling. A further 25 per cent. of investment expenditure will be on infrastructure, including track and civil assets. The remaining 25 per cent. will be on stations, delivering the improvements that passengers consider important: making sure the lifts and escalators work; installing CCTV to improve passenger security; tackling congestion at the busiest stations; providing step-free access; and improving the quality and cleanliness of stations.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many violent incidents against London Underground staff by passengers there were in each financial year since 1994–95 broken down by each line of the London Underground. [5003]
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground, which has provided the following information:
369W
Year Physical assaults Threats and abuse Total 1994–95 419 233 652 1995–96 455 278 733 1996–97 399 236 635 1997–98 451 257 708 1998–99 460 286 746 1999–2000 518 427 945 2000–01 576 539 1,115 The figures show the total number of assaults and threats of assault against London Underground staff by non-staff which have been reported internally. London Underground inform us that to provide a breakdown on a line-by-line basis would incur disproportionate costs as the data are not readily kept in this format.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many trains per hour in(a) peak time and (b) other times Westinghouse Signals were contracted to provide on the Jubilee Line of London Underground. [5010]
§ Mr. JamiesonLondon Underground provides train services on the Jubilee Line. Westinghouse Signals do not provide trains but were contracted to provide signalling infrastructure enabling trains to be run.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many London Underground trains were delayed due to passenger illness in each month since 1994–95 broken down by line. [5006]
2000–01 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 Bakerloo — 1 1 1 — 4 2 1 5 — 3 2 1 Central 10 7 7 14 12 6 1 6 15 2 12 11 8 Circle 2 1 1 1 1 — — — 2 — — 3 2 District 4 2 4 6 7 3 1 3 5 1 3 4 7 East London — — 1 — — — — — 1 — — 1 — Hammersmith and City 1 2 — 1 1 1 1 2 1 — — — 1 Jubilee 6 1 7 10 4 1 6 2 2 5 5 9 4 Metropolitan — 1 2 1 2 1 — — 1 2 1 2 2 Northern 8 9 7 10 11 6 2 10 — 2 8 8 7 Piccadilly 6 4 5 3 12 9 11 10 5 10 11 10 5 Victoria 3 5 2 3 2 3 3 5 3 5 4 2 2 Waterloo and City 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — Total 41 33 37 50 52 34 27 39 40 27 47 52 39
2001–02 P1 P2 P3 Bakerloo 2 1 — Central 17 6 12 Circle 1 3 1 District 5 6 3 East London — — 1 Hammersmith and City — — 3 Jubilee 2 6 3 Metropolitan 2 1 — Northern 10 8 5 Piccadilly 6 6 5 Victoria 5 2 1 Waterloo and City — — — Total 50 39 34 370W
1994–95 1995–96 1996–97 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 Bakerloo 1.2 1.1 2.7 3.9 4.6 6.2 5.8 Central 2.0 2.0 3.3 4.5 4.9 6.2 6.0 District 2.9 4.6 7.4 6.9 6.3 6.7 7.9 Jubilee 1.9 1.5 3.1 4.8 4.6 4.9 7.1 East London1 — — — — — 5.3 1.8 Metropolitan 1.1 0.5 1.8 3.4 5.5 7.0 8.5
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground. It operates to 13 four-week periods in a financial year and gathers its performance data to these timescales. It has provided the information in the tables as shown on train delays of over two minutes due to passenger illness, split by line and by period. London Underground does not hold data in this format prior to Period 7 (broadly September) in 1999. To collate previous information would incur disproportionate cost.
1999–2000 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 Bakerloo 3 1 5 2 — 1 — Central 12 16 15 5 12 7 15 Circle 1 2 1 — — 2 1 District 4 7 8 6 6 4 6 East London — — — — — — — Hammersmith and City 2 — 1 1 1 1 1 Jubilee 5 — 3 2 3 8 3 Metropolitan 2 4 — — 2 2 3 Northern 11 5 5 4 16 12 10 Piccadilly 3 9 5 7 6 6 2 Victoria 3 6 4 2 8 3 4 Waterloo and City — — — — — — — Total 46 50 47 29 54 46 45
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many customers waited more than 10 minutes to purchase tickets for London Underground journeys broken down by station in each year since 1994–95. [5013]
§ Mr. JamiesonThis is an operational matter for London Underground, which informs me that it does not gather information on ticket office performance in the format requested. It measures "the percentage of customers in a ticket queue for three minutes or more". This information is available by line, but it is not possible to break it down for the 253 stations operated by London Underground. The table sets out the average percentage of customers in a ticket queue for three minutes or more for each of the years requested.
371W
1994–95 1995–96 1996–97 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 Circle and Hammersmith 2.9 3.0 3.3 5.2 7.0 7.2 9.1 Northern 2.1 2.2 3.4 4.8 5.6 6.8 7.1 Piccadilly 2.6 3.3 3.7 4.7 7.3 8.0 8.7 Victoria 4.4 3.0 5.1 8.9 9.7 11.6 13.6 Total 2.3 2.6 4.0 5.2 6.1 7.1 7.9 1East London line formerly managed jointly with the Jubilee line and not separately surveyed before 1999–2000. It should be noted that over this period as a whole the pressures on the Underground network have risen substantially, with some 200 million extra passenger journeys undertaken last year compared to 1994–95.
Various measures are being taken as part of the Prestige PFI scheme to improve ticketing services. New multifare ticket machines have been installed across the network. These machines take credit and debit cards and are expected to help speed up ticket purchase time significantly. New ticket office machines and accounting systems are being installed which will help ticket office staff process transactions more swiftly. And by September 2001 50 new Queuebuster machines will be in place at key stations, selling a variety of tickets including weekly travelcards.