A.                 HISTORY OF THE TUBE

Public transport has been a perennial need of up and coming cities. Specifically, it was London, which clamored for a different kind of transport that would not compromise the land area of the city. There was a lack of direct rail services (railroad lines which connected with each other to give a passenger direct access to his destination); the solution to this problem was the idea for a succession of main line stations linked by an underground railway. Charles Pearson, the City Corporation's Solicitor for London, first suggested this idea in the 1830s. (Ladart, 1999) As overseer of the city's corporations, he recognized the desperate need for a new type of railway. A railway with up to eight tracks running under the New Road was proposed. It seemed to have numerous economic and social advantages. The demand for this type of transportation was so great that there was no need to doubt its financial value. Traffic in the inner city would be relieved, all markets would experience an increase in business because they could be more easily reached by the public, and it fit in with the city's improvement scheme by clearing out the unsanitary slum areas with railway lines. However, the proposal failed. It could not get the necessary financial backing and was refused by Parliament. In 1818, Marc Isambard Brunel patented a method of tunneling through the ground using a shield. This shield went through many transformations until J. H. Greathead perfected the design. It was circular in shape with a diaphragm within which the cast iron tunnel segments were bolted up. It advanced hydraulically. As it advanced, a void was left in between the excavation and the lining, but pumping a cement grout into the gap solved this problem. Sir Benjamin Baker, a partner of the Metropolitan Railway Company, summed up the great engineering experience of the construction by listing at least twelve feats of engineering which were perfected by the crew without having ever been instructed in such procedures. Those problems had been solved for the first time during the construction of the Underground, and the principles of their solutions have been used since then in engineering and construction.

All of this happened without much input from the public. (Ladart, 1999) Because of the great demand for direct line services within the city of London, it was simply assumed that this project was one the public was anxious to see in progress. This was absolutely the case. In spite of the great danger and fear of going underground, die loss of the few open spaces in the already crowded city, the incredible demolition of London, and the horrible injustice to the poor (without any consideration or reparation, many of the poor had their homes destroyed in order to clear the way for the lines) all caused or furthered by the introduction of the Underground, the public loved it. It was there and they used it. There would have been an immense of loss of comfort and convenience without it. Not only would the Victorian public have lost a method of transportation, but also future generations would have been denied references to a metaphor of motion, which fascinated the Victorians and permeated their art and literature. They would also have lost out on the unbelievable advancements made in engineering through the Underground's construction, and the first real allowances for the poor made through transportation which would lead to a number of other types of regulated standards for the less fortunate.

About 38,000 people rode the Underground its first day in operation and thousands more waited in line. The crowd was described as "the crush at the doors of a theatre on the first night of a pantomime." (Ladart, 1999) The trains were overstuffed to accommodate those who absolutely had to experience the Underground on the first day. At 12:00 noon, there were enough people waiting to fill four trains in succession and for an hour, no further tickets were sold in order to decrease the crowds. The London Times described the experience of the Underground as, on the whole, pleasant. The underground lines were free from the annoyances usually experienced in railway tunnels. The engine drivers paid greater attention to the working of the engines, and they were very careful in the management of their fires. However, it was admitted that there was a very small amount of sulfurous fumes given off, and because the condensing tanks below the engines were really too small to accommodate the amount of steam given off, some steam had to be discharged into the tunnels-but it was also a small amount and condensed very quickly.

The Underground continued to grow as well. It began at only 3.75 miles long and today has over 250 route miles. (Ladart, 1999) During the Victorian period it had profound economic and social effects. Its construction, and all railway construction, increased the demand for coal, iron, bricks and other building materials. Large companies backed the railways and made them into huge financial investments -- huge profit producing corporations.

 

B.                 CONSUMER PERCEPTION

However, the project was not able to acquire all smiles from the public. Very notable sectors of the London community were pessimistic on the said construction of the tube. In fact, a different source described the atmosphere in the tunnels as extremely bad and said breathing the sulfurous fumes was "much like the inhalation of gas preparatory to having a tooth drawn ... By the time we reached the Gower Street, I was coughing and spluttering like a boy with his first cigar!" (Ladart, 1999) And still another observer found the problems of the Underground to be significant, complaining of "the darkness of the tunnels, the heat of the gas-lighted carriages in the summer, the sulphurous odor down in the stations, and the fear of unknown and indefinite dangers."

Likewise, the extensive demolition and area shutdowns caused by the Underground were also a highly debated topic. One very critical editorial in The London Times likened the map of the Metropolitan railways to "an anatomical drawing with endless filaments of blue and red veins running from one blotchy center to another." (Ladart, 1999) In this article we are told that no space is safe from the intrusion of the "iron monsters." There was a great fear in many of the Victorians that the simplicity in life which they highly valued and the element of nature which was extremely important was being destroyed by this fast-paced progress, just as the earth was being raped by the men and machinery constructing the Underground.

In addition, many felt that all of the railway lines added to the squalor and unhealthiness of the city. While the Underground was constructed under the premise that it was to relieve traffic, its construction led to even further blockage of roads. Timber, mud, stone, bricks, sand, tools, etc. made foot pavements impassable and roadways were blocked with men, machinery, earth, and the tunnels themselves. The Underground was to have increased business, but at first it succeeded only in driving people away from lodgings and shops. There was also a great interference with drainage and other underground pipelines. In spite of careful attempts to avoid these lines in the excavation of the earth, many lines were hit and damaged or destroyed. One of the reasons behind the delay of the Underground's scheduled opening was an accidental breakage into the sewerage line, which ran parallel to the railway line. As the pipelines below the earth were being destroyed and the city above was being demolished, London's few open spaces dwindled away. If there were any places that were not already overcrowded with people, pollution, and buildings, they were soon filled up with the confusion of construction and/or railway lines.

Nonetheless, the Ladart (1999) provided an analysis on the negative reaction of the people of London. Firstly, the resentment and the problems were felt and seen by an extremely small percentage of people. There was never any more than editorial comments made on the disadvantages of the railway; never was any train boycotted, not for a day, not even for a single run. It was a necessity and a convenience-not something the public was likely to give up. The Underground and the railways of London amazed the people. They put the spectacle of speed and motion in front of the people's lives and it was intoxicating to them. Nature was conquered and now there was a way also to conquer space and time! The art and literature of the era reflect these feelings. Railway metaphors popped up in many literary works. Dickens used them frequently. R. L. Stevenson's famous poem "From a Railway Carriage" is another example: "All of the sights of the hill and the plain, fly as thick as driving rain, and ever again in the wink of an eye, painted stations whistle by." (Ladart, 1999) The railways also appeared in literature in a negative light. William Morris describes the Underground as "that vapour-bath of hurried and discontented humanity."

Moreover, the most important consequence of the creation of the London Underground is the contribution it made to the regulation of standardized assistance to the poor. (Ladart, 1999) Charles Pearson, the creator of the plan for an underground railway service knew that the service would cater greatly to the working class traveling to work each day. He also realized the serious expense such railroad trips would be to the poor. He had hoped for a standard low fare for the working class, but died before this goal was achieved. By 1865 between 1,800 and 2,000 workmen were using the Underground every day. Because of the huge injustice done to the poor in the construction of the railway, the return rate for the workers was lowered to 3 d. Although this does not sound like a significant discount, and while we realize that this in no way solved or helped the problem of homelessness (except in a very abstract way), the Metropolitan Railway was the first ever to offer such a compensation to the poor

 

C.                 ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIES

The Tube is crucial to London's role as a great, modern metropolis. It has helped give London a unique transport system, supporting business, tourism and leisure activity. And its impact goes beyond London. (Dept. of Transport) It is the oldest underground railway in the world. Its age, and the past under-investment, means that it does not provide a modern service fit for a 21st century capital. This fact provides anxiety to the consumers of the said transport with regards on the proper maintenance of the Tube. Nonetheless, the Government is committed to modernize the Underground. Thus, the government pursued the Public Private Partnership (PPP). It is a process wherein the Tube stays in the public sector while private companies fix the infrastructure.

The PPP proposals combine public sector control of trains and stations with the best of private sector expertise in maintaining and upgrading the infrastructure. It will continue to deliver a single integrated service for passengers and a modern, safe, reliable Tube. It will drive investment of £13 billion over 15 years, with £8.7 billion spent on enhancements, and £4.3 billion on maintenance - higher sustained investment than ever before. (Dept. of Transport) Moreover, the PPP promises to be better value for money than the present system, and is designed to satisfy the rigorous safety checks of the independent Health and Safety Executive. In addition, services will be faster and more frequent - for example, a 20% increase in capacity on the Victoria Line. There will be fewer breakdowns and delays and more reliable services. The PPP will update technology - around half of all cancellations today are caused by equipment failures. The public sector will co-ordinate works - so you would not see, for example, the Northern and Victoria lines closed for upgrades at the same time.

On the other hand, safety and security will be improved. London Underground will remain one of the safest mass transit systems in the world. The independent Health and Safety Executive will continue to ensure Underground safety. Many more stations will have security cameras. Every carriage will have CCTV for passenger safety. (Dept. of Transport) Likewise, fares will continue to be set by the elected Greater London Authority under the Mayor - the PPP does not require fares to rise faster than inflation.

For decades London Underground has not been properly funded. Moreover, Government funding was chopped and changed from year to year, so Tube managers could not invest effectively. From 1979 to 1997 average core investment was £395 million a year. (Dept. of Transport) According to the projection of United Kingdom's Department of Transport, by 1997 there was a massive investment backlog. Since 1997 core investment in London Underground has increased to around £530m a year - better than before, but still not enough. With economic growth and increased tourism, overcrowding is now a daily problem. Passenger numbers rose above 1 billion passengers last year for the first time. Likewise, the Ten Year Transport Plan will deliver £180 billion of investment, with over £50 billion coming from the private sector. PPPs are boosting investment in National Air Traffic Services, the Channel Tunnel Rail Link and modern tram schemes up and down the country. These schemes have one thing in common - without partnership with the private sector they would still be promises, not actual projects.

Moreover, London Underground is already working in partnership with the private sector to deliver modern communications, reliable power supplies, and a new ticketing system. A forerunner of the PPP is already working on the Northern Line, where trains are far more reliable thanks to a new maintenance regime operated jointly by LU and its private sector partners. On the Docklands Light Railway, the £200 million PPP delivered the Lewisham link two months early and on budget in 1999. Another PPP is planned to link the DLR to London City Airport. (Dept. of Transport) Furthermore, the PPP proposals bring in the first committed long-term investment programme (£13 billion over 15 years) for the Underground, with higher public sector support than ever before. PPP companies will be paid by results, and charged for poor performance. To reduce risk and avoid penalties, the companies therefore invest as early as possible in the most reliable systems and technology.

In addition, London Underground is a transport operator, not a construction and maintenance specialist. Management improvements to existing systems might be promised, but executive control and mayoral policies would inevitably change frequently over future decades with all the consequent uncertainty. (Dept. of Transport) Under existing systems London Underground projects are often late and suffer large cost overruns. The Jubilee Line Extension was 2 years late, and is still not running at full capacity despite a cost overrun of £1400 million. The Central Line resignalling work is 6 years late. Thus, London Underground enhancement works currently overrun by an average of 20% more than budget. Even allowing for a lower overspend on simple maintenance works, this would amount to some £2 billion over the next 15 years.

 

D.                 IMPACT ON TOURISM

According to James (2001) the Tube is one of the key ingredients in boosting tourism in London. Moreover, CBI Chairman Digby Jones, the first chairman of Tourism Alliance – the new voice of the industry – yesterday revealed the need to embrace the benefits of private finance for the Underground. According to him, both London and the rest of the UK will benefit from better transport links across the capital – with most visitors coming into Britain through London.

In the alliance's five-year vision for London's tourism, a privately financed, publicly run Tube is a cornerstone of keeping the capital on the move. (James, 2001) James noted that London needs investment and delivery of significant improvements to keep it on the move. Likewise, political in-fighting over the past two years has let London down at the very time swift, decisive action has been required. And it adds that congestion charging 'if not implemented effectively, could cause lasting damage to London's reputation.

Specifically, tourism is London's second biggest industry after financial services. (James, 2001) It involves almost 700,000 people. Tourism is valued at almost £10 Billion, the industry represents 8 per cent of London's GDP. Moreover, in 2001, London attracted more than 183m visitors. In addition, London accounts for 75 per cent of all international arrivals in the UK.

 

Sources:

 

Department for Transport. London Underground: Public Private Partnership, The Offer to Londoners. In http://www.local-transport.dft.gov.uk. Accessed [01/27/03]

 

James, Tom.Tourism's lifeline: Transport crying out for private cash says CBI chief. 2001. In http://www.thetube.com. Accessed [01/27/03]

 

Ladart, Samantha. The London Underground. 1999. In http://www.loyno.edu. Accessed [01/27/03]

 

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.