Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

The Tube lines project : notorious yet attracting investors

by Agnes a Paris Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 at 06:25:01 AM EST

The much heralded Tube lines project, focused on revamping the JNP lines of the London Underground, hit a major landmark on the bond market. The transaction refinanced about £2 billion of loan facilities with the aim of:
-Achieving refinancing benefits through a repackaging of debt;
-"Tranching" the debt to provide different exposures to credit risk; and
-Gaining the benefit of lower interest rates.

The Borrower, Tube Lines Holdings, is responsible for the infrastructure management and upgrade of the Jubilee, Northern, and Piccadilly London Underground lines under a 30-year PPP. They  manage, renew, and maintain the infrastructure, including stations and rolling-stock assets, on these lines.

This strikes me as the illustration of the gap between common sense perception of this project, that of average public facility users like you and me and the appetite of financiers to fund it. Indeed, for a project to reach a successful refinancing, it has to be well-perceived by investors, in risk-reward terms.

This diary aims at giving a specific illustration of the PPP scheme being implemented, on a project that most of us know of, having at least once travelled on the London tube, when not having been stuck between 2 stations on a regular basis.


At the end of last year, the following trends in the revamping process had been identified :

Continued positive performance on the Piccadilly Line;

Weakening performance on the Jubilee Line, although still ahead of the original schedule. Part of the recent deterioration on this line has been attributable to poor performance by the track contractor, Amec. Tube Lines has, therefore, terminated this contract and brought the staff in house ;

Some recovery in performance on the Northern Line after previously disappointing levels, as a result of poor rolling-stock and signals performance. Well this is groundbreaking news to all London commuters !
Northern Line rolling stock is provided by ALSTOM under a private-finance initiative (PFI) contract established before the PPP.

The Jubilee and Northern line upgrade projects are scheduled to be completed by March 2009 and March 2011. TL has made good progress in its station modernization and enhancement program and has completed the first 10 stations, which were required to be finished in 2005. Work is under way on 19 other stations

Over the Christmas period in December 2005, TLL has successfully implemented the "seventh car" program to enhance the rolling stock on the Jubilee Line, thereby increasing the overall capacity of the line. The program was to enhance passenger capacity by nearly 20% through adding a seventh carriage to each of the existing 59 train sets and procuring four new seven-car train sets.

As to the problems previously encountered by London Underground, it would take hours to list all the culprits, so I'll stick to one, kinda funny in some way : over-reliance on temporary agency staff.
Indeed, under the PPP contract, it was expected that the longer-term view adopted by Tube Lines would lead to reduced numbers of temporary staff and an overall rationalisation of staffing.

Tubes Lines has, however, undertaken various additional works outside the scope of the PPP contract such as the redevelopment of Wembley Park Station to serve the new stadium and works at Terminal 5 at Heathrow.
TL has retained temporary agency staff to undertake these works.
Although these other works have proved profitable for TL to date, management attention was "diverted" from its core responsibilities. In other words, the company is accused of indulging into marketing specific categories of customers by allowing them to reach Wembley or Heathrow, at the expense of regular tube users...

Display:
Good grief girl, pace yourself. I haven't had time to read your last diary properly yet!
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Jan 20th, 2006 at 10:35:58 AM EST
Don't worry, I will be totally computer deprived starting this evening until Monday, so was just taking some advance... :-)

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Fri Jan 20th, 2006 at 10:49:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm slowly digesting your diaries, I will comment later on if I can.
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Sat Jan 21st, 2006 at 11:19:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Don't discourage her...go for it Agnes!! (You sure have an interesting variety of topics to explore...)

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 at 06:59:07 AM EST
Staffing issues aside: This sounds like a miracle has happened. Normally, with these sorts of projects, especially in London, there are always delays and massive cost overuns.

I was never a supporter of the London Underground privtisation scheme. I am impressed.

Money is a sign of Poverty - Culture Saying

by RogueTrooper on Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 at 09:33:47 AM EST
Like Migeru, I'm slowly sinking my teeth in these diaries. It's a bit of an alien dish to me, so I need to take this in slowly and let it linger a while before I can fully comprehend. It's all very new to me, but fascinating.

I'm still grapling with the PPP concept, so one question again. You use the PPP of several Tube lines as an illustration of the "gap between common sense perception ... and the appetite of financiers to fund it". You mean that most people view the renovation of the JNP lines by a private company as a bad thing?

by Nomad (Bjinse) on Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 at 07:33:40 PM EST
Well, what I know is PFI/PPPs are currently strongly criticised in the UK see posts on my other diary Healthcare in France : following the UK example

I am not sure this is about having a private company involved in revamping a public infrastructure, but rather about the concern about misuse of public funds, the way the tender process is organised, etc.
But I'm sure Londonbear can contribute on this and help answer your question.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill

by Agnes a Paris on Tue Jan 24th, 2006 at 04:03:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The attraction for financing companies to become involved in the London Underground PPP is preceisely because of the lack of financial risk. This is one of those projects that has so much impact on the UK economy that it cannot be allowed to fail. Quite simply, if it did, London would grind to a halt. There is therefore always the expectation that in extremis the government would bail out a failing company. With that virtual guarantee of no loss (contrary to the philosphy behind PPP!), there is every likelihood that the whole project will be highly profitable. Even if the company failed, there again would likely be a restructuring of debt with little or no loss to the financiers. Ironically it is this lack of risk that makes it likely the PPP will have to be declared as quasi-public borrowing and therefore included in the goverments public borrowing figure rather than being "off the books". As the whole intention of the PPP process is to move borrowing for public investment off the Government's books  and either onto the private borrowing figures or into an accounting "black hole", the PPP process is a failure for the Government.

Ken Livingstone proposed the sale of "London Bonds" to pay for the upgrading of the tubes lines which would be paid back over the lifetime of the project. These were rejected because they did not have this golden "off books" status that the PPP then had. You will remember that Gordon Brown has recently been ticked off by the Commission for failing to meet the Convergence Criteria because of government borrowing. This was a result partly of him being forced to re-assign some PPP borrowing back to the PSBR (public sector borrowing requirement) by the National Audit Office.

by Londonbear on Tue Jan 24th, 2006 at 12:04:21 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]