星空传媒

Think of a country where 50% of local authorities do not have a plan for housing, where electricity connections are allocated not by need but where they are positioned in the queue, and where objectors can delay crucial infrastructure through repeated judicial review.

This was the UK in November 2020, on the eve of the publication of a growth-focused infrastructure strategy. The strategy included bold steps to drive recovery in the economy, to create regional powerhouses, to decarbonise the economy and to support private investment in infrastructure.

Looking at the UK of 2025, all these problems remain. The urgent measures that were being rushed through in 2020 either took longer to implement or, in the case of planning reform, did not work at all.

>> Also read: Significant, welcome, sensibly cautious but most definitely promising: the experts鈥� verdict on the infrastructure strategy

>> Also read: Industry welcomes government鈥檚 10-year infrastructure strategy

>> Also read: The infrastructure strategy opens the door to private finance

Such are the challenges of government 鈥� unexpected disruptions distracted ministers鈥� attention and diverted resources. Complex joined-up infrastructure strategies become much more difficult to deliver, as cumulative events ultimately take over.

That is the background to the publication of the current government鈥檚 10-year infrastructure strategy. There is a lot to praise: it benefits from an excellent analysis, introduces a stronger focus on regional and spatial planning, and is backed up by 10 year-long funding settlements. In addition to long-term spending plans totalling 拢725bn, the government proposes some very welcome innovations.

Combining spatial planning for economic, social and housing infrastructure makes a lot of sense. A renewed focus on basics, including repair and maintenance and resilience standards, will be good not just for the users of crumbling infrastructure but also for the firms who look after it, who should have more confidence to invest in capacity and capability.

However, if we take a longer view, going back to the strategy in 2020, many of the problems and many of the solutions presented in the latest version are remarkably like those that came before. For example, 鈥渟ustainable city region transport settlements鈥� are now called 鈥渢ransport for city region settlements鈥�.

Given the complexity of the strategy and the number of moving parts, can the policy levers work as intended to deliver the strategy鈥檚 grand ambition?

Consistent, long-term planning for infrastructure investment over decades is vital to meeting national targets such as decarbonisation. NISTA and ministers can be congratulated for sticking with many of the technical reforms developed during the previous administration, even as they are rebadged for political expediency.

However, even as the government launches the new strategy, the industry response has been quite guarded. The scheduling of the publication of the infrastructure pipeline later in July partly explains this 鈥� industry leaders want to see the detail before they believe the blandishments.

But there is something more fundamental: Given the complexity of the strategy and the number of moving parts, can the policy levers work as intended to deliver the strategy鈥檚 grand ambition?

Spending money is unlikely to be a problem. The New Hospitals Programme and schools rebuilding programmes are already building momentum and there is a huge maintenance backlog across the economic and social infrastructure portfolio. Spending money effectively could be much more of a challenge.

Extending the adoption of the Construction Playbook, launched five years ago, is a cultural transformation programme and will not succeed by departmental dictat alone. Furthermore, having invested in training over 2,000 senior leaders in the IPA鈥檚 project leadership programme (PLP), can programme governance and assurance be reformed at pace? Change is clearly needed, and NISTA and the government will need to work hard to drive this change.

There are four other aspects of reform that I think will help to measure progress in implementation and hence the long-term impact of strategy. Substantial progress in these areas will give far greater confidence with respect to impact over the 10-year strategy period.

The first initiative is the infrastructure investment pipeline. The pipeline has a chequered history with respect to the level of meaningful data that can be provided to an expectant supply chain. The quality of the six-monthly updates will be particularly important.

If businesses, government departments and city regions do start to use the online pipeline to inform their planning of skills and market capacity, then the new platform will be a gamechanger. Let鈥檚 give it time to bed in.

The second change is spatial planning upon which so many parts of the strategy depend; from meeting housing targets to the efficient planning of economic infrastructure like the National Grid. Enhanced spatial planning is needed everywhere, from combined authorities to joined-up utilities.

A key element of the infrastructure strategy is the promise of stability and the certainty of a 10-year pipeline of work. Recent events have undermined our confidence in stable government

Can this innovative planning capability to be built in time? I hope so, but we do need a plan for planning 鈥� a joined-up, nationwide solution for training and technology development to make sure that this takes place.

The third area of change sits in the combined mayoral authorities (MCAs) who will have responsibility for the allocation and management of their integrated settlements. Accelerated devolution is a great move, supporting locally planned investment and greater accountability. However, the MCAs now have a very influential role in ensuring that funds are quickly and effectively dispersed.

If their new processes and teams delay investment, then a key plank of the infrastructure strategy will become a barrier to progress. MCAs will need capability development support to ensure that this does not happen.

The final dimension is time. A key element of the infrastructure strategy is the promise of stability and the certainty of a 10-year pipeline of work. Recent events have undermined our confidence in stable government. Events are taking over, just as they did in 2020.

Labour鈥檚 infrastructure strategy is a model of carefully thought through, systematic reform. It accurately identifies causes, builds on existing foundations, and plans long-term, joined up solutions to solve the UK鈥檚 growth problems.

The clock, however, is ticking. Whether such an elegant solution will do any better than its predecessors when it comes into contact with crude reality remains to be seen. 

Simon Rawlinson is a partner at Arcadis