Transport Insights

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

Author

Chris Ames

Tag: dft

  • Dft all at sea as Mather gets maritime gig

    The new transport minister, Keir Mather, appears to have been given the maritime brief, leaving the role of roads minister pretty vacant.

    To mark London International Shipping Week, the Department for Transport has issued a press release with the title More than £1.1 billion investment to boost growth, jobs and skills in UK’s coastal towns and cities.

    And the claim that:

    Funding will help businesses and academia develop real-life technology that reduces carbon emissions from shipping.

    It follows the government’s recent policy of badging decarbonisation spending as aimed at growth, presumably because they are worried what fascist Farage will say and scared of upsetting the even more fascist Trump.

    The press release issued in the name of The Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP and Keir Mather MP but Mather’s linked profile still does not give him a portfolio.

    Apparently:

    To launch the week, Local Transport Minister, Simon Lightwood, will ring the bell at the London Stock Exchange. The Transport Secretary and Maritime Minister will attend several key events during the week where they will champion UK shipping on the international stage and showcase the UK as a global hub for growth, investment, skills and jobs.

    Mather is not named here as the maritime minister, but a press release from the Transport Select Committee announces that:

    The Transport Committee will question the new Minister for Maritime, Keir Mather MP, as it concludes it inquiry into the Government’s draft revised National Policy Statement for Ports. 

    Let’s hope someone has told Mather what his job is.

    Leave a comment

  • MPs slam Labour over cowardice on utilities’ roadworks

    The chair of the Transport Select Committee has hit back at ministers over their response to its recent report on street works, which saw ministers largely reject the committee’s recommendations for fear of upsetting utility companies.

    Committee chair Ruth Cadbury MP did not hold back in her disdain for ministers’ response: 

    The Government’s rejection of all the major recommendations in our report risks making itself simply look unwilling to stand up to utility companies, on behalf of frustrated road users who have to endure unreasonable and often repeated street works delays. 

    Among other recommendations, the committee said the Department for Transport (DfT) should support more local authorities to set up lane rental schemes by allowing them to do so without needing approval from ministers.

    Ministers rejected this call to give up one of their powers, despite the DfT agreeing that the schemes have been effective where used.

    The department suggested that there would be a risk of authorities introducing “poorly targeted schemes” that would increase costs for utility companies. 

    The committee also recommended extending the period for which utility companies are responsible for the road surfaces they have reinstated, from two years after completion to five years, similar to the six years period operating in Scotland. But ministers said they want to see how the Scottish approach plays out. 

    (more…)

  • Road deaths continue as Starmer plays musical chairs

    As the BBC reports on the “relentless” toll of deaths on Essex’s roads in 2025, we wait to see what impact the latest game of musical chairs at the Department for Transport (DfT) may have on Labour’s long-promised road safety strategy.

    BBC News, Essex reports that crashes have killed 48 people in the county since the turn of the year, almost matching the 50 total for 2024.

    It’s the beginning of September so we are just over two-thirds of the way into the year.

    Adam Pipe, head of roads policing at Essex Police, cited drug-driving, speed and carelessness as the biggest problems seen on the county’s highways.

    “It is relentless,” Mr Pipe added.

    Twenty-five of the 48 deaths on Essex’s roads in 2025 have been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service to consider charging drivers.

    “These are not, in most cases, an accident – there is a behaviour behind it,” Mr Pipe continued.

    (more…)

  • Exclusive: DfT, NH, ORR caught in Weekend at Bernie’s scam

    I have obtained another document about the secret shelving of the A1 Morpeth to Ellingham scheme that amounts to something of a smoking gun, showing that both National Highways and its regulator deliberately hid from Parliament that fact that the scheme had been “paused” as well as defunded.

    To recap, the Treasury secretly defunded and deprioritised the scheme in the (late) 2021 Spending Review and told the government-owned company and the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) this in February 2022.

    Despite this, both organisations said in reports presented to Parliament in July 2022 that the scheme would go ahead in the financial year 2022-23.

    The new document is a Department for Transport (DfT)/ National Highways “change control” form on the subject of a funding change for the 2020-25 Roads Period (RP2) to formalise the outcome of the Spending Review, which overall saw the company’s budget cut from £27.4bn to £24bn.

    The document makes clear that the A1 scheme was “paused” which is obviously incompatible with the claim in National Highways’ 2022-23 Delivery Plan that works would start that year. The ORR repeated this lie in its annual assessment 2021-22.

    The document also makes clear that the scheme had been “deprioritised with no further development funds”. It further states:

    The SR21 settlement includes pausing the development of two schemes with poof VfM. These will be dealt with as separate change control submissions, the timing and communication of which will have to be carefully timed with any broader announcements in response to TSC or Union Connectivity reports and any DCO process considerations.

    (more…)

  • Ministers on the move

    At the time of writing, there are only four ministers listed on the Department for Transport webpage, with Lilian Greenwood and Mike Kane moving out and just one MP, Keir Mather, coming in.

    The remaining junior ministers, “Lord” Peter Hendy and Simon Lightwood, still have their existing portfolios (rail and local transport respectively) but Mather does not have one. I’m not sure he even has a driving licence.

    We will see how it settles down if/when a fifth minister is announced.

    I should apologise to Greenwood. Last week I mocked her for promising for the second time that progress on pavement parking would be made “very soon”.

    The trouble of course is that Greenwood’s departure will both delay progress on this and mean that her “very soon” promise will not have been made by the current minister.

    She also said the issue was a personal “bugbear” and this may have been her downfall with a No 10 operation determined not to upset drivers.

    Perhaps the new minister will even be a fan of pavement parking, particularly for delivery, delivery, delivery vehicles.

    Leave a comment

  • Up to its old tricks: DfT conceals local road upgrade budget

    The Department for Transport (DfT) has confirmed that there is a budget for local road upgrades in England for the next four years but has refused to say what that budget is.

    The secret fund will pay for two categories of local authority upgrade – the Major Road Network (MRN) and Large Local Majors (LLM), which previously fell under a funding stream called the National Roads Fund (NRF) that also included National Highways’ funding.

    A DfT spokesperson has effectively confirmed that the NRF no longer exists but did refer to an MRN/LLM programme.

    Using the Freedom of Information Act, I asked the DfT what the individual or combined budgets were for the MRN and LLMs for the period covered by the Spending Review, which is up to and including 2029-30. It implicitly confirmed that this information exists by explicitly refusing to provide it.

    The DfT may be following a tried and tested PR strategy of announcing a large headline figure and then the smaller allocations within that – effectively re-announcing the same cash as it did this week. But it may be that the total budget is never stated.

    The DfT previously told me that the MRN/LLM funding falls under the £24bn capital funding for strategic and local roads up to 2030 that was announced in the spending review, with further announcements “in due course”.

    The government has since announced that the third Road Investment Strategy (RIS 3) will get nearly £25bn up to 2031. A large proportion of this will come from the £24bn, although not all of the cash for the RIS will be capital funding. Nearly 70% of the “interim settlement” of £4.8bn for the current year is capital.

    (more…)

  • It’s not investment; it’s spending

    The Department for Transport (DfT) has managed to pull off two of its favourite tricks in an announcement this morning, re-announcing funding and labelling it “investment” when it’s day-to-day.

    Millions of people across the country will have greater access to jobs, education and public services thanks to a £104 million government funding boost, which will be shared with communities outside England’s major cities.

    The gist of the story is that the DfT has confirmed the Local Transport Grant (LTG) resource allocations that English councils outside city regions will receive for the next three years, with the headline figure of £104m having been announced in the Spending review.

    So, despite claims that the cash is a “boost”, it’s the deceitful labelling of the continuation of an existing funding stream as extra cash.

    There is a small amount of extra cash for a small number of councils from 2027, but this comes on the back of previous freezes, which continue into 2026-27.

    The annual total of £28m next year is therefore the same as this year, and the year before, with £38m a year after that.

    (more…)

  • Greenwood goes back to the future of roads

    Future of roads minister Lilian Greenwood has been out and about in the Midlands, touting Labour’s decision not to cancel a road building scheme from the second Road Investment Strategy (RIS 2).

    The M54-M6 link road was one of five schemes from RIS 2 that were confirmed by the Department for Transport (DfT) in July, following the spending review, having been subject to the value for money review that the then transport secretary, Louise Haigh, announced a year earlier.

    Apparently forgetting that her own government had called the longstanding scheme into question, Greenwood called it a “no-brainer”. It has also been said that it could be a “game changer” for the region. Other cliches are available.

    Apparently also forgetting that the scheme had been subject to a value for money review, Greenwood said she did not know how much it was going to cost. It was estimated at around £200m in 2019 so the current cost of the blank cheque will be a lot higher.

    According to the BBC, she said:

    We’ve got National Highways working really hard now to finalise the costs, to work out the schedule, to appoint a delivery partner; all that will be confirmed as part of the roads investment strategy that we’ll be publishing before the end of March next year.

    The DfT rather carelessly lost its previous contractor, sorry, “delivery partner”, Bam Nuttall in 2023.

    The four other schemes that the government “confirmed” in July were: A38 Derby Junctions; M60/M62/M66 Simister Island; A46 Newark Bypass; and the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine.

    All were “confirmed” RIS 2 schemes but frozen by Labour so it is giving itself credit for unblocking things it blocked. At least, for once, Greenwood didn’t claim that this was part of its Plan for Change.

    All schemes will be returned to RIS 3 and take up quite a lot of whatever capital funding it includes for enhancements. It was always expected that the “tail” of schemes slipping from RIS 2 to RIS 3 would make up a big chunk of the latter.

    The big picture is that Labour’s future of roads minister has confirmed that the future of roads is a lot of road schemes from the past.

    Leave a comment

  • Safety takes a back seat in Labour’s “draft RIS”

    Ministers have let National Highways off the hook over its continued failings on safety, excusing the company’s failure to meet its 2025 casualty reduction target and allowing it to put its 2040 zero harm pledge back by a whole decade.

    The Department for Transport has published what it is calling a Draft Road Investment Strategy 3, running from April 2026 to March 2031, although the document is billed as a “high-level vision” policy paper and has very little detail.

    The document notes that a consultation on previous papers “revealed that respondents placed the highest importance on improving road safety and environmental outcomes” but offers almost nothing to take these issues forward.

    (more…)

  • Has the DfT put the brakes on the road safety strategy?

    Back on the subject of the (allegedly) forthcoming Road Safety Strategy, I note that this BBC report ends with a comment from the Department for Transport (DfT) that:

    …we will set out the next steps for our strategy for road safety in due course.

    Not only is “in due course” deliberately vague but the DfT is only here referencing the next steps for its strategy in relation to that non-existent deadline.

    For all the spin and expectation that the strategy will be published in the autumn, there have only been two on-the-record statements that the government hopes it will happen this year.

    In April, transport secretary Heidi Alexander told MPs:

    Later this year we hope to publish the first new road safety strategy in 10 years.

    This hope was reiterated in June when roads minister Lilian Greenwood answered a parliamentary question:

    At the Transport Select Committee in April 2025, the Secretary of State set out that we hope to publish the Strategy later this year.

    It may be that the vague timeline given by the DfT is because it wants to make an announcement that will seem like new news rather than something we been expecting, but it could also be a reflection that the timeline is slipping.

    Leave a comment