5 Conclusion
55. During our inquiry both the Mayor of London and
the Minister of State for Transport argued that they were not
ideologues with regard to the PPP. Both agreed with the position
made by representatives from the trade unions, that passengers
do not care who is responsible for improving the underground as
long as the work is done effectively and within budget.
56. We reiterate
once again our judgement that the PPP scheme is flawed. Some 20
months following the demise of Metronet, the Government is no
nearer to being able to demonstrate that the PPP provides value
for money for the taxpayer. The performance of Tube Lines has,
in some cases, been exemplary. However, the sorry tale of the
upgrade to the Jubilee line has marred its overall record badly.
In the light of this project which, on current estimates, will
be delivered 10 months late, the PPP has so far failed to prove
that it is capable of delivering consistent value for money.
57. On the other hand, there is
not sufficient evidence available to demonstrate whether London
Underground is providing value for money in its work on the former
Metronet lines. We reiterate our previous recommendations that
the Government should prioritise transparency and accountability
to taxpayers and passengers by extending the PPP Arbiter's powers
for the collection of data across the entire underground network—LU
managed lines as well as those managed by Tube Lines.
| 
