Deloitte Report Exposes Manipulation of London Tube Figures

Following a court hearing on Friday, August 24, Transport for London has published a Deloitte & Touche report that criticized the British government's plans for London Underground, according to our sister site, AccountingWEB-UK.

London mayor Ken Livingstone and Transport for London commissioner Bob Kiley have used every possible means at their disposal to avoid being forced to fund improvement's to the capital's underground system by going for a part-privatization.

Messrs. Kiley and Livingstone oppose the government's plans for the tube because the plans would follow the Railtrack model and separate responsibility for operating trains from track maintenance. Having failed in a legal challenge, publicizing the accountant's report has proved to be one of their most successful campaigning tactics.

According to Mr. Kiley, the report, completed in July, exposed manipulation in government figures to make the public sector alternative look more expensive than its preferred public-private partnership option.

"The public’s bargaining power was thrown away in the rush to appoint chosen bidders. Moreover, the Underground applied ‘judgmental adjustments’ when they selected one of the preferred bidders," said Mr. Kiley.

"The big question is why the Underground was so keen to keep this vital information from the public. The answer may lie in the fact that the government has regularly said PPP [Public Private Partnership] contracts will not be awarded unless they demonstrate clear value for money when measured against the public sector alternative. The Deloitte & Touche report suggests that the government’s plan does not pass the test."

The entire Deloitte & Touche report and an executive summary can be viewed as PDF files on the Transport for London Web site. Among the comments the body highlighted are the following:

  • "Neither the 30 year nor the seven-and-a-half year [value for money test] provides a satisfactory basis for establishing value for money;
  • "Highly material adjustments to the [Public Sector Comparator] are judgmental, volatile or statistically simplistic;
  • "Selection of preferred bidders too early in the process could lead to a materially adverse impact on value for money;
  • "The financial advantages of selecting [one of the] preferred bidder[s] depends upon judgmental adjustments;
  • "Public sector bond financing has been largely dismissed."

As well as gaining the Court of Appeal's approval to put the report into the public domain, Transport for London has forwarded a copy to the National Audit Office.

You may like these other stories...

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) on Tuesday adopted a new auditing standard and amendments in three areas of the audit that could pose an increased risk of material misstatement in company financial...
Read more from Larry Perry here and in the Today’s World of Audits archive.In my last article, I presented an overview of one of the first steps in the preplanning phase of an audit engagement: reviewing prior year...
Read more from Larry Perry here and in the Today’s World of Audits archive.AU-C Section 800, Special Considerations—Audits of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance with Special Purpose Frameworks (SPFs),...

Already a member? log in here.

Editor's Choice

Upcoming CPE Webinars

Nov 24This webcast presents basic principles of revenue recognition, including new ASU 2014-09 for the contract method. Also, CPAs in industries who want a refresher on revenue accounting standards will benefit.
Dec 3The materials discuss the concepts and principles in the AICPA’s new special purpose framework.
Dec 9A key component to improving your firm’s workflow efficiency while enhancing your profitability at the same time is how you leverage emerging technologies.
Dec 9Kristen Rampe will cover how to diffuse the tension in challenging situations in this one-hour webinar.