Financial Times<\/em> reported<\/a> that a government review would consider the possibility of making the DfT directly responsible for the rail project.<\/p>\nBut Sir John Armitt, chair of the National Infrastructure Commission, was asked by Parliament’s Transport Committee chair Ruth Cadbury (Labour) whether bringing control of HS2 into the department would mitigate risks on the project.<\/p>\n
In response, Armitt said: \u201cI can understand it being very difficult for ministers to stand back when they\u2019re the ones who have to defend what\u2019s happening.\u201d<\/p>\n
But he added: \u201cIt\u2019s bound to lead to delays and, I fear, at times too much desire to meet every concern and objection and requirement for extra facilities within a scheme.\u201d<\/p>\n
He told the committee: \u201cI think there is a natural inevitability that when government, and by that I mean the whole machinery of government, is doing something, there is a desire to actually please people, rather than a more private sector approach, which says, ‘Sorry, I have not got any more money. That is all we can afford’. And I think government is not very good at saying that.”<\/p>\n
Armitt also said that greater clarity was needed on the pipeline of future rail infrastructure projects. Armitt said suppliers needed certainty on which rail projects will go ahead in future.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat remains to be done is for the government to produce a real integrated rail plan so the supply can side see what\u2019s going to happen,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
He added that what the rail industry and contractors were looking for was \u201ca proper long-term plan on how the money is going to be spent\u201d.<\/p>\n
Armitt also called for integration between road and rail planning, saying: \u201cYou tend to have two silos in the Department for Transport… that needs to be looked at in a much more integrated and strategic approach.\u201d<\/p>\n
In the spring, the NIC will be merged with the Infrastructure Projects Authority (IPA) to form a new national body.<\/p>\n
MPs asked what the NIC had achieved until now.<\/p>\n
Julia Prescot, NIC deputy chair, told the select committee that the commission has outlined projects up to 2040, which has not been done before.<\/p>\n
But it would now be \u201chugely beneficial\u201d to create a rail project pipeline, she added.<\/p>\n
Armitt and Prescot’s comments were followed by publication this morning (16 January) of the IPA’s annual report.<\/p>\n
It included a call by a government minister for greater use of data and AI in infrastructure and construction projects to improve value for money.<\/p>\n
In her forward to the report, Georgia Gould, parliamentary secretary for the\u00a0Cabinet Office, said: \u201cWe now need to embrace new ways of doing things and to seize the opportunities that come with a\u00a0digital revolution. At a time of rising prices, particularly in construction, data analytics and AI are important tools\u00a0to deliver value for money for the taxpayer.\u201d<\/p>\n
The report on major taxpayer-funded projects included a ‘red’ rating for the New Hospital Programme<\/a>, indicating that the successful delivery of the project “appears to be unachievable”.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Bringing HS2 into the Department for Transport (DfT) could increase, rather than reduce problems with the project, according to the head of the government’s infrastructure advisory body. In September last year, the Financial Times reported that a government review would consider the possibility of making the DfT directly responsible for the rail project. But Sir …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":149995,"featured_media":350044,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"categories":[549,39314],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n