Tag: west yorkshire mass transit

• Isn’t “concerted ambition” just more warm words?

  The latest government document to reference plans for a West Yorkshire mass transit system shows ministers’ ability to offer little more than warm words – and hype – including an empty promise to deliver more than “warm words”.

  In fact, like Lord Peter Hendy’s “long overdue” PAYG upgrade, this statement in the Treasury’s Northern Growth Strategy: Next Steps document could be seen as a stinging critique of the government’s approach:

  The north of England has waited far too long for a government that matches warm words with concerted ambition…

  It continues:

  but by working in lockstep with northern Mayors, businesses, and communities , we can see the North define its own future.

  

  The problem is that central government has recently waded into the West Yorkshire Combined Authority’s plans for mass transit in an utterly Stalinist way that includes putting the scheme back by years and telling the authority that it has to prove that it cannot just be a few better buses.

  “Working in lockstep” with northern mayors to allow the North to define its own future is a bit like the Soviet Union invading Czechoslovakia to help it define its own future.

  (more…)

  2026.03.24

• Brabin: We have to prove mass transit can’t be a bus

  West Yorkshire mayor Tracy Brabin has cast further doubt over expectations that the region’s mass transit plan will deliver trams, admitting that she is in a battle to prove to the Department for Transport that “it can’t be a bus”.

  

  Her comments at a meeting of the West Yorkshire Combined Authority’s (WYCA) Scrutiny Committee came alongside a refusal by transport secretary Heidi Alexander to confirm that mass transit would include trams.

  Brabin signalled the size of the battle by again publicly citing the support of chancellor and Leeds MP Rachel Reeves:

  It’s going to be a tram And as the chancellor of the exchequer said on camera, when she was interviewed about what Mass transit was going to be, she said, And Tracy, I said it was going to be a tram.

  However, we have to make the case, and that is fine. We are now in a process where we have to prove it can’t be a bus, and that’s fine. We’ll do that, because it will be a tram.

  At times Brabin seemed unsure whether she and Reeves were on the same side as Alexander or aiming for different outcomes, following the “resequencing” of the scheme on the back of a report from the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) last year:

  (more…)

  2026.03.20

• Alexander: Mass transit may not mean trams

  Heidi Alexander has cast new doubts over whether West Yorkshire’s plans for “mass transit” will ever amount to anything more than “a few better buses”, in what appears to be an ongoing battle between her department on one side and chancellor Rachel Reeves and mayor Tracy Brabin on the other.

  The Yorkshire Post (paywall) reports:

  Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander has refused to guarantee that the planned West Yorkshire mass transit system will include a tram network.

  It adds:

  It comes after The Yorkshire Post revealed last year that civil servants could overrule Ms Brabin and turn the mass transit system into a bus network, with West Yorkshire Combined Authority asked to set out an alternative business case for buses. The Department for Transport is the ultimate body which will sign off the plans for the scheme.

  It also comes after the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA), led by Brabin, refused to disclose a “peer review” of the scheme by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) on the grounds that it would damage public confidence in the scheme.

  

  The Yorkshire Post article shows Alexander not only repeatedly refusing to commit to the trams that Brabin and Leeds MP Reeves have been pushing for but also refusing to back Reeves’ insistence that “mass transit does not mean a few better buses”:

  (more…)

  2026.03.16

• Marching on together?

  Following the admission that disclosure of a “peer review” of West Yorkshire’s mass transit plans would damage public confidence in them, central and regional government continue to act in a way that suggests the plans really are “in peril” and that the contribution of trams to the scheme may be limited.

  The latest desperate looking move is a press release from the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA):

  Businesses, investors and political leaders have united to reaffirm their backing for West Yorkshire’s Mass Transit plans following a visit to the region from the Rail Minister.

  […]

  Leeds United Football Club is the latest high-profile organisation to throw its weight behind Mass Transit, alongside the National Wealth Fund and leading developer Muse.

  

  The press release adds:

  (more…)

  2026.03.04

• A sinking ship?

  As the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) continues to insist that there is nothing to see over the secret report into its mass transit plans, the man in charge of the project is leaving as it is kicked into the long grass.

  In a post on LinkedIn beginning “Time to change direction”, Mike Birch, the authority’s mass transit director has said:

  I have reached the very difficult decision to leave my position as Mass Transit Director at West Yorkshire Combined Authority.
  
  Since joining the programme early last year, the focus has shifted from an accelerated delivery programme, to one following a more traditional sequential approach. The next few years will now be spent delivering the business case, a very different leadership focus. I am proud to have led this incredible transformative programme, with an amazing dedicated team.
  
  I will be leaving in mid April, seeking my next challenge……

  

  When someone leaves a senior post to seek a new challenge, it’s usually a sign that all is not well and in this case, as Birch notes, the project has been “resequenced” so that it will no longer try to do spatial planning with business case development.

  This followed the “peer review” report from the National Infrastructure and Service Tranformation Authority (NISTA), which WYCA has refused to publish on the grounds that it would undermine public confidence in the programme.

  Perhaps the departure of the man who at the helm when the ship hit the iceberg will help?

  Leave a comment Cancel reply

  Δ

  2026.02.23

• WYCA prejudices effective conduct of public affairs

  Alongside West Yorkshire Combined Authority’s (WYCA) refusal to disclose the secret “peer review” into its mass transit plans, it has totally embarrassed itself in its response to a similar request.

  In December someone asked for:

  details of expenditure on consultants and external professional services connected with mass transit activity from January 2024 to present.

  Specifically, please provide: A list of consultancy or professional services suppliers engaged.

  The value and duration of each engagement.

  The procurement route used for each engagement (for example open tender, framework call-off, or direct award).

  The total consultancy expenditure incurred during this period.

  All pretty routine transparency information, you might think. But WYCA responded:

  the information you are seeking may be exempt under Section 36(2) of the FOIA. Information to which this section applies is exempt information if, in the reasonable opinion of a qualified person, disclosure of the information under this Act would or would be likely to prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs.

  (more…)

  2026.02.20

• Mass transit could mean a few better buses

  As the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) continues to hide the independent peer review report into its mass transit plan, suspicions are growing that the underlying problem is an insistence within government that the authority should drop its proposals for trams and settle for a few more buses.

  At a recent meeting of the authority, mayor Tracy Brabin quoted chancellor and Leeds MP Rachel Reeves as saying that “mass transit means trams”, adding that the authority is conscious of the need to prove to government that tram (rather than buses) is the right option.

  As TransportXtra/Local Transport Today pointed out, WYCA’s West Yorkshire Mass Transit: Spatial Development Framework Joint Development Plan, published for consultation a week after the meeting, states:

  Mass Transit is a large-scale public transport system, which may comprise one or more of the following transport technologies: advanced bus rapid transit, light rail, tram or tram-train vehicles.

  

  Someone should tell Reeves. She stated very clearly to the Yorkshire Post:

  (more…)

  2026.02.20

• Mass transit is in peril, WYCA admits

  West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) has refused to disclose the controversial peer review of its mass transit plans on the grounds that disclosure “will impact the programme by a loss of public confidence” – effectively admitting that the review was highly critical of the scheme.

  The admission is a vindication for the Tory councillor who has claimed that WYCA was putting forward a “dishonest” version of the review’s findings and suggests that the outrage that West Yorkshire mayor Tracy Brabin expressed over the suggestion was confected.

  

  To recap, the review by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) led to the WYCA’s plans for mass transit (probably trams) being put back from the early 2030’s to the end of the decade.

  Both Brabin and transport ministers have tried to put a brave face on the situation but have refused to publish the report for various reasons, although it was made available to members of the combined authority.

  At a meeting last month, Cllr Alan Lamb, the leader of the Conservative opposition on Leeds City Council, alleged that the public presentation of the report was “dishonest” and that people needed to see the report itself because it shows that “mass transit is in peril”. Brabin said she was “outraged” by the claim.

  But WYCA has now effectively admitted that this is true and that the situation set out in the report is so dire that the public would lose confidence in the scheme if this were known.

  In response to a freedom of information request, it said:

  on the balance of probabilities releasing the information will impact the programme by a loss of public confidence

  Although the response sought to tie this up with issues around “a free and frank exchange of views by NISTA” and a report “provided in confidence”, it clearly stated that it would be “public confidence” that would be damaged.

  It also referred to:

  the real and significant likelihood that disclosure would prejudice WYCA’s ability to manage and develop a complex, high-value transport programme.

  As Cllr Lamb said “mass transit is in peril” if you look behind the curtain.

  Leave a comment Cancel reply

  Δ

  2026.02.19

• Mather looking increasingly foolish over secrecy claims

  It has been pointed out to me that there is some history behind the refusal of the various authorities to publish the “peer review” into West Yorkshire’s mass transit plans on the grounds that participants should expect confidentiality, with the Information Commissioner rejecting these arguments in a similar case.

  The Commissioner has also made it absolutely clear that authorities cannot withhold whole reports on the grounds that some of its contents need to remain secret.

  Both the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) and the Department for Transport have refused to publish the entire review by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) on various grounds, including a statement from transport minister Keir Mather that:

  All major project reviews undertaken by NISTA are treated as confidential, in the interests of ensuring that everyone involved is able to share their honest feedback. This has been standard practice across successive governments.

  Although NISTA is not a simple continuation of the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA), campaigners previously obtained a ruling from the Information Commissioner that the Cabinet Office was wrong to withhold a November 2021 IPA “stage gate assessment” review and June 2022 follow-up IPA independent peer review on the Lower Thames Crossing.

  

  That case was judged under the Environmental Information Regulations and involved some discussion of whether emails between National Highways and government departments are “internal” (they aren’t) but also hinged on whether disclosure would “the interests of the person who provided the information”.

  (more…)

  2026.02.18

• Ministers addicted to secrecy – and fabrication

  Transport ministers have again resorted to lying to justify their obsessive secrecy – this time over the secret “peer review” of the West Yorkshire Mass Transit programme.

  As I have written, the peer review was carried out by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA), despite the project not being a part of the government’s major projects portfolio, and resulted in the project being “resequenced” and delayed by years.

  

  Both the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) and the Department for Transport (DfT) have refused to publish the review, amid claims that the public presentation of its findings has been “dishonest”.

  Now very junior transport minister Keir Mather has made up a tradition for NISTA reviews going back through “successive governments”, despite the body only having been created (by Labour) last April.

  Asked by Tory David Simmonds if the government will place the review into the public domain, Mather said:

  All major project reviews undertaken by NISTA are treated as confidential, in the interests of ensuring that everyone involved is able to share their honest feedback. This has been standard practice across successive governments.

  Not only is the claim that NISTA reviews have always been confidential a fabrication – and indeed the phrase has no meaning in this context – but the excuse for not publishing the West Yorkshire one is a departure from what the DfT has previously said, which is that the project is subject to “live” policy discussions.

  Mather’s lie follows fellow transport minister Simon Lightwood falsely claiming the smart motorway “POPE” evaluation reports whose publication the DfT delayed for years were subject to an “assurance” process.

  2026.02.16