London stalling

I. Write in the transcription and memorize the following words:

cheer		ободрительное, приветственное восклицание
decrepit		дряхлый, изношенный, ветхий
decline prosperous stride abolish damp unquantifiable maverick plummet exaggerate scrap reckon amid flexible migrant vibrant efficiecy impact borough statutory deteriorate chaos rejuvenate		упадок процветающий большой шаг отменять угнетенное состояние, уныние не поддающийся перечислению диссидент, инакомыслящий мертвый груз, тяжесть выбрасывать, отменять преувеличивать считать среди, посреди гибкий переселенец вибрирующий, резонирующий эффективность влияние, воздействие небольшой округ, район установленный (законом) ухудшаться хаос восстановление, придание новых сил
recession		спад, снижение спроса, кризис

2. Read and translate the text:

Decrepit public transport is threatening the city’s position as a leading financial and cultural centre. There are no quick solutions in sight, writes Kevin Brown.

London is booming - but do not expect the locals to cheer. Office costs have just been declared the most expensive in the world, house prices are soaring out of reach for many and the transport system is falling apart.

After 50 years of decline, Lon­don's population is forecast to rise from 7.2m to as much as 8.6m over the next 15 years. Most of this reflects international migrants making their homes in Europe's most culturally cosmo­politan city. They have helped to make London more prosperous than Paris and to take big strides towards catching up on Ham­burg, Europe's richest city.

London has Europe's most vibrant youth culture, some of its best orchestras, opera houses and theatres, and a financial sector that competes with New York and Tokyo. Even the US reces­sion is expected to have only a temporary damping effect.

But London's potential to grow, its economic efficiency and its quality of life are increasingly threatened by its decrepit transport system. Business leaders are fuming about the overcrowded and unreliable Underground, commuter trains suffering record delays and traffic speeds in the central area that would have shamed the Victorians.

The impact on business com­petitiveness is unquantifiable. But the City of London Corpora­tion - the borough that includes the financial district - says US and European institutions are increasingly drawing pointed comparisons between London and other European financial centres. "They must be laughing in Paris and Frankfurt," says Digby Jones, head of the main employers' federation.

There are two main reasons for this state of affairs. The first is that for 14 years from 1986, London had no region-wide government. Margaret Thatcher abolished the former Greater London Council to stop the capital being run by radical socialists (who then included Ken Livingstone, the Labour maverick who is now London's independent mayor). While no one spoke for London, investment plummeted and new transport schemes were stymied by vested interests.

The second is that while London's booming economy has income to 21 per cent (generated by about 12 per cent of the population) it has created enormous infrastructure strains. Since 1991, 720,000 jobs have been created, mostly in the central area. That means hundreds of thousands of extra journeys every day.

Mr. Livingstone, London's first executive mayor, has the statutory responsibility to find a way out of this mess. His approach is for the capital to build its way out of trouble. To bring down office costs he plans to scrap restrictions on the height of buildings and reduce limits on density. Not all the new buildings would be in the city centre. But the plan will not work without huge improvements in public transport.

The mayor, elected in 2000, is not short of ideas. One of his first acts was to produce a transport strategy running to 468 pages. He wants to cut traffic volumes in central London by 15 per cent. Public transport capacity would rise by 40 per cent on the buses, 17 per cent on the Underground and 40 per cent on com­muter railways.

To achieve this, the mayor has recruited Bob Kiley, who once ran New York's subway system, to head Transport for London, his transport-planning agency. He has also proposed a charge for vehicles entering central London, intended to cut road congestion and raise up to £200m ($288m) a year for investment.

But the plan is subject to huge uncertainties. For a start, Mr. Livingstone is fighting a rear­guard battle against Tony Blair's Labour government over plans to split the Underground's infra­structure into three parts, which would be handed to private sec­tor consortia for renovation, while the mayor runs services.

Mr. Livingstone lost a court bat­tle to stop the project, which the government calls a public/private partnership. But the Under­ground's performance has contin­ued to deteriorate while the PPP programme - supposed to deliver £13bn of investment in the next 15 years - was negotiated.

Ministers are now worrying about whether the PPP will deliver value for money. Insiders say the government, which once thought the private sector would pay the entire cost of rejuvena­ting the Underground, has now realized it will have to provide several hundred million pounds a year over 30 years. If the plan is scrapped, there will be more delays.

Much of the extra mainline rail capacity would have to be pro­vided by a network of up to three new lines, in tunnels under London that would link existing rail terminals with transport hubs such as Heathrow airport. The first two have been cost at £3.5bn ($5bn) each Mr. Living­stone, drawing a comparison with the Reseaux Express Regional (RER) network in Paris, last week conjured up a third, so far uncostly. No funding has been earmarked for any of the schemes.

Mr. Livingstone also plans to spend up to £1.l bn on improving buses and roads. He has had some success in improv­ing bus services: London was the only part of Britain last year where the number of bus passen­gers increased. But the funding streams included in the mayor's budget leave a gap of up to £300m a year.

The mayor has another prob­lem. While he has moral author­ity as the only representative of the whole of London, he has direct control only over buses and strategic roads. He will even­tually get control of the Under­ground - but if the PPP goes ahead, investment priorities will have been set for 30 years. Main­line railways are the responsibil­ity of the Strategic Rail Author­ity, which answers to the government.

Mayoral officials say these con­cerns are exaggerated. They say that Mr. Livingstone's contacts with ministers are more friendly than outsiders generally reckon and that the mayor’s plans have had a sympathetic hearing. Red­mond O'Neill, a senior policy adviser to the mayor, says there is a strong government commit­ment to back big rail schemes.

Mr. Livingstone's officials also say that a high-level group on London's rail problems set up by John Spellar, the transport minister, has the potential to develop into a regional strategic transport agency of the kind that exists in cities such as New York and Paris.

Still, there are plenty of informed observers who think putting right London's transport problems will be much more diffi­cult than the mayor seems to think. Some officials at Transport for London fear the government is preparing to approve the PPP contracts without providing suffi­cient funding. That would force Mr. Livingstone to increase Underground fares or raise local taxes. Either course could tor­pedo his hopes of winning next mayoral elections, which might suit the government nicely.

Tony Travers, director of the greater London group at the Lon­don School of Economics, says the "bizarre" division of responsi­bilities makes it hard to see how the capital's problems can be resolved. "At the moment, nei­ther the money, nor the power, nor the will to use the power exist. What London needs is the money, the power, and someone like [former New York mayor] Rudolph Giuliani to use it," he says.

There is, though, one ray of light amid the clouds. This is that London's economy has been growing about 30 per cent faster than the UK average in recent years, in spite of its problems, suggesting that it is dynamic and flexible enough to compensate for the transport chaos.

"The gradual disintegration of the city's railway network must have an effect but I am cautious about being too pessimistic because up to now the city has managed to find its way around the problems," says Mr. Travers. "The big question is whether it can continue to do so. If I were the Blair government, I would not rely on that."

3. Get ready to answer the following questions:

1. If London is booming, why then the locals don't expect to cheer?

2. Why is London's population going to rise over the next 15 years?

3. What threatens London's potential growth?

4. What are business leaders fuming about?

5. What are the reasons for such bad state of affairs?

6. How do London's authorities try to find the way out of this mess?

7. Is there ray of light amid the clouds?

4. Give English equivalent of the following words and phrases with reference to the text:

- замедлять развитие

- быстро расти в цене

- стремительно повышаться

- разрушаться

- догонять

- раздражаться

- поезд, курсирующий туда и обратно

- срывать план

- отменять ограничения

- устанавливать, учреждать

- странный, эксцентричный

5. Make up your own sentences with the words (see tasks 1,2,5).

6. Finish up the following sentences:

1. Office costs have just been …

2. They have hеlp to make London …

3. The impact on business …

4. His approach is …

5. To bring down office costs …

6. Insiders say the government, which …

7. There are plenty of informed observers who …

7. Write down a summаry of the text.

8. Discuss the following topics:

1. Imagine that you are a member of British government. What would you do to solve the problem of public transport in London?

2.What are the main problems of the city you live in? Do you know the way out?