§ Matthew TaylorTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what changes relating to reputational externalities were made in the Ernst & Young, London underground PPPs Value for Money Review, between the receipt of a copy from Ernst & Young and the presentation of the copy to the House on 5 February; and if he will make a statement. [46448]
§ Mr. JamiesonNo such changes were made.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions whether he intends to appoint an interim arbiter for the London Underground PPP; and under what powers and specification he is able to make such an appointment. [46381]
§ Mr. JamiesonI refer the hon. Member to the answers given on 5 March 2002,Official Report, column 170W, and 12 March, Official Report, column 920W.
§ Norman BakerTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what assessment he has made of the ability of London Underground rolling stock to operate on main lines beyond the terminal points of the tube network. [45880]
§ Mr. Jamieson[holding answer 25 March 2002]: This is a matter for London underground (LU). LU's rolling stock is purpose-designed and the Underground uses a four-rail system and operates to different rules from the main line. These differences make it difficult for LU rolling stock to operate beyond the existing network. However, there are short sections of the main line over which LU has long standing running rights and which have been specially adapted for this purpose.
LU has carried out an assessment of a section where they plan to extend the Metropolitan line to Watford Junction (the Croxley Link). This involves a short section of new line and then a connection to the Euston/Watford Junction main lines.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the safety case that will be required to be conducted by the Health and Safety Executive before the transfer of London Underground to Transport for London; and what implications this has for contracts between infracos and London Underground under the PPP. [45660]
§ Mr. JamiesonLondon Underground, as the operator of trains, stations and infrastructure, is responsible for preparing a safety case. The Health and Safety Executive considers whether the safety arrangements made out in the case, if implemented, are capable of delivering safety.
HSE is currently considering London Underground's revision of its existing case, which sets out safety arrangements with its infrastructure companies in the private sector. Acceptance of these arrangements by HSE is necessary before the Tube modernisation plans can proceed. Whether a further revision will be necessary to cover transfer of London Underground to 947W Transport for London depends on the extent of any further changes to safety arrangements that may be involved.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions which aspects of the modernisation plans for the London Underground have been set as requirements by his Department; and what the mechanism is by which these requirements have been set in each case. [45654]
§ Mr. JamiesonThe Government do not have powers to set specific requirements in relation to London Underground's plans for the modernisation of the Tube. London Underground shares the Government's objectives of improving the Tube and ensuring that there should be no privatisation, that safety be maintained or improved and that the contracts should only go ahead if they represent value for money.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) pursuant to the answer of 11 March 2002,Official Report, column 736W, on London Underground, who in Government have been involved in the discussions on increased public grants to support the tube modernisation programme with Transport for London; on what dates discussions have take place; and what reference has been made to the infraco contracts in discussions with Transport for London; [45662]
(2) what discussions he (a) has had and (b) plans to have with other parties regarding increased public grants to support the tube modernisation programme. [45655]
§ Mr. JamiesonTripartite discussions have begun between officials of my department, London Underground and Transport for London on the overall level of grant provision over the first seven and a half years of the Tube modernisation contracts. It is envisaged that a number of further discussions will take place between the three parties before the grant determination process is concluded.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to the answer of 11 March 2002,Official Report, column 737W, on PPP Infracos, who has statutory powers to take over work from the London Underground PPP Infracos; and under what legislation. [45708]
§ Mr. JamiesonUnder the plans for the modernisation of the Underground, three infrastructure companies will carry out work to maintain and modernise the Tube's infrastructure under contract to London Underground. The contracts provide powers for London Underground to take over the work of the infrastructure companies if necessary for safety or other reasons.
As referred to in my answer of 4 March 2002, Official Report, column 85W, the Greater London Authority Act 1999 provides statutory powers for an infrastructure company to be managed under a PPP administration order.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to the answer of 7 March 2002,Official Report, column 555W, on London Underground, how many 948W revisions of the draft PPP contracts were received by his Department; on which dates; and what the reasons were for the revisions in each case. [45623]
§ Mr. JamiesonAs stated in my answer of 7 March 2002,Official Report, column 555W, London Underground has shared revisions to draft contracts with DTLR throughout the process of developing the proposals for the modernisation of the Underground. Details of the number and dates of changes could only be provided as disproportionate cost. The reasons for any changes are a matter for London Underground, but throughout the aim has been to ensure that the public sector gets the best value for money overall.
§ Tom BrakeTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what correspondence was received from(a) Transport for London, (b) the London Mayor and (c) London Transport on the London Underground PPP in the week preceding 7 February; and if he will place the correspondence in the Library. [42113]
§ Mr. Jamieson[holding answer 11 March 2002]: Consistent with the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information exemption on internal discussion and advice, it would not be appropriate to place such correspondence in the Library.