Article: The next TfL financial crunch will be wrapped in a purple ribbon, and labelled “Crossrail”.

[aavm]

The next TfL financial crunch will be wrapped in a purple ribbon, and labelled “Crossrail”.

Saturday 11th June 2022 Guest Blog – David Leeder, Managing Partner, Transport Investments Ltd. The much-delayed opening of Crossrail / Elizabeth Line once again raises questions about …

busandtrainuser.com

"The much-delayed opening of Crossrail / Elizabeth Line once again raises questions about the corporate culture of TfL and the medium-term financing"

The article looks at the effect of Crossrail/Elizabeth Line on TFL's finances, and it is was a good value investment. It's author is an industry consultant.

The website it comes from, https://busandtrainuser.com is an interesting public transport blog by a retirement bus company manager. Several other of it's posts are worth a read.

[edited to comply with external link rules]

 

[Malaxa]

Interesting musings. I didn't quite give up when he implied that Crossrail money could have been better poured into that inefficient, bottomless pit called the NHS... Perhaps the London bus system could do with some massive pruning, but then that's another sacred cow to Khan and his crowd.

 

[Wolfie]

Interesting musings. I didn't quite give up when he implied that Crossrail money could have been better poured into that inefficient, bottomless pit called the NHS... Perhaps the London bus system could do with some massive pruning, but then that's another sacred cow to Khan and his crowd.

The London bus network is being pruned.

The article is disingenuous at best and reads like it's written by some uber-rightwing think tank. It looks at Crossrail's loadings in a post-COVID environment and complains that they are below those envisaged pre-pandemic. No forward planning could take account of such an event. It doesn't at any point touch on Crossrail's planned role in relieving pre-pandemic crowding on other lines, particularly the Central line.

If l was a betting man l would suspect that despite the name of the organisation that he purportedly represent s the author favours investment on roads and only buses as public transport. 4 out of 10 at best....

 

[Mikw]

The London bus network is being pruned.

The article is disingenuous at best and reads like it's written by some uber-rightwing think tank. It looks at Crossrail's loadings in a post-COVID environment and complains that they are below those envisaged pre-pandemic. No forward planning could take account of such an event. It doesn't at any point touch on Crossrail's planned role in relieving pre-pandemic crowding on other lines, particularly the Central line.

If l was a betting man l would suspect that despite the name of the organisation that he purportedly represent s the author favours investment on roads and only buses as public transport. 4 out of 10 at best....

If it's an uber right wing thinktank then the end game would be people working in factories next to accomadation blocks and private transport only being availalbe to the elites.

 

[Malaxa]

If it's an uber right wing thinktank then the end game would be people working in factories next to accomadation blocks and private transport only being availalbe to the elites.

The move within inner London is towards people living and working in tall accommodation blocks. Private transport [I assume you mean the motor car] is becoming increasingly irrelevant, as indeed are tube and, especially, bus services.

 

[KenA]

In the end TfL has a budget and currently it has a £500M deficit. Some ho that gap needs to e closed. TfL has already borrowed to the hilt and interest rate increases will make that debt more expensive

Fare have to go up. or cuts have to be made or efficiency improved or a combination of all three. £500M is a big hole to fill an the opening of the Elizabeth line may increase that debt

 

[akm]

The article is disingenuous at best and reads like it's written by some uber-rightwing think tank.

If l was a betting man l would suspect that despite the name of the organisation that he purportedly represent s the author favours investment on roads and only buses as public transport. 4 out of 10 at best....

At the top of the article it says "Guest Blog", at the bottom it says "David Leeder is Managing Partner of economic and strategy consultancy TIL Transport Investment Limited", on which organisation's homepage we have

Our Capabilities​

We provide management consulting, interim management and related services to transport operators and investors.

Our clients have included:

• hedge funds
• infrastructure funds
• distressed debt funds
• transport operators
• strategy consultants
• public equity investors
• private equity funds

By their friends shall ye know them...

 

[Goldfish62]

The London bus network is being pruned.

The article is disingenuous at best and reads like it's written by some uber-rightwing think tank. It looks at Crossrail's loadings in a post-COVID environment and complains that they are below those envisaged pre-pandemic. No forward planning could take account of such an event. It doesn't at any point touch on Crossrail's planned role in relieving pre-pandemic crowding on other lines, particularly the Central line.

If l was a betting man l would suspect that despite the name of the organisation that he purportedly represent s the author favours investment on roads and only buses as public transport. 4 out of 10 at best....

David Leeder is pretty well known in public transport circles:

Transport Investment Limited

Transport Investment Ltd (TIL) is a group of transport specialists with first hand, high-level experience of bus and rail operations in the UK, Asia, EU and North America.

www.transportinvestment.co.uk

Partners, Senior Team and Project Associates​

David Leeder - Managing Partner

David Leeder has over twenty years of top-level experience in the bus and rail sectors as director, CEO, transport planner and economist.
He was CEO of the UK's largest regional bus network outside London - West Midlands Travel, Managing Director of the UK Bus Division of First Group plc and Executive and Main Board Director at National Express Group and First Group respectively. He has considerable experience outside the UK, identifying and leading rail and bus deals in the UK, EU (Ireland, Belgium, Germany, Sweden and Denmark), Turkey and North America. He was Chairman of Altram LRT - the PPP company that designed, built and operated Midland Metro Line 1.
He has advised the UK Department of Transport across the full range of UK transport policy, including rail, from 1999-2011, and has been a Director of the holding companies for the majority of the UK's train operating companies, as well as bus and rail operations in Europe, North America and Australia, as well as GB Railfreight.
As a strategy advisor, David Leeder has provided high-level advice and analysis to a variety of global listed companies, banks, governments, infrastructure funds, and private equity investors in relation to strategy and investment in transport, supporting deals in the UK, EU, Turkey, the Middle East and USA.

 

[Craig1122]

Former board positions with National Express isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. 2 of my local bus operators have at different times been NEx owned, let's just say that the quality of operation has been vastly improved now they're no longer involved.

 

[HSTEd]

If crossrail traffic does not live up to projections once the full project is operational there are plenty of places that costs in the related rail system could be cut.

An end to the residual surface suburban trains out of Paddington and Liverpool street etc etc etc.

Given the functionally infinite life of the project, I really don't think it is credible to suggest that this is the White Elephant he says it is.
Leaving aside the functionally infinite material wealth of modern society making such projects far cheaper in real terms than they might appear.

EDIT:

He appears to be demanding the effective end of all capital spending in favour of pouring money into day-to-day spending that will just accelerate the systemic death spiral.
His political views are not surprising give his cushy consultancy roles in the Blairite governments of the early 2000s.

I would much rather have £18bn spent on crossrail than £18bn spent propping up the NHS for a couple more years before the inevitable sets in again.

 

[Wolfie]

If crossrail traffic does not live up to projections once the full project is operational there are plenty of places that costs in the related rail system could be cut.

An end to the residual surface suburban trains out of Paddington and Liverpool street etc etc etc.

Given the functionally infinite life of the project, I really don't think it is credible to suggest that this is the White Elephant he says it is.
Leaving aside the functionally infinite material wealth of modern society making such projects far cheaper in real terms than they might appear.

EDIT:

He appears to be demanding the effective end of all capital spending in favour of pouring money into day-to-day spending that will just accelerate the systemic death spiral.
His political views are not surprising give his cushy consultancy roles in the Blairite governments of the early 2000s.

I would much rather have £18bn spent on crossrail than £18bn spent propping up the NHS for a couple more years before the inevitable sets in again.

I agree your edit. Targeted investment in infrastructure is essential. Extant infrastructure does become inadequate, obsolescent or worse.

 

[SynthD]

Poppycock opinion. It seems to rely on criticising 2000s and 2010s people for providing for a world without covid. The other complaints are similarly old and well covered on this forum.

Will we be paying attention to each new complaining opinion article that has something bad to say about local politics? I hope not.

 

[Goldfish62]

His political views are not surprising give his cushy consultancy roles in the Blairite governments of the early 2000s.

He's definitely not a Blairite!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Blimey i started reading this and thought it must have come from a spokesman from the Road Haulage Association, AA or RAC but no someone who was involved with public transport. Although thanks to other posters above it all makes sense.

Ultimately its pretty pointless doing a lookback after Covid and the change in travel patterns that's occurred as all the working assumptions have been undermined.

This won't be the only public transport investment thats ongoing that won't stand up to retrospective scrutiny but I say again that just a waste of time and effort the assumptions have changed and any stress testing of those assumptions at the time wouldn't have included a pandemic and even if it did its probability would have been low to have influenced the outcome.

 

[Wolfie]

Blimey i started reading this and thought it must have come from a spokesman from the Road Haulage Association, AA or RAC but no someone who was involved with public transport. Although thanks to other posters above it all makes sense.

Ultimately its pretty pointless doing a lookback after Covid and the change in travel patterns that's occurred as all the working assumptions have been undermined.

This won't be the only public transport investment thats ongoing that won't stand up to retrospective scrutiny but I say again that just a waste of time and effort the assumptions have changed and any stress testing of those assumptions at the time wouldn't have included a pandemic and even if it did its probability would have been low to have influenced the outcome.

Exactly

 

[SynthD]

But it will stand up to retrospective scrutiny. If the pre covid report expected the central line to be unboardable at Stratford by 2025, covid would have delayed that to 2030. Year on year growth into a finite capacity network is an unavoidable truth.

 

[Goldfish62]

It's a ridiculous article from a huge bag of hot air, who seems to suggest that no large capital projects should ever go ahead incase there are calamitous unforseen circumstances in the future that impact the business case, and that mass public transport should not be subsidised.

 

[ScotGG]

Yep it's misguided at best.

Take a step back and London and the UK's population *will* continue to grow. The govt may have Rwanda flights for a bit of PR but it's also permitting *far* more migration from Asia and passports via Hong Kong and Chinese students.

Many will move to new high density housing where a car isn't an option - and public transport the norm in cities they've moved from. So in time the underlying drive for work/education/leisure use on public transport remains. Covid is a blip in the mid to long term - which is exactly what projects like Crossrail are for.

 

[miami]

Crossrail is great investment, I just with it had been paid for entirely by a land value tax on those who have benefited the most. House prices near crossrail stations increased far more than the rest of London. That's a hell of a lot of money being made and not taxed, meanwhile the suckers who actually work for a living face an ever increasing tax burden to pay for it.

inefficient, bottomless pit called the NHS

What nonsense. The UK spends far less on healthcare than other G7 countries and has done for decades.

 

[Horizon22]

I'd like to know how HS1 domestically has "undershoot the traffic levels which justify the expenditure on objective grounds". Pre-pandemic 12-cars trains were often full and standing during the peak and the rolling stock was at capacity 10-15 years earlier than expected for replacement.

The author seems to have forgotten entirely about induced demand and the fact that in places like Woolwich, Abbey Wood and Southall, various stages of housing developments have relied on Crossrail's completion. It is also a project for the next 50-100 years and will become as essential as things like Jubilee Line Extension, which also had its doubters in the first few months.

Yes TfL has a financial issue - which was not helped by the Crossrail overrun - but that is somewhat political in its making. Of course we can't forget Covid which, whilst not the be-all-and-end-all of TfL's financial woes, has led to a devastating impact with TfL being acutely exposed in its income stream by fare revenue fluctuations.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Crossrail is great investment, I just with it had been paid for entirely by a land value tax on those who have benefited the most. House prices near crossrail stations increased far more than the rest of London. That's a hell of a lot of money being made and not taxed, meanwhile the suckers who actually work for a living face an ever increasing tax burden to pay for it.

Not strictly as govt will levy stamp duty on new purchase or house sales so will reap some return for the taxpayer..

 

[jayah]

Interesting musings. I didn't quite give up when he implied that Crossrail money could have been better poured into that inefficient, bottomless pit called the NHS... Perhaps the London bus system could do with some massive pruning, but then that's another sacred cow to Khan and his crowd.

No mention of the ridiculous entitlements to free travel. There is nothing wrong in people under 16 and over 60 actually paying for things. No wonder there is a 'funding crisis'.

 

[Starmill]

No mention of the ridiculous entitlements to free travel. There is nothing wrong in people under 16 and over 60 actually paying for things. No wonder there is a 'funding crisis'.

Might ridiculous not be a little bit far? A key reason for offering free travel to under 16s was that they couldn't use cash to pay for child tickets any more, so free Oyster Zip cards were issued instead. Obviously there are alternatives, especially now. But might bot an expansion of free travel for under 11s and concession rates for under 18s be viewed as desirable for a whole host of reasons?

 

[Agent_Squash]

There is nothing wrong in people under 16 and over 60 actually paying for things.

Workhouses don't exist these days, so the vast majority of under 16s are reliant on their parents for income - what better way to encourage modal shift than to give free travel?

Do feel that the Freedom Pass should be increased to 66 as per the state pension age, however.

 

[jayah]

Workhouses don't exist these days, so the vast majority of under 16s are reliant on their parents for income - what better way to encourage modal shift than to give free travel?

Do feel that the Freedom Pass should be increased to 66 as per the state pension age, however.

Modal shift - by definition u16 can't drive. They also have fantastic and quite conspicuous spending power.

If they can't afford a bus fare now, wait until they try and insure a car a year later.

No funding crisis necessary.

 

[GusB]

Modal shift - by definition u16 can't drive. They also have fantastic and quite conspicuous spending power.

If they can't afford a bus fare now, wait until they try and insure a car a year later.

No funding crisis necessary.

Under sixteens can't drive, but if they've got access to free travel on public transport there's less reliance on parents driving them everywhere: modal shift.

 

[Wolfie]

Workhouses don't exist these days, so the vast majority of under 16s are reliant on their parents for income - what better way to encourage modal shift than to give free travel?

Do feel that the Freedom Pass should be increased to 66 as per the state pension age, however.

The Older Persons Freedom Pass, paid for by London councils not TfL, is linked to the women's state pension age. The 60+ Oyster card, introduced by one B. Johnson, is l believe funded by TfL.

 

[Agent_Squash]

Modal shift - by definition u16 can't drive. They also have fantastic and quite conspicuous spending power.

If they can't afford a bus fare now, wait until they try and insure a car a year later.

No funding crisis necessary.

If you get people used to high quality public transport, you encourage them to use it more in the future and get the parents cars off the road.

Get them used to the ease of public transport and then get them to pay - it’s worked so well so far!

 

[mmh]

If you get people used to high quality public transport, you encourage them to use it more in the future and get the parents cars off the road.

Get them used to the ease and then get them to pay - it’s worked so well so far!

Sorry, you'll have to explain what you mean here. What is "the ease" and what will you get them to pay for?

 

[Agent_Squash]

Sorry, you'll have to explain what you mean here. What is "the ease" and what will you get them to pay for?

The ease of public transport - and then once they’re at an age they can afford to pay, that’s the point they should.