Transport Insights

The transport stories you won't see in the industry-friendly media

Author

Chris Ames

  • Not all good news

    The local authority that will receive government funding for one of the two local road schemes that the Department for Transport (DfT) *actually announced* yesterday is far from happy and expects the cost of the scheme to rise further.

    The Middlewich Eastern Bypass is a 1.6-mile bypass including a new bridge over a railway line and a combined cycleway and footway. Cheshire East Council has told me that the estimated total cost of the scheme is currently £97.941m, of which the DfT will provide a maximum funding contribution of £48.037m, including £1.257m already paid.

    “Cheshire East Council is solely responsible for meeting any expenditure over and above this maximum amount.”

    Yesterday the council’s leader and deputy leader, Nick Mannion and Michael Gorman, issued a statement with a strong good news, bad news flavour:

    (more…)

  • Labour re-announces road schemes “in construction”

    The Department for Transport’s (DfT) announcement of a “green light” for 28 local road schemes has fallen apart as quickly as the Tories’ notorious Network North announcement, as it emerges that many of the green lit schemes have been in construction for a while and others are still awaiting confirmation of cash promised years ago.

    I wrote earlier that the DfT had clarified that only two of the Large Local Major (LLM) and Major Road Network (MRN) schemes had actually had funding confirmed (today) but the department’s list of schemes with “funding confirmed” (now at the bottom of the announcement) includes schemes that are not only in construction, but were promised funding as far back as 2018.

    These include “Gallows Corner” and “A595 Grizebeck Bypass”, both of which were promised money in 2018 by the then transport secretary Chris “failing” Grayling, even before the MRN existed as a network.

    Also on the “funding confirmed” list is the North Hykeham Relief Road, which was the only new road project announced in the Tories’ November 2020 National Infrastructure Strategy.

    (more…)

  • DfT doubles down on planned publication

    National Highways’ delivery plan and safety action plan for the current financial year will be published this month, the Department for Transport (DfT) has told me.

    The government-owned company’s Interim Settlement for the current year, during which no road investment strategy is in place, states that to support progress towards achieving its December 2025 casualty reduction target “National Highways must deliver a series of safety improvements set out in its Safety Action Plan for 2025/26”.

    The safety action plan has not been published, but in May roads minister Lilian Greenwood told fellow Labour MP Ruth Cadbury, who is chair of the Transport Select Committee, that it “will form part of National Highways 2025-26 delivery plan for the Interim Settlement which will be published in the coming months”.

    I have requested the plan under the Freedom of Information Act from the DfT, National Highways and the Office of Rail and Road but each refused my request on the spurious grounds that a document that was not produced for publication is intended for future publication alongside another document.

    In response to a review request, the DfT has now told me: “We expect the requested information to be published in July 2025.”

    (more…)

  • Rapid u-turn on green light for 28 local road schemes

    The Department for Transport (DfT) has confirmed that the “green light for over 50 road and rail upgrades” is not actually a green light for around half the schemes involved.

    The claim that more than 28 local road upgrades had been “given the green light” was an obvious lie. At best, 26 of the upgrades have, or still have, an amber light.

    I quoted and queried this bit, suggesting that there was some sleight of hand over the number of road schemes that have actually been green lit.

    To support local journeys, the government is also committing support to continue 28 local road schemes vital to connecting and growing communities. These schemes, which include the Middlewich Eastern Bypass and A382 Drumbridges to Newton Abbot schemes, are not motorways or trunk A-roads, but junctions, bypasses and traffic-easing projects which will improve millions of congested commutes and unlock further housing and jobs.   

    The DfT has now confirmed to me that the only confirmed schemes are the Middlewich Eastern Bypass and the A382 Drumbridges to Newton Abbot – a large local major (LLM) and a major road network (MRN) scheme respectively – while the others have been given ongoing development funding.

    Having followed the funding for LLM and MRN schemes for years, I know that final funding is confirmed two or three schemes at a time, not 28 all at the same time.

    The DfT has not “given the green light” to 50 road and rail upgrades.

    Image: Cheshire East Council 

    2 responses to “Rapid u-turn on green light for 28 local road schemes”

    1. Throwing random numbers at the problem – Transport Insights

      […] *UPDATE: I have now confirmed that the government has not green lit 28 local road schemes* […]

      Like

      Reply
    2. Labour re-announces road schemes “in construction” – Transport Insights

      […] wrote earlier that the DfT had clarified that only two of the Large Local Major (LLM) and Major Road Network […]

      Like

      Reply

    Leave a comment

  • Throwing random numbers at the problem

    *UPDATE: I have now confirmed that the government has not green lit 28 local road schemes*

    The Department for Transport announcement about a “green light for over 50 road and rail upgrades” has a lot of random numbers and very little detail but cannot disguise the fact that Labour is throwing a lot of money at road schemes in a climate emergency, with very little for rail.

    One number that isn’t in the press release is the £1.5bn cost of the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine, which I wrote about yesterday, and which dwarfs the “£27 million to reinstate passenger rail services between Portishead and Bristol city centre”.

    Neither is the benefit cost ratio of 0.9 for the A66 scheme, representing poor value for money.

    And it is unclear how much funding the government is giving the Midlands Rail Hub, other than that it is “significant”.

    Among some obviously made-up numbers about road and rail schemes supporting tens of thousands of new jobs and new homes, there seems to be quite a sleight of hand over the number of road schemes that have actually been given the green light.

    (more…)

  • Throwing money down the utilities

    Transport Action Network has published the latest piece in its National Highways Watch series, which I researched and wrote, looking at how the government-owned company regularly overspends on enhancements projects.

    It is, I hope, a comprehensive account on past, current and future projects, as well as scrapped schemes like the A303 Stonehenge Tunnel.

    Among schemes that the Labour government has not yet admitted it can’t afford are the £10bn+ Lower Thames Crossing and the £1.5bn A66 Northern Trans-Pennine project, which is currently stuck in the Department for Transport’s value for money review.

    Both have very low benefit cost ratios and seem to be being driven by politics more than anything.

    Last month’s Spending Review did not mention the A66 scheme, something that the Northern Echo noticed, before reporting what it optimistically called an “update”, based on a Treasury Statement.

    A spokesperson for the Treasury said: “The Department for Transport will set out their long-term plan for the Strategic Road Network through the third Road Investment Strategy.

    “Further details on individual schemes like the A66 will be provided by the Department for Transport in due course.”

    Labour is rightly using a hiatus between five-year road investment strategies to rethink what it want to fund but the government has previously said the RIS would be aligned with the spending review and “in due course” is governments’ much-mocked way of refusing to give a firm date.

    So not much of an update.

    (more…)

  • Getting your priorities wrong

    Following up on my piece about the impact of the major works at Junction 10 of the M25 on road users, I’d like to return to a story I covered elsewhere in January about National Highways’ efforts to persuade drivers disrupted by roadworks that work is being done, even when it probably isn’t.

    The company’s Guidance for using Electronic Boards for Roadworks (EBRW), with the subtitle “Guidance for using ‘customer friendly’ messages through roadworks” is explicit about the need to use information boards for public relations purposes.

    In fact, it frames National Highways’ “primary objective” in a way that you may find surprising:

    For the rest of RIS2, and moving into RIS3, it is imperative we focus on our primary objective of maintaining and improving our reputation with customers.

    Not safety, not decarbonisation, not even improving customers’ journeys, but making them feel like they have had a good journey is the company’s primary objective.

    (more…)

  • Junction 10 closure chaos continues

    Another full weekend road closure from National Highways’ catastrophic M25 Junction 10 scheme will cause delays and congestion this weekend, with long diversions, particularly for non-motorway traffic.

    Although National Highways has said there will be no more full closures of the motorway, the A3, which intersects with it at Junction 10, will be closed from Friday night until Monday morning over the short section north of the junction as far as Painshill (Cobham) roundabout.

    Some of the lengthy diversions will be taking traffic past already busy spots on the local network, including Chessington World of Adventures.

    Wisley Gardens, south of the motorway, is warning of delays, with visitors on the northbound A3 already having to engage with to engage with the Junction 10 roundabout, which will be busier with even more people leaving the road to join the M25 for a diversion.

    The charity that runs Wisley, the RHS, says it will have lost £11m in visitor revenue by the time the scheme ends (late) next year. It has a petition calling for compensation with nearly 94,000 signatures so far.

    I have written extensively about the catastrophic impact of the scheme on the network how National Highways underplayed it at the planning stage and this features heavily in Transport Action Network’s National Highways Watch page on the True cost of traffic delays from building major roads, which I researched and wrote.

    In future, National Highways needs to be more honest about the disruption caused by planned schemes and ideally it should not be allowed to mark its own homework.

    Picture: Surrey County Council

    One response to “Junction 10 closure chaos continues”

    1. Getting your priorities wrong – Transport Insights

      […] up on my piece about the impact of the major works at Junction 10 of the M25 on road users, I’d like to return to a story I covered elsewhere in January about National […]

      Like

      Reply

    Leave a comment

  • Shropshire bows to the inevitable over unfunded £215m road scheme

    Shropshire Council has shelved the £215m Shrewsbury North West Relief Road (NWRR) after the Department for Transport (DfT) made clear that it will not put up any money beyond the £54m originally pledged.

    The council, which is now run by the Liberal Democrats, said leader Heather Kidd and deputy leader Alex Wagner met DfT officers earlier this week to “discuss the scheme, seek clarity about funding and explore options with regards to its future”:

    During the meeting officers from the DfT confirmed that they would not award any more money than had been originally allocated to the project. Furthermore, the Local Transport Fund of £136.4m, originally mooted by the previous administration to fund the scheme, has been replaced with a Local Transport Grant totalling only £48m.

    However, they also confirmed that the council would need to cancel work on the road before a formal discussion could proceed with Roads Minister Lilian Greenwood MP, the Department for Transport and other parts of central government about the £39m it has already spent on the scheme.

    The council said it had “paused all work” on the scheme but Cllr Kidd said the council had no choice but to cancel it, faced with a funding gap of over £176m:

    “Through our conversations with the Department for Transport, it was made very clear that no more funding would be allocated to the scheme. This makes it simply unaffordable.

    “As you can imagine, there are many implications for cancelling the road however we really have no choice.”

    (more…)

  • No Apology from Labour MPs over false roadworks claim

    On Tuesday, cyclist, public transport user, ev driver and pedestrian Harry revealed on Bluesky that he had discovered from a freedom of information request that the total number of miles of roadworks that the Labour government had “lifted for Easter” was not “over 1,000” as claimed but…

    0.8 miles.

    It followed propaganda promoted by Labour Party general secretary Hollie Ridley which claimed that the Labour government was “on the side of drivers”.

    I haven’t got the exact data, but Harry says 31 of 34 schemes listed by National Highways “always planned to finish before Easter”.

    In fact, the original Department for Transport press release did not claim that the roadworks were being lifted “for Easter” but referred to roadworks “being lifted or completed in time for the Easter getaway”.

    But transport secretary Heidi Alexander claimed to be “lifting 1,127 miles of roadworks over Easter”, falsely implying that the roadworks were temporarily being put aside over the bank holiday weekend but would return.

    The propaganda was disseminated by Labour MPs, including Rachel Hopkins and Peter Prinsley.  I emailed them to ask them if they stood by the (false) claim or would like to apologise for spreading misinformation.

    So far, neither has taken the trouble to reply.

    As the new government’s first transport secretary, Louise Haigh promised to end culture wars in transport, which was no doubt one of the reasons that Morgan McSweeney got rid of her.

    Leave a comment

Subscribe

Subscribe to get our the latest stories in your inbox.