A financial appraisal of the london underground public-private partnership

Public Money and Management

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 53-60

  Shaoul, Jean ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036011393     PISSN: 09540962     EISSN: 14679302     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9302.00308     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Boardman, A. E. and Vining, A. R. (1989), Ownership and performance in competitive environments: A comparison of the performance of private, mixed and state-owned enterprises. Journal of Law and Economics, 32, 1, pp. 1-33.
2. Booz Allen and Hamilton (1999), Railtrack’s Performance in the Period 1999-2001 (Report to the Office of the Rail Regulator, London).
3. Boyle, S. and Harrison, A. (2000), Private finance and service development. In Appleby, J. and Harrison, A. (Eds), Health Care UK, Autumn 2000 (The King’s Fund, London).
4. Broadbent, J. and Laughlin, R. (1999), The Private Finance Initiative: Clarification of a further research agenda. Financial Accountability and Management, 15, 2, pp. 93-113.
5. Deloitte and Touche Corporate Finance (2001), London Underground Public-Private Partnership-Emerging Findings (Report for Transport for London).
6. Drury, C., Braund, S., Osborne, P. and Tayles, M. (1992), A Survey of Management Accounting Practices in UK Manufacturing Companies (Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, London).
7. Edwards, P. and Shaoul, J. E. (1999), Lessons of Pimlico. Public Finance (29 October-4 November), pp. 16-18.
8. Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Select Committee (1998), London Underground. Seventh Report, 1997/98, HC 715-1 (The Stationery Office, London).
9. Ernst, J. (1994), Whose Utility? The Social Impact of Public Utility Privatization and Regulation in Britain (Open University Press, Buckingham).
10. Freedland, M. (1998), Public law and private finance- Placing the Private Finance Initiative in a public law frame. Public Law, pp. 288-307.
11. Froud, J. and Shaoul, J. (2001), Appraising and evaluating PFI for NHS hospitals. Financial Accountability and Management, 17, 3, pp. 247-270.
12. Gaffney, D. and Pollock, A. M. (1997), Can the NHS Afford the Public Finance Initiative? (Health Policy and Economic Research Unit, British Medical Association, London).
13. Gaffney, D., Pollock, A. M., Price, D. and Shaoul, J. (1999), PFI in the NHS-Is there an economic case? British Medical Journal, 319, pp. 116-119.
14. Gaffney, D., Pollock, A. and Shaoul, J. (2000), Funding London Underground: Financial Myths and Economic Realities (Listen to London, London).
15. Glaister, S., Scanlon, R. and Travers, T. (2000), Public- Private Partnerships and Investment in Transport (Report for the IPPR Commission on Public-Private Partnerships, London).
16. Health Select Committee (1999), Department of Health Expenditure 1999: Minutes of Evidence (The Stationery Office, London).
17. HM Treasury (1997), Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government (The Green Book), (The Stationery Office, London).
18. Industrial Society (2001), The London Underground Public-Private Partnership: An Independent Review (London).
19. King, P. (1975), Is the emphasis of capital budgeting theory misplaced? Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting, 2, 1, pp. 69-82.
20. McIntyre, A. D. and Coulthurst, N. J. (1986), Capital Budgeting Practices in Medium Sized Businesses-A Survey (Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, London).
21. Millward, R. (1982), The comparative performance of public and private enterprise. In Lord Roll (Ed), The Mixed Economy (Macmillan, London).
22. National Audit Office (1998), The First Four Design, Build, Finance and Operate Road Contracts, House of Commons Paper 476, Session 1997/98 (The Stationery Office, London).
23. National Audit Office (1999a), The PFI Contract for the New Dartford and Gravesham Hospital, House of Commons Paper 423, Session 1998/99 (The Stationery Office, London).
24. National Audit Office (1999b), Examining the Value for Money of Deals Under the Private Finance Initiative, House of Commons Paper 739, Session 1998/99 (The Stationery Office, London).
25. National Audit Office (1999c), The Newcastle Estate Project, House of Commons Paper 104, Session 1999/2000 (The Stationery Office, London).
26. National Audit Office (1999d), The PRIME Project- The Transfer of the Department of Social Security Estate to the Private Sector, House of Commons Paper 370, Session 1998/99 (The Stationery Office, London).
27. National Audit Office (2000), The Financial Analysis for the London Underground Public-Private Partnership, House of Commons Paper 54, Session 2000/01 (The Stationery Office, London).
28. Pike, R. H. and Wolfe, M. B. (1988), Capital Budgeting in the 1990s (Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, London).
29. PwC (1999), London Underground PPP-Briefing Document (PricewaterhouseCoopers, London).
30. PwC (2000), London Underground PPP: Methodology for Preparing the Public Sector Comparator (PricewaterhouseCoopers, London).
31. Ross, S. A. (1995), Uses, abuses and alternatives to the net present value rule. Financial Management, 24, 3, pp. 96-102.
32. Schofield, R. and Shaoul, J. (1997), Regulating the water industry: By any standards? Utilities Law Review, 8, 2, pp. 56-70.
33. Shaoul, J. (1997), A critical financial analysis of the post-privatization performance of the UK water industry. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 8, pp. 479-505.
34. Shaoul, J. (2000), On the wrong track? Public Finance (3 November).
35. Shaoul, J. and Gaffney, D. (2000), Fantasy funding: London Underground and the PPP. Public Finance (7 April).
36. Shaoul, J. (2001), NATS debt model fails to take off. Public Finance (30 November), pp. 18-20.
37. Tribe, L. H. (1972), Policy science: Analysis or ideology? Philosophy and Public Affairs, 2, 1, pp. 66-110.