The government wants to speed up delivery of major projects, but can the formation of a new ‘centre of expertise’ really bridge the gap between vision and outcome? Tim Clark reports
It has the brightest minds from both the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) and the Infrastructure Projects Authority (IPA) put together under one roof.
The new National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (or NISTA) was formally launched at the start of April, with Becky Wood, former commercial advisor to the IPA coming on board as chief executive.
Originally announced in October last year, NISTA aims to bridge the divide when it comes to grand visions of major projects, and actually delivering them.
According to the government, NISTA forms a part of a “three-pronged approach” to addressing the fundamental constraints to infrastructure investment, sitting alongside the 10-year infrastructure strategy, which sets out a long-term plan for the country’s infrastructure, and the new Planning and Infrastructure Bill to unblock planning constraints.
Wood will take up her appointment in June and comes with a plethora of experience. Currently a partner at the consultancy firm EY at the IPA, Wood oversaw infrastructure developments at the Department for Transport, serving as the senior responsible officer for the Crossrail, Thameslink and Intercity Express programmes.
Sensible step?
The formation of NISTA raised some eyebrows when it was suggested in Labour’s manifesto prior to the 2024 general election.
It is, however, a sensible step forward considering how many major infrastructure schemes have hit the buffers in recent years. Although HS2 may be known as the poster child of overspending, a diverse number of schemes have gone astray in the past decade.
The HMP Glasgow, which would replace Barlinnie Prison had an original estimated cost of £100m in 2011. The latest estimate stands at £998m.
The Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route, known as AWPR, saw its costs rise less significantly, but still by around £250m from £745m to £1bn. The impact of the AWPR however rippled across the construction sector, with contractors Galliford Try, Balfour Beatty, and Carillion taking huge financial losses on the project. The scheme arguably contributed to Carillion’s collapse in 2018.
The reforms that government is looking to usher in via the new Planning and Infrastructure Bill also includes speeding up, and lessening the cost, of planning schemes. The Lower Thames Crossing is estimated to cost around £10bn, however £1.2bn has already been spent, circa £400m of that is on planning documents alone. The project is due to open in 2032.
Although the main reasons for each individual project’s delay or overspend isn’t directly due to either the NIC or the IPA, having one combined body to oversee them is a sensible suggestion.
According to the recent NIC report, the formation of NISTA cannot come soon enough. Its report, published in October, didn’t pull its punches, stating that: “Government has not been able to identify, with a single voice, what the most important infrastructure projects are to achieve its goals and then to ensure it is collectively working to deliver them on time and to budget,”
Wider remit
The new body will cover infrastructure, which itself has been given a wider remit by the Labour government to include its own Plan for Change, which aims to build up to 1.5m homes.
Anne-Marie Friel, partner at Pinsent Masons says that the NIC’s report gave ample justification for the government to rip up the previous rule book when it came to infrastructure.
“The NIC’s latest report provides further valuable evidence justifying the necessity for system-wide disruption to the status quo, across all stages of the project delivery lifecycle, and throws light on the positive interventions that will be needed at each stage, if better outcomes are to be achieved on any project,” she said.
Darren Jones, chief secretary to the Treasury said that NISTA would act as a “centre of expertise for infrastructure and major project strategy and delivery, working with government departments and the supply chain to get Britain building and help drive economic growth.”
The new body has been broadly welcomed by the construction sector. Upon news of NISTA’s formation last year contractor Mace, which is building HS2’s Euston and Curzon Street stations, said: “Once the new authority is established, with supporting policy levers in place and the new public procurement portal launched, the challenge of baking in resilience during project pre-delivery stages and procurement, will be better resourced. This is a good start but there will be much more to do.”
Project delivery experts have also welcomed the news. Writing on LinkedIn, Martin Paver, chief executive of project data analytics firm Projecting Success said NISTA had a “huge potential” to make a difference.
“Really looking forward to seeing how the intent translates into impact,” he added. “Not just within government, but as a catalyst for broader change across project delivery within the UK and wider society.”
Analysis from the Construction Leadership Council of 20,000 projects has found those with the best planning at the start of a project, had 20% lower costs and were delivered up to 15% faster.
According to the Association for Project Management (APM) the merger of the NIC and IPA needs to be run “as a transformation programme” to ensure that the differing priorities of both bodies are united as seamlessly as possible.
The report stated: “There are many competing voices on infrastructure across government which can lead to confusion about ownership.
“The governance must be clear on the outline of NISTA’s roles and objectives, especially as complex projects often involve multiple government departments, and clarity will embolden staff morale. Governance change alone will not lead to the change that the new government wants to achieve, without considering the resources, mandate, powers and authority given to NISTA.”
Streamlined process?
It isn’t only NISTA where the government is looking to speed up infrastructure delivery. On Thursday it announced that planning consultations for major infrastructure are to be streamlined.
The changes announced in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill aim to reduce the average two-year consultation period by half, expediting the delivery of projects such as clean energy facilities, public transport links, and other significant infrastructure developments.
The government asserts that the current consultation system is burdensome, leading to delays and increased costs, and that the reforms will save over £1bn for industry and taxpayers during this lifetime of this Parliament.
Commenting on the changes, Robert Bruce, planning and infrastructure partner at law firm Freeths LLP, said the shift marked a “significant step” towards speeding up the Development Consent Orders (DCO) progress, welcoming the focus on the “quality and effectiveness of the consultation”, rather than box ticking and a risk-averse approach to pre-application consultation due to the current legal requirement.
Bruce said: “The Ministerial Statement announcing the proposed change to be made to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to remove the current statutory requirement for pre-application consultation makes clear the government still expects meaningful consultation for NSIPs and will publish statutory guidance setting out the strong expectation that applicants for DCOs undertake pre-application consultation, together with the Planning Inspectorate continuing to assess whether DCO applications are suitable for examination.
“Whilst the change should help significantly with speeding up the process, it is clear applying for a DCO will still be a lengthy and complex process. Whilst rightly ambitious, I very much doubt that the government is likely to meet its stated pledge of 150 planning decisions on major infrastructure projects this Parliament, given there’s only been 145 decisions on DCO applications since 2008.”
Ushering in the Teal Book
To accompany, and help industry and government make sense of the sweeping changes the Treasury launched what is known as the Teal Book. The book provides a series of standardised methodologies and best practices for planning, managing, and executing public sector projects. The aim, again, is to improve efficiency, accountability, and outcomes rather than budget-busting delays.
The book will be used by civil servants, project managers, and construction delivery professionals, as a reference point for their projects and forms part of a broader initiative to drive effective infrastructure development and public service transformation. The formation of the Teal Book was influenced by a National Audit Office report into delivering value from government investment into major projects, published in February last year.
The APM have recommended that the government review the shape and size of the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) to “clarify strategic alignment over the next 12 months”. The implementation of more ‘strategic alignment’ looks to be a major part of the forthcoming spending review, which is due to be published in mid-June.
Many eyes of the industry, as well as the wider infrastructure and real estate sector, are poised to see what the chancellor unveils in the spending review. For NISTA, it will be the opportunity to establish itself, and a pipeline for infrastructure, for the next decade and beyond.
Read next: Mace appoints Brian Conlon as country director
Are you a building professional? Sign up for a FREE MEMBERSHIP to upload news stories, post job vacancies, and connect with colleagues on our secure social feed.
