Transport for London has previously said that each of the lines on the London Underground has its own cleaning schedule/regime for the interior and exterior of trains. 1) I would like to know the full cleaning regimes for each of the services’ ten lines which are currently in service: (Bakerloo, Central, Circle, District, Hammersmith & City, Jubilee, Metropolitan, Northern, Piccadilly, Victoria.) Details for these cleaning regimes should include information on the following: Are the seats on the line shampooed? If no, please say “No” and if yes, how frequently? How often are poles disinfected or cleaned? How often are other “high contact” areas disinfected, such as train doors? How frequently floors are mopped, and how frequently they are polished? 2) If there is a document which details the cleaning regime currently in use on each of the lines by LU staff or LU’s cleaning contractor, I would like a copy of that document in a PDF format. 3) I would like a copy of the most recent CoMET Synthesis Report held by TfL. This is a report that has been compiled by the Centre for Transport Studies, based at Imperial College London. This regular report provides “analysis on how metros are responding to the COVID-19 pandemic” to TfL. For the avoidance of doubt, I am asking for the report referred to in Appendix 1 in the meeting papers for the Audit and Assurance Committee on September 11. This report has been shared with members of TfL’s SET group, and the London Underground's Executive team.

---

Our ref: FOI-1277-2021

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 2 October 2020 asking for information about tube cleaning regimes.

Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) and our Information Access Policy. I can confirm we do hold some of the information you requested. You asked:

1) I would like to know the full cleaning regimes for each of the services’ ten lines which are currently in service: (Bakerloo, Central, Circle, District, Hammersmith & City, Jubilee, Metropolitan, Northern, Piccadilly, Victoria.)

Details for these cleaning regimes should include information on the following:

Are the seats on the line shampooed? If no, please say “No” and if yes, how frequently?

How often are poles disinfected or cleaned?

How often are other “high contact” areas disinfected, such as train doors?

How frequently floors are mopped, and how frequently they are polished?

2) If there is a document which details the cleaning regime currently in use on each of the lines by LU staff or LU’s cleaning contractor, I would like a copy of that document in a PDF format.

Please find attached details of the tube cleaning regime. The hand rails/grab poles are i included in the deep clean process and get picked up via various cleaning tasks (Deep Clean, Mini Clean and Zoono antibacterial application) at various intervals.

Please also see https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/safer-travel-guidance?intcmp=63123

3) I would like a copy of the most recent CoMET Synthesis Report held by TfL. This is a report that has been compiled by the Centre for Transport Studies, based at Imperial College London.

This regular report provides “analysis on how metros are responding to the COVID-19 pandemic” to TfL. For the avoidance of doubt, I am asking for the report referred to in Appendix 1 in the meeting papers for the Audit and Assurance Committee on September 11.

This report contains benchmarking information from the operators of other transport networks around the world and is subject to the confidentiality agreement between CoMET member metros and is therefore exempt from disclosure under Regulation 12(5)(e) of the Environmental Information Regulations – as disclosure would adversely affect ‘the confidentiality of the proceedings of [a] public authority where such confidentiality is provided by law’. In this instance the public authority is TfL and the law is the common law duty of confidence. The information has been provided to us under no obligation, for the purpose of knowledge sharing and benchmarking with a view to establishing best practice and potential areas for improvement. We have a duty of confidence to other CoMET members when handling their information and the adverse effect would arise if this information were to be disclosed as it would compromise our ability to exchange information with CoMET members in future as they would be likely to equate providing TfL with information to being akin to release to the general public. This could lead to us being provided with only sections of information or no information at all. This would clearly have a detrimental effect on our ability to benchmark against other metro systems and improve our performance.

Furthermore, the information has been provided to us without consideration for its potential release into the public domain and breaching that confidentiality could potentially lead to costly legal action, as well as undermine the effectiveness of CoMET in data sharing.

While we recognise that there is worldwide interest in passenger safety and a specific public interest in the benchmarking activity TfL has undertaken to inform our response to the Covid-19 pandemic, which we consider is addressed by the published information provided in the paper for our Audit and Assurance Committee http://content.tfl.gov.uk/aac-20200911-agenda-pack-public.pdf, we do not consider it in the general public interest to breach the confidentiality undertaking to CoMET members when there is no expectation that their information would be disclosed once it has been shared. Similarly, we do not consider it in the public interest to prejudice our position within CoMET by disclosing the data when the likely effect of this would be an unwillingness of CoMET members to share confidential data with us in future. In addition, releasing this information would open TfL to wholly avoidable and unnecessary legal action as it would be in breach of its agreement with CoMET. This would clearly involve distraction of TfL’s limited resources, in both financial and staff terms. This would make it less likely that other data brokers or organisations would trust TfL with confidential data in the future. Therefore, we feel that the balance of the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption to ensure that we are able to continue our good working relationship with CoMET members and enabling TfL to continue to benchmark against reasonable comparators, as well as share ideas, knowledge and innovation aimed at improving the London Underground network

If you are considering submitting a further FOI request please think carefully about whether the request is essential at this current time, as answering FOI requests will require the use of limited resources and the attention of staff who could be supporting other essential activity. Where requests are made, please note that our response time may be impacted by the current situation.

If this is not the information you are looking for, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.

Yours sincerely,

Melissa Nichols

FOI Case Officer

General Counsel

Transport for London

Attachments

Back to top

---