Passenger safety
88. London Underground is in possession of its safety
certificate and safety authorisation from the Office of Rail Regulation
(ORR), which, while not guaranteeing safety, indicates that the
ORR is satisfied that an effective safety management system is
in place. Responsibility for adhering to the terms of the certificate
and authorisation rests with London Underground, and the Infracos
must cooperate with LU on all safety matters. London Underground
will need to obtain an updated certificate and authorisation by
March 2012 at the latest. The ORR's own indicators show that overall
safety on the railway has not deteriorated since the inception
of the PPP Agreements and it describes LU as providing "good
levels of passenger and worker safety" though, as with all
railways, there is the potential for derailments and other serious
incidents.[122]
89. The ORR has investigated four train derailments
since the introduction of PPP and concludes that the number and
causes of derailments appears to have been unaffected by the PPP.
Similarly, the ORR does not believe that PPP has resulted in a
change to the number of signals passed at danger. On track maintenance
and renewals the ORR says:
The quality of track has implications for train
safety, and was implicated in the 2003 Hammersmith derailment.
The PPP Infracos took time to develop their priorities for maintaining
and renewing track and this meant that some of the most pressing
renewals work was not done as quickly as it should have been.
In April 2006 we took enforcement action to require Metronet SSL
to maintain the District Line to an appropriate standard.[123]
Finally, the ORR report that, as a result of the
PPP, rail defects are now more likely to be detected before they
become rail breaks, and that there is no indication that the PPP
has had a detrimental effect on rolling stock maintenance.
90. When Metronet entered administration, the ORR
carried out additional inspections to ensure that track, signals
and rolling stock continued to be safely maintained. However,
Gerry Doherty, General Secretary of the Transport Salaried Staffs'
Association, expressed grave concern that the PPP structure had,
in fact, increased risk on the Underground network:
Do not wait until you get the same specific instances
that you had on the mainline railway through fragmentation and
through privatisation before we do something about bringing the
railway infrastructure back into where it should be and get proper
control over it. What we are saying is that what happened on the
Underground is a mirror of what happened on the railway before
we had all of those accidents and before we took action by bringing
infrastructure and maintenance back in-house.[124]
91. The ORR's evidence supports the view that passenger
safety levels on the Tube have been broadly maintained, and in
some areas improved, since responsibility for the infrastructure
transferred to the Infracos. There is no room for complacency,
however—the
unions have highlighted the fact that divisions of responsibility,
particular during periods when responsibilities are being transferred
between organisations, could potentially increase the risk of
safety breaches occurring.
92. During the transition of Metronet's ownership
from its shareholders to Transport for London and for the duration
of Transport for London's stewardship of the Infracos, as well
as in the longer-term under whatever vehicle is chosen to deliver
the upgrades, passenger safety must be the primary concern of
everyone who is involved. A key role for the Government in its
discussions with the Mayor and Transport for London will be to
ensure that future contracts incentivise the actions that are
necessary to guarantee the highest standards of safety on the
network.
117 
