Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Sayeed: Will the Minister give way?

5 May 1999 : Column 971

Ms Jackson: If I may, I should like to finish responding to the hon. Member for Southwark,North and Bermondsey. We have made it abundantly clear that we will not be driven by an artificial date; we will be driven only by that which is in the best interests of the public and will deliver best value.

Mr. Sayeed: The Minister says that she will not be driven by an artificial date, but a date is already specified in the proposals: that date is May 2000. According to Treasury figures, there will be no subsidy after May 2000. The fact is that the Government are well behind their plans for public-private partnerships. If PPP does not come about by the specified date, how will the Minister fund the tube?

Ms Jackson: May 2000 is important because that is when the mayor and the assembly will be elected in London. The hon. Gentleman should note that we are discussing amendments and new clauses that will bring about the transition from London Regional Transport to Transport for London. There is no date for when PPP will be completed, because, as I have said, the Government will not be driven by the artificial end dates that, as far as the people were concerned, proved such a disaster under Administrations hell-bent on rail privatisation.

Mr. Bercow: Will the Minister give way?

Ms Jackson: No.

Those end dates cost the people an enormous amount. They were a gross waste of national assets. This Government are driven by a wish to provide best value for the taxpayer, and they will deliver the best of all possible values in terms of investment in London Underground.

Mr. Bercow rose--

Ms Jackson: Now I will give way to the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Bercow: If the Government are untroubled by dates, why, at the end of last year, did the Deputy Prime Minister blunder into talking about invitations for expressions of interest early this year--and why is it now necessary for his junior colleague to rescue him?

Ms Jackson: My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister never blunders. I do not understand what the hon. Gentleman is talking about.

I believe that I have answered all the questions put to me. I commend the amendments and new clauses.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 145

Transfer of property etc to the Authority


Amendment made: No. 85, in page 76, leave out lines 32 to 39.--[Mr. Dowd.]

5 May 1999 : Column 972

Clause 146

Transitional provisions


Amendment made: No. 86, in page 76, line 40, leave out from beginning to end of line 23 on page 77.--[Mr. Dowd.]

Clause 147

Construction of references in Local and Personal Acts


Amendment made: No. 87, in page 77, leave out lines 24 to 26.--[Mr. Dowd.]

Clause 171

PPP agreements

Mr. Ottaway: I beg to move amendment No. 79, in page 88, line 1, leave out from beginning to end of line 16 on page 98.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following: Amendment No. 22, in page 88, line 24, leave out 'must not' and insert 'may'.

Amendment No. 23, in page 88, line 25, leave out 'must not' and insert 'may'.

Amendment No. 24, in page 88, leave out lines 27 to 29.

Government new clause 37--The PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 38--Terms of appointment etc of the PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 39--Staff of the PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 40--Directions of the PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 41--Guidance by the PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 42--Duty of PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 43--Further powers of the PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 44--Provision of information to the PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 45--Immunity of PPP arbiter.

Government new clause 46--Expenses of the PPP arbiter.

New clause 3--Funding and Management of London Underground--


'The Mayor shall not be bound by any Public Private Partnership entered into by London Regional Transport or Transport for London and shall be free to enter into any method of funding and management of London Underground including a long lease of management, maintenance, replacement of rolling stock and operation to a private contractor.'.

New clause 5--Public interest company if PPP agreement not signed--


'(1) If no PPP agreement has been signed by 1st July 2000, the Mayor and Assembly shall be permitted to establish a public interest company as defined by subsection (2) below.

5 May 1999 : Column 973


(2) In this Chapter "public interest company" means a company--
(a) a majority of whose issued shares are held by or on behalf of any of the bodies or persons falling within paragraphs (i) to (iv) below;
(i) any Minister of the Crown, Government department or other emanation of the Crown;
(ii) any local authority;
(iii) any metropolitan county passenger transport authority;
(iv) any body corporate whose members are appointed by a Minister of the Crown, a Government department, a local authority or a metropolitan county passenger authority or by a body corporate whose members are so appointed;
(b) in which the majority of the voting rights are held by or on behalf of any of the bodies or persons in subsection (2)(a) above;
(c) a majority of whose board of directors can be appointed or removed by any of the bodies or persons in subsection (2)(a) above;
(d) in which the majority of the voting rights are controlled by any of the bodies or persons in subsection (2)(a) above, pursuant to an agreement with other persons; or
(e) a subsidiary of a company falling within subsections (a) to (d) above.
(3) The public interest company may borrow money for investing in transport in Greater London.'.

New clause 9--Public interest company if PPP agreement not signed (No. 2)--


'.--(1) If no PPP agreement has been signed by the date of enactment of this Act, the Mayor and Assembly shall be authorised to establish a public interest company as defined by subsection (2) below to take over from London Underground Limited.
(2) In this Chapter "public interest company" means a company--
(a) a majority of whose issued shares are held by or on behalf of any of the bodies or persons falling within paragraphs (i) to (iv) below:
(i) any Minister of the Crown, Government department or other emanation of the Crown;
(ii) any local authority;
(iii) any metropolitan county passenger transport authority;
(iv) any body corporate whose members are appointed by a Minister of the Crown, a Government department, a local authority or a metropolitan county passenger authority or by a body corporate whose members are so appointed;
(b) in which the majority of the voting rights are held by or on behalf of any of the bodies or persons in subsection (3)(a) above;
(c) a majority of whose board of directors can be appointed or removed by any of the bodies or persons in subsection (3)(a) above;
(d) in which the majority of the voting rights are controlled by any of the bodies or persons in subsection (3)(a) above, pursuant to an agreement with other persons; or
(e) a subsidiary of a company falling within subsections (a) to (d) above.
(3) The public interest company may borrow money for investing in transport in Greater London.'.

Mr. Ottaway: If anything illustrates the ideological battle at the heart of the Government, it is the delay, dither and lack of policy on London underground. The Government have learned how to use the language of the marketplace; they have learned how to pay lip service to the value of the private sector; but, when it comes to the

5 May 1999 : Column 974

crunch and they have to face up to tough issues such as the future of London underground, they chicken out and return to their old Labour roots.

What party on earth other than the Labour party promises improvements to London underground in its manifesto, and then comes up with a scheme that offers less investment than was offered by their predecessors, and says that the solution is to leave London underground in the hands of its present management?

As my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) said, the standards of London underground are slipping, and the problems have become increasingly acute during the past two years. The Department's own figures state that in 1994-95, more than 16,000 delays were caused by faults in rolling stock. That figure fell over the next few years, before rising to more than 20,000 this year. Signal failures are up, as are other track faults; breakdowns and signal failures are daily occurrences. Poor conditions, delays and people missing connections are a fact of life, and the Government are taking no positive action to improve the situation.

Since taking over the underground, the Government have cut investment. Table 13.d of their own annual report, to which I referred when we were discussing the previous group of amendments, shows a sharp fall in London Transport investment. As my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Bedfordshire (Mr. Sayeed) pointed out, no investment has been announced for next year, and the Treasury is ordering the Deputy Prime Minister to take the money out of the road maintenance programme.


Next Section

IndexHome Page