Question
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the statement of 10 March 2008, Official Report, column 113, on London Underground, who undertook the work on comparative analysis of the public private partnership versus conventional public sector-led procurement referred to by the Minister of State in her Department at column 114; what (a) account was taken and (b) weight given to the potential for the private partner to go into administration by (i) those undertaking the work and (ii) each independent scrutineer of the work and methodology on which it was based; and if she will place in the Library copies of the reports of (1) KPMG, (2) Ernst and Young and (3) the National Audit Office on this matter.
Answer
Work on the comparative analysis of the public-private partnership versus conventional public sector-led procurement was led by London Underground, with assistance from various organisations including KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers and Ove Arup. Ernst and Young also undertook a separate, independent analysis on behalf of the then Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions.The potential for a PPP company to enter administration was fully considered during the construction, analysis and procurement of the PPPs and was reflected in both the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and the contracts themselves.The Ernst and Young report, ““London Underground PPPs Value for money Review—Independent Review for the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions””, was placed in the House Libraries when it was published on 7 February 2002. All National Audit Office reports, including their report, ““The Financial Analysis for the London Underground Public Private Partnerships””, published on 15 December 2000, are placed in the Libraries when they are published. On 31 March 2000, KPMG wrote to London Underground giving their ““Final Assessment Report”” into the PPPs and this included analysis of the public sector comparator and my officials are seeking London Underground's views as to whether or not this report can now be placed in the House Library.