On May 8, 12:01*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2010 11:16:46 +0100, Bruce wrote:

On Sat, 8 May 2010 02:58:03 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:
No problem - you were very on the ball to pick this up

He was?

Well, I hadn't come across any suggestion of it - I'm not even
remotely in the loop of course.


My sources alerted me earlier in the day, but I couldn't say anything
until it was released to the press.

Given that there was an article in the Times which someone at Tube Lines
sent to me at work before 8am yesterday morning what was it that you
couldn't say?

The Times article was embargoed because of the election AIUI.

I was called at 2135 last night to say the deal had gone through and
Paul Waugh stuck something up on the Standard website at 2153.

A copy of the internal notice and TfL Press Release were posted to a
Yahoo group I belong to before 2230 last night.

The shenanigans around Tim O'Toole's proposed appointment to Tube
Lines told me several weeks ago that something was afoot, so I delved,
and delved, and found out that something was going on, but no-one
could tell me what - they know it will go straight to uk.r (and to
uk.t.l if I remember!). *So my antenna have been twitching for a few
weeks now ... ;-)

Oh really. *Only weeks. *Behind the times as usual then.

Good news indeed. *Very good news!

Well if you want to see people like me sacked then yes I suppose so.
Peoples' livelihoods are all wrapped up in this you know.

In and of itself that's not really a strong defence of the current
arrangements that appear to be widely viewed as rather flawed, and
that's a broad opinion that I think it's fair to say that you yourself
have voiced a number of times beforehand (I don't want to misrepresent
your views though). I do of course realise that this is all rather
close to the bone - we know about the 'efficiency savings' that
happened when Metronet got subsumed into the LU structure as a result
of duplication being cut out - and I would hope that LU realise
they've got an asset in you (and others) and that there aren't going
to be any compulsory redundancies as a result of the subsequent
reorganisation.

On Sat, 8 May 2010, Mizter T wrote:

On May 8, 10:45*am, Bruce wrote:

On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:38:24 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

[original thread on uk.railway]
[x-posted to ik.transport.london]

Or indeed *UK*.transport.london (as opposed to IK !)

Would ik.transport.london be restricted to discussing the GWR and the
Thames Tunnel?

tom

--
made up languages, delusions, skin diseases and unaided human flight

In article . li,
says...

On Sat, 8 May 2010, Mizter T wrote:

On May 8, 10:45*am, Bruce wrote:

On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:38:24 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

[original thread on uk.railway]
[x-posted to ik.transport.london]

Or indeed *UK*.transport.london (as opposed to IK !)

Would ik.transport.london be restricted to discussing the GWR and the
Thames Tunnel?

tom

No, should also include transport by any means to that university near
Uxbridge.

In message . li
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sat, 8 May 2010, Mizter T wrote:

On May 8, 10:45*am, Bruce wrote:

On Fri, 7 May 2010 17:38:24 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

[original thread on uk.railway]
[x-posted to ik.transport.london]

Or indeed *UK*.transport.london (as opposed to IK !)

Would ik.transport.london be restricted to discussing the GWR and the
Thames Tunnel?


I think you'd get away with adding the Metropolitan Line.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net/

On May 8, 1:38*am, Mizter T wrote:

On May 7, 11:59*pm, Bruce wrote:

Quite a surprise except to those who knew about the negotiations:

"Tube Lines' shareholders agree £310M buyout deal with TfL

Shareholders of London Underground contractor Tube Lines have tonight
agreed a buyout deal with Transport for London (TfL) for the PPP
arrangement with a price tag of £310M.

The dramatic decision follows months of rows between the two parties
over the cost of the upgrade and maintenance of the Piccadilly,
Northern and Jubilee Lines over the next seven and a half years.

However, the parties confirmed that Amey will continue to provide
management and maintenance during that period under the existing
contract with Tube Lines and that Bechtel will remain for an interim
period to ensure a smooth transition of the capital improvement
programme into TfL."

First Metronet, now Tube Lines. *The effective end of the PPP!

Blimey - didn't see that coming, not at all!

More from Tom Edwards of BBC London:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mindthega...inning_of.html
or via http://tinyurl.com/2w8w6xx

He quite reasonably asks where TfL will find the £310 million from to
buy Tube Lines, given that TfL said they were going to struggle
finding the £400 or so million for the Tube Lines funding gap (as
determined by the PPP arbiter).

Wouldn't be a massive surprise to hear that some of the Underground
network's upgrades will be put on ice, given the already stretched
state of TfL's finances - given the state of (central govt) public
finances (which TfL is heavily reliant on), things aren't about to get
any easier any time soon.

He quite reasonably asks where TfL will find the £310 million from to
buy Tube Lines, given that TfL said they were going to struggle
finding the £400 or so million for the Tube Lines funding gap (as
determined by the PPP arbiter).

Surely TfL weren't expected to pay the £4.46bn upfront for a 7 year
programme! The £400m shortfall was on top of the £4bn TfL had budgeted
and were willing to pay for the infrastructure works. Surely the £310m
would simply come from this years payment to Tubelines for their work,
AIUI.

On May 8, 2:34*pm, Benamin wrote:
He quite reasonably asks where TfL will find the £310 million from to
buy Tube Lines, given that TfL said they were going to struggle
finding the £400 or so million for the Tube Lines funding gap (as
determined by the PPP arbiter).

Surely TfL weren't expected to pay the £4.46bn upfront for a 7 year
programme! [...]

Well no, of course not!

[...] The £400m shortfall was on top of the £4bn TfL had budgeted
and were willing to pay for the infrastructure works. Surely the £310m
would simply come from this years payment to Tubelines for their work,
AIUI.

That doesn't follow - the payments from LU to Tube Lines are for work
to be done. If that money is simply diverted to the current owners of
Tube Lines so as to pay for the purchase of the company (i.e. to pay
for the shares), then that money won't be available for the newly LU-
owned Tube Lines to use to pay for those works. Therefore if that
money would simply come from this years payment, then £310 million
less worth of work would be done on the relevant part of the network
(Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly lines).

However, one does rather suspect that this will contribute towards a
scaling back of the upgrade programme. Boris might well argue with the
to-be-newly installed Tory Chancellor Osbourne that this PPP mess was
not of his (or indeed his predecessors) making, but that of central
governments, and therefore they should stump up the extra cash -
indeed this is more or less what Boris has already argued with the
outgoing Labour Chancellor Darling (and whilst things were at an
earlier stage, Ken was putting forward such arguments too). However,
given the coming age of austerity, I wonder if Boris would really put
forward such an argument that strongly given the circumstances - and
if he did I suspect it would be done quietly rather than publicly
(i.e. loudhailer negotiations would be a ting of the past). That said,
it is Boris, so who knows...

(Of course all the above is in the context of there being an incoming
Tory administration of some sort, but given that that's what's going
to happen, I didn't feel the need to add any caveats in. Well, apart
from this one!)

Everyone should be aware this is not the end of pfi ppp within the
london underground.

Powerlink and Connect both remain in place. No doubt someone will post
something to the opposite, but I am not aware of any serious rumours
about bringing those in house.

--
Nick

On May 8, 6:35*pm, D7666 wrote:
Everyone should be aware this is not the end of pfi ppp within the
london underground.

Powerlink and Connect both remain in place. No doubt someone will post
something to the opposite, but I am not aware of any serious rumours
about bringing those in house.

Also the Northern line rolling stock is provided by Alstom under a PFI
deal (a "whole life train service provision contract" or some such
similar thing).

The Northern line trains, Powerlink and Connect are all PFI contracts
- "PPP" solely refers to the infraco arrangements, UIVMM.

On May 8, 1:31*pm, Mizter T wrote:

He quite reasonably asks where TfL will find the £310 million from to
buy Tube Lines, given that TfL said they were going to struggle
finding the £400 or so million for the Tube Lines funding gap (as
determined by the PPP arbiter).

Wouldn't be a massive surprise to hear that some of the Underground
network's upgrades will be put on ice, given the already stretched
state of TfL's finances - given the state of (central govt) public
finances (which TfL is heavily reliant on), things aren't about to get
any easier any time soon.

In round figures, as I understood things, when metronet went into TfL
there were direct savings of 0.5 million - 1.0 million depending who
you listed to just by eliminating the duplicated effort of 2 parties
checking each others contracts and works. Proportionately finding 310
million to take in tube lines seems about right. While the
circumstances are different - metronet was in admin and tube lines is
being brought in before (if) that happens, those costs were still
there, they were not a function of collapse but contracts admin on
both sides. At least thats how the gossip wet. The problem is one
never knows if what you get is rumour and speculation or is a leak by
someone who really doesknow the score.

--
Nick