TfL possible long term funding settlement @ June Spending Review

[OneTrackMinded]

There is no chance they'd close the Bakerloo Line, too many job losses for one.

The Evening Standard has an article on the subject which seems to suggest that a long term funding is more likely than funding all of the big ticket projects. The BLE can't really happen before new trains anyway.

The article linked above suggests that London won't be receiving any funding at all at the Spending Review, including specifically the trains.

 

[Mawkie]

The article linked above suggests that London won't be receiving any funding at all at the Spending Review, including specifically the trains.

Today's Evening Standard has further comment regarding funding.

However, The Standard understands there is greater optimism that a long-term funding deal for TfL is closer to being agreed – which is far more significant in terms of the day-to-day operation of the capital’s transport network.

A multi-year deal would potentially enable TfL to upgrade the signalling on the Piccadilly line – enabling the new trains that are being introduced later this year to run at greater frequency – and could also enable more zero emission buses to be ordered to get London closer to removing all diesel buses from the capital’s streets by 2030 rather than 2034.

A generous capital funding settlement could also pave the way for new trains to be ordered for the Bakerloo line.

 

[OneTrackMinded]

Today's Evening Standard has further comment regarding funding.

Interesting, although we'll just have to wait and see. Frequent use of the word "could" and "maybe" in that article.

 

[Mawkie]

Interesting, although we'll just have to wait and see. Frequent use of the word "could" and "maybe" in that article.

I mean, until Wednesday, this entire thread is just could they, couldn't they, maybe they should, and shouldn't they....

(Doesn't make it any less interesting by the way.)

My own view would be that TfL (like anyone in any negotiation) asks for a lot more than they believe they will ever get, and sometimes they do a little better than expected, and sometimes a little worse.

 

[OneTrackMinded]

I mean, until Wednesday, this entire thread is just could they, couldn't they, maybe they should, and shouldn't they....

(Doesn't make it any less interesting by the way.)

My own view would be that TfL (like anyone in any negotiation) asks for a lot more than they believe they will ever get, and sometimes they do a little better than expected, and sometimes a little worse.

Yes, all true points. Fingers crossed they come out of it better than expected.

 

[Thirteen]

I mean, until Wednesday, this entire thread is just could they, couldn't they, maybe they should, and shouldn't they....

(Doesn't make it any less interesting by the way.)

My own view would be that TfL (like anyone in any negotiation) asks for a lot more than they believe they will ever get, and sometimes they do a little better than expected, and sometimes a little worse.

I get the sense that getting the money for capital renewals like the Bakerloo Line trains is more what TfL want at the moment. That's more urgent than the other projects.

I do wonder if some of the articles are somewhat misleading, the BLU is not the same as the BLE even though they cross pollinate so while TfL might not get funding for the BLE, they may still get funding for the BLU.

 

[Eurostarosaur]

Perhaps an effective strategy to get funding for Bakerloo line trains and upgrade would be to announce:

Bakerloo Line service reducing to 3tph starting 2029
Full closure 2033
1k+ job losses expected
Siemens Yorkshire closes 2027

Or something like that!

 

[Thirteen]

ITV News London reported that the Thamesmead DLR extension will cost £1.5bn which seems kind of low for such a big project.

 

[ScotGG]

No new Bakerloo trains makes a mockery of the goverents statements on building not blocking, new homes etc. Imagine all the new Elephant and Castle towers are built and the Bakerloo line serving it sees cuts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2025 ==

ITV News London reported that the Thamesmead DLR extension will cost £1.5bn which seems kind of low for such a big project.

It's high enough for one single station in Thamesmead that doesn't even link to Abbey Wood Elizabeth line station, nor help most of the town's existing residents or development potential across central and west Thamesmead given its location at the far north.

Not great value for money.

It also has pretty much zero chance of heading on to serve thousands of proposed homes across Belvedere and Erith.

Keeping an extension north avoiding a tunnel can serve 20-25k new homes in Barking and Dagenham Dock.

Thamesmead needs good, fast, high capacity transport south to the Elizabeth line at Abbey Wood which can also serve other parts of the town (unlike the DLR plan) as well as other proposed housing growth areas in the nearby area. £1.5bn would go a lot further there.

 

[Thirteen]

No new Bakerloo trains makes a mockery of the goverents statements on building not blocking, new homes etc. Imagine all the new Elephant and Castle towers are built and the Bakerloo line serving it sees cuts.

Oddly, apart from London Centric, none of the other articles are suggesting that TfL won't get funding to replace the Bakerloo Line trains which makes me think that a long term funding deal will happen but not the greenlight for the big ticket projects like the BLE and Thamesmead DLR.

Looking back of the previous funding letter from Spending Review Phase 1 back in October, there are mentions of the Bakerloo Line Upgrade as part of Phase 2 of the Spending Review but not the BLE or DLR Thamesmead which makes me wonder if it's the still the case.

 

[boiledbeans2]

There is no chance they'd close the Bakerloo Line, too many job losses for one.

[...]

I think there's still an intermediate option before closing the Bakerloo line - which is to cut the Bakerloo to just E&C to Queen's Park. The shiny big trains can handle the north bit.

 

[MaidaVale]

I think there's still an intermediate option before closing the Bakerloo line - which is to cut the Bakerloo to just E&C to Queen's Park. The shiny big trains can handle the north bit.

Only issue with that would be Stonebridge Park depot. Quite the long deadrun.

 

[Thirteen]

I'm looking at TfL's Mayor Budget Submission 2025/2026 and the big ticket projects were not part of the Spending Review Phase 2 discussions, only things like capital renewals,

TfL Mayor's Budget Submission 2025/2026

TfL’s funding context

1.3 The coronavirus pandemic in March 2020 had a catastrophic impact on TfL’s finances and exposed TfL’s funding model, which had been in place since 2015 following the withdrawal of the operating grant, as one of being highly reliant on fare revenues.

1.4 Coronavirus-related government support to TfL culminated with the August 2022 Funding Settlement which ended on 31 March 2024. In December 2023, government awarded TfL £250m of funding for the 2024-25 financial year to enable TfL to continue to deliver its current capital programme and its committed major capital projects, prioritising the Piccadilly Line Upgrade Phase 1. On 14 June 2024 TfL was awarded £220.5m by the government in relation to ten additional Elizabeth line trains, with £77.2m provided in the 2024-25 financial year.

1.5 In the Autumn Budget 2024, published on 30 October 2024, an award of £485m of capital funding for 2025-26 was made as part of Phase 1 of the Spending Review to enable TfL to continue to deliver its current capital programme and its committed major capital projects. This was confirmed in a funding settlement letter to the Mayor on the same day. A copy of this funding settlement and earlier agreements can be found on TfL’s website. In addition to this funding, TfL will continue to apply for funding streams for which it is eligible for, including Major Road Network Fund and the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme


1.6 The 30 October 2024 funding settlement letter confirmed the government’s understanding of “the importance of long-term funding certainty to enable investment in critical upgrades to major capital projects” and stated that the Department for Transport (DfT) would “continue to work with TfL with the aim to place it on a long-term financially sustainable footing as part of Phase 2 of the Spending Review”. A long-term capital funding settlement is critical for TfL to plan and deliver its major capital projects effectively and efficiently. Therefore, providing a long-term capital funding settlement to TfL in Phase 2 of the Spending Review would 6 support TfL in delivering efficiencies and allow the award of contracts which will, in many cases, support jobs across the UK. This would bring TfL in-line with the capital funding arrangements for Network Rail, National Highways and other major city regions across the country.

1.7 TfL is now working with the DfT to develop its case for Phase 2 of the Spending Review, which demonstrates how capital investment in TfL can support the government’s missions to kick start economic growth across the country, make Britain a clean energy superpower and break down barriers to opportunity.

1.8 With Phase 2 of the Spending Review just beginning, and the uncertainty over its capital funding beyond 2025-26, TfL has not produced its own medium-term business plan this year. For this budget submission, TfL has completed a focused update on 2025-26, with a lighter touch approach to the years 2026-27 and beyond, retaining key investment assumptions made in the 2024 TfL Business Plan. A more comprehensive update will be made in autumn 2025 following the outcome of Phase 2 of the Spending Review in spring 2025.

1.9 As TfL is obliged to prepare a budget that is balanced over both the short and medium term, TfL has developed its financial plans for the period from 1 April 2025 to ensure that TfL continues to be financially sustainable.

 

[JonathanH]

the mayor has been asking for funding to replace the trains for many years now.

It shouldn't necessarily involve central funding. TfL and the mayor should have been working on plans to fund their stock renewal projects from local taxes and fares, rather than relying on central government funding which can never be taken for granted.

 

[Thirteen]

It shouldn't necessarily involve central funding. TfL and the mayor should have been working on plans to fund their stock renewal projects from local taxes and fares, rather than relying on central government funding which can never be taken for granted.

TBF TfL are the only public transport authority with no Government subsidy in the world, fares alone cannot pay for new rolling stocks and TBF the previous Government gave funding for new Elizabeth Line trains and extra DLR trains so money for new Bakerloo Line trains isn't out of the question.

Things like the BLE, WLO and DLR Thamesmead are more long term projects.

 

[bahnause]

It shouldn't necessarily involve central funding. TfL and the mayor should have been working on plans to fund their stock renewal projects from local taxes and fares, rather than relying on central government funding which can never be taken for granted.

If I have correctly understood the system with the tasks and the financial resources that can be provided by the mayor himself, this is an impossibility. You'd need a MacGyver to do that. "Build me a long haul airplane with 300 seats! Here is some string, superglue and a paper clip. Good luck!"

 

[jon81uk]

It shouldn't necessarily involve central funding. TfL and the mayor should have been working on plans to fund their stock renewal projects from local taxes and fares, rather than relying on central government funding which can never be taken for granted.

Why should TfL have to keep trying to fund everything from fares when most other networks in the world get government support?

 

[Eurostarosaur]

The fact is that low income people living in outer zones of London are penalised with incredibly high fares, now around £14 return in peak time from zone 6 into zone 1. I crunched numbers based on median take home pay and basically the average commuter in those areas commuting full time would be spending 13% of their net income and 20%+ if they were on a low income. Comparable European cities all come out as around 5% or less of net income being spent on transport. Manchester and Birmingham obviously have much less developed mass transit systems but again the ratios do not exceed about 7% of median or low income if commuting from a far suburb using monthly passes. So yes, London has had more transport investment, but the overall system is mostly funded by local working people and businesses who can now barely afford to use the system. Do the residents of Manchester and Birmingham want to spend 20% of their income commuting?

 

[PGAT]

Why should TfL have to keep trying to fund everything from fares when most other networks in the world get government support?

How old is this data?

 

[jon81uk]

How old is this data?

I got the image from elsewhere but found its from a 2022 article when the funding coming out of Covid was being arranged https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-62728974

Although the general point is still correct and has been since George Osborne phased out the grant in 2015-2028 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34923879

 

[OneTrackMinded]

4 year financial settlement confirmed for TfL

 

[Thirteen]

4 year financial settlement confirmed for TfL

Not quite five years but takes up to the next election.

 

[Mrwerdna1]

Not quite five years but takes up to the next election.

...and there's FPTP in a nutshell. Still, it's something.

 

[Thirteen]

TBH I never thought TfL would get no money at all, the four year deal means the more immediate issues can be addressed, the long term projects were always a hope rather than a guarantee.

 

[Mawkie]

The fact is that low income people living in outer zones of London are penalised with incredibly high fares, now around £14 return in peak time from zone 6 into zone 1. I crunched numbers based on median take home pay and basically the average commuter in those areas commuting full time would be spending 13% of their net income and 20%+ if they were on a low income. Comparable European cities all come out as around 5% or less of net income being spent on transport. Manchester and Birmingham obviously have much less developed mass transit systems but again the ratios do not exceed about 7% of median or low income if commuting from a far suburb using monthly passes. So yes, London has had more transport investment, but the overall system is mostly funded by local working people and businesses who can now barely afford to use the system. Do the residents of Manchester and Birmingham want to spend 20% of their income commuting?

It's sometimes difficult to compare one city with another city. For example, if I remember correctly, French companies are required by law to contribute a percentage of commuting costs?

 

[anthony263]

Not quite five years but takes up to the next election.

Let's hope then we could see a follow up order placed for the 2024 stock for the bakerloo line

 

[ScotGG]

One issue is that the UK is the most centralised major economy in the world so local cities don't even have much tax raising powers to do things themselves even if they want to.

Worst of all worlds of Treasury keeps saying no then doesn't want to devolve power.

 

[Dstock7080]

4 year financial settlement confirmed for TfL

“Providing the largest multi-year settlement for London in over a decade, with £2 billion of funding between 2026‑27 and 2029-30 for Transport for London’s (TfL) capital renewals programme. The government also recognises the potential growth and housing benefits of the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) Thamesmead extension and is committed to working with TfL to explore options for delivery”.

Spending Review 2025 (HTML)

www.gov.uk

 

[erikvd28]

Let's hope then we could see a follow up order placed for the 2024 stock for the bakerloo line

That would cost £1 billion yeah?

 

[Thirteen]

I wonder why it's 2026-2027 and 2029-2030 for funding, what's happening in 2027-2028?