| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Railways
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 1 February 2002, Official Report, column 589W, on railway policy, if he will list the specific responsibilities of staff working in the (a) Rail Delivery Directorate and (b) Railways Restructuring Directorate; and how many staff work in each directorate. [37566]
Mr. Jamieson: There are now 51 people working in the Rail Delivery Directorate and 32 people in the Railways Restructuring Directorate. It is neither customary nor practicable to publish individual civil servants' job descriptions.
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) what proportion of the £26 billion programme of public sector support for sustaining the rail network and delivery of existing commitments, as referred to on page 25 of the Strategic Rail Authority Strategic Plan published on 14 January is (a) public investment, (b) public resource expenditure and (c) revenue support for private investment, subdivided for each year of the 10-Year Plan 2001–02 to 2011–12; [37522]
- (2) what proportion of the public sector funding used to lever in the new commitments, as referred to on page 25 of the Strategic Rail Authority Strategic Plan published on 14 January, is (a) public investment, (b) public
27 Feb 2002 : Column 1368W
- resource expenditure and (c) revenue support for private investment for each year of the 10-Year Plan 2001–02 to 2011–12. [37525]
Mr. Jamieson: I refer the hon. Member to the replies given to my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Lynne Jones) on Wednesday 23 January 2002, Official Report, columns 871–72W, and for Amber Valley (Judy Mallaber) on Tuesday 29 January 2002, Official Report, columns 177–178W, for the classification of total public sector funding.
No classification has been made for the figures published in the SRA strategic plan. While some expenditure can be generally classified—such as capital expenditure on CTRL and resource expenditure through franchise support payments—funding is allocated by purpose (i.e. existing or enhanced railway) rather than public expenditure classification.
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how much money has been spent on the bid costs of the company limited by guarantee team and their advisers; and what the estimated monthly budget going forward is. [37541]
Mr. Jamieson: The Strategic Rail Authority is funding the bid costs of the CLG team and their advisers. Expenditure will depend on the claims submitted to the SRA.
27 Feb 2002 : Column 1369W
Departmental Underspend
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the underspend in his Department for each year since 1997–98 for (a) total expenditure and (b) rail expenditure in each case providing details of the (i) amount and (ii) financial year to which any underspend has been re-allocated. [37223]
Dr. Whitehead: Provisional outturn against cash limits and against cash departmental expenditure limits, which replaced cash limits from 1 April 1999, is published in the relevant editions of the Public Expenditure Provisional Outturn White Paper. Amounts taken up under end year flexibility arrangements are announced in written answers preceding supplementary estimates and at the end of each financial year. It is not possible to provide separate figures in respect of rail expenditure on a comparable basis.
Jubilee Line
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will publish the figures originally forecast for (a) passenger volumes, (b) revenue raised and (c) frequency of trains per hour on the Jubilee Line for each financial year since 1997–98. [37253]
Mr. Spellar: This is a matter for London Underground Ltd., who have provided the following information, which indicates forecast Jubilee line passenger volumes (by the number of journeys), revenues (in the form of cash receipts) and services (as trains per peak hour):
A forecast of journeys is available only for the opening year of the Jubilee Line Extension: 1999–2000—119 M journeys.
Only forecast receipts from cash sales at underground ticket offices on the Jubilee Line are shown, rather than total revenue. This is because data on receipts are available by line. (Total revenue would include apportionment of travelcard income between different operators—including buses, national rail etc.—but these figures are available only at network level.)
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 47.3 |
| 1998–99 | 51.0 |
| 1999–2000(16) | 69.5 |
| 2000–01 | (17)106.8 |
(16) Jubilee Line Extension fully open November 1999
(17) Forecast
Forecast service levels were altered as the project evolved to reflect changes to the signalling system proposed for use on the extension. The final forecast was in line with the service actually delivered. Service levels are expressed as trains per hour (tph) on the busiest section of line at peak hours at year end. The busiest section for the first two years quoted was Charing Cross-Willesden Green and, thereafter, North Greenwich- Willesden Green. The latter two years' data are for peak direction as well as peak hour services:
27 Feb 2002 : Column 1370W
| Tph | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 20 |
| 1998–99 | 20 |
| 1999–2000 | 24 |
| 2000–01 | 24 |
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will publish the (a) passenger volumes of, (b) revenues of and (c) services on the Jubilee Line for each financial year since 1997–98. [37246]
Mr. Spellar: This is a matter for London Underground Ltd., who have provided the following information, which sets out Jubilee Line passenger volumes (by the number of journeys actually made), revenues (in the form of cash receipts) and services (as trains per peak hour):
| Million | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 62 |
| 1998–99 | 65 |
| 1999–2000(18) | 92 |
| 2000–01 | 139 |
(18) Jubilee Line Extension fully open November 1999
Only receipts from actual cash sales at underground ticket offices on the Jubilee Line are shown in the table, rather than total revenue. This is because data on receipts are available by line. (Total revenue would include apportionment of travelcard income between different operators—bus, national rail etc.—but these figures are available only at network level.)
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 47.4 |
| 1998–99 | 51.3 |
| 1999–2000(19) | 70.6 |
| 2000–01 | 107.5 |
(19) Jubilee Line Extension fully open November 1999
Service levels are expressed as trains per hour (tph) on the busiest section of line at peak hours at year end. The busiest section for the first two years quoted was Charing Cross-Willesden Green and, thereafter, North Greenwich- Willesden Green. The latter two years data are for peak direction as well as peak hour services:
| tph | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 20 |
| 1998–99 | 20 |
| 1999–2000(20) | 24 |
| 2000–01 | 24 |
(20) Jubilee Line Extension fully open November 1999
Rail Services (South-west)
Mr. Streeter: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what steps he has taken to persuade the Strategic Rail Authority to provide for a three hour journey time from London to Plymouth in its 10-year plan. [37294]
27 Feb 2002 : Column 1371W
Mr. Jamieson: The Strategic Rail Authority is currently considering how journey times from London to the south-west could be improved.
London Underground
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will estimate the loss of revenue because of fare evasion on London underground in each of the last 10 years. [37244]
Mr. Spellar: This is an operational matter for London Underground (LU) who have provided the following information.
| Year | Estimated loss of revenue (percentage) | Total revenue for the year (£ million, cash) | Estimated loss of revenue (£ million, cash) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1992 | 2.37 | 703 | 16.7 |
| 1993 | 2.28 | 749 | 17.1 |
| 1994 | 1.19 | 824 | 9.8 |
| 1995 | 1.44 | 849 | 12.2 |
| 1996 | 1.50 | 864 | 13.0 |
| 1997 | 2.00 | 945 | 18.9 |
| 1998 | 2.30 | 993 | 22.8 |
| 1999 | 2.41 | 1,059 | 25.5 |
| 2000 | 2.37 | 1,131 | 26.8 |
| 2001 | 2.54 | 1,150 | 29.2 |
LU have identified particular revenue loss hotspots, and these areas have been targeted in liaison with the British Transport Police (BTP) and where appropriate the train operating companies. They are also engaged in initiatives with the BTP to mitigate the effects of ticket touting, for example, by making announcements to customers to ask them not to give their tickets to touts and asking them to report touts to LU staff. Steps have been taken to make ticket purchase far simpler, by introducing phone and internet ticketing facilities and the installation of "Queuebuster" ticket machines at the busiest stations. The development of smartcard technology, being introduced under the Prestige project, should help to make fare evasion more difficult in the future.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |