We have the tools – what more do we need to fix major infrastructure delivery?

A resigned feeling that ‘nothing works in this country’ isn’t new to politics, nor is it unique to discussions about infrastructure delivery.

The reality is that while major projects are an investment in a country’s future, they cost a lot and often take a long time to deliver.

And after all that, they can fail to deliver on the benefits that were promised at the start.

Governments across the world, and here in the UK, have long recognised the challenges of infrastructure delivery.

They have developed resources and tools, identified best practice tools and gathered lessons from past projects. But they’re not applied consistently.

Following a call for evidence earlier this year, the ICE has now published a policy paper outlining how best practice could become the norm in infrastructure delivery.

1. Improving project forecasts through a central database

Calculating how long a project is going to take, how much it will cost and the benefits it will deliver is technically hard to do.

It’s often made even more difficult by perverse political incentives that encourage underestimation or the use of single digit estimates (i.e. £1bn, £8m, etc) rather than cost and time ranges.

This information is also frequently released to the public too early in the planning process.

A better use of project data can help make these estimates more accurate.

The UK government already collects project data and performance information as part of how it assesses and assures major projects.

This information, alongside lessons learnt from previous projects, sector-wide reviews and global best practice, should be stored in a searchable and accessible database.

This database could be operated by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) and be available to government departments and client organisations to inform more accurate project forecasts.

2. Cementing who’s responsible for delivering infrastructure strategies

The chief secretary to the Treasury (CST) should be permanently responsible for delivering the government’s 10-Year Infrastructure Strategy (10 YIS), and future versions of it.

The need for consistent leadership and coordinated decision-making on projects, and across government departments, came up frequently during consultation for this paper.

No one will take the politics out of infrastructure – nor should they – but there is an opportunity to think critically about the leadership structures we have in place.

The government has recognised the value of a senior politician leading the delivery of the 10 YIS in the form of CST.

The ICE sees this as a positive step and recommends that it becomes the norm.

Future CSTs should keep the responsibility for the infrastructure system, as directed by the strategy, in their ministerial portfolio.

This will help to coordinate infrastructure decision-making across government.

3. Supporting coordination through a cabinet committee on infrastructure

Establishing a cabinet committee on infrastructure would also help to enable better joined-up decision-making at the political level.

This committee would bring together CST, the relevant secretaries of state, junior ministers and senior civil servants to take infrastructure decisions together.

The UK has explored the value of similar committee structures on a project-by-project basis. Other countries around the world, including New Zealand and Ireland, have similar structures in place.

But it hasn’t tried this cabinet committee structure across major programmes that span several government departments (i.e. housing and transport).

Decision making across these programmes could be better coordinated if it became a permanent fixture.

4. Streamlining how major projects are assessed and assured

The way the UK government assures major infrastructure projects can be improved.

Assurance refers to the assessment and approval processes for major projects.

Assessors confirm that the project has passed certain milestones or ‘gates’ and approve that it can continue.

On projects like HS2, assurance has lacked clarity and has often duplicated work with no real coherence throughout.

Consultation respondents felt that assurance responsibilities across the Cabinet Office, NISTA and HM Treasury should be clarified and streamlined.

They also felt the phasing of the process (when projects reach milestones/gates) could be better.

The establishment of NISTA presents an opportunity to rethink these systems.

5. Establishing a unit of infrastructure experts to support delivery

NISTA should have a unit made up of senior infrastructure leaders within government that can support public bodies on project delivery.

Capability on the delivery side has been a key constraint.

Particularly for departments and arm’s length bodies that don’t deliver major projects often, and as such, don’t have the skills and capacity in-house.

Currently, they’re supported by senior advisers and non-executive directors with previous experience delivering projects.

This is positive, but this system lacks a level of accountability that would embed their expertise more effectively into major project teams.

The ICE recommends creating a ‘delivery unit’ to complement existing capability.

This unit can move from project to project, focusing on departments with less experience delivering infrastructure. It should be brought in early to enable success.

6. Engaging the public on the benefits of infrastructure

Infrastructure projects tend to get the most coverage when they are delayed or go over budget. This often means that their value fails to be communicated to the public.

The benefits that infrastructure delivers for society over its lifetime are the driving purpose behind building it in the first place.

Being clear about what a project is trying to achieve – whether that’s to ease congestion or unlock more housing and development – is crucial to ensure that project stakeholders are building towards the same outcome. It also helps the public get onboard.

Instead, the focus on project delays and disruptions has eroded public support.

NISTA and CST have important roles to play in meaningfully engaging the public on the true benefits of infrastructure delivery, but also any necessary trade-offs.

The government has a particular opportunity to get this right

The steps the government has taken over the last year have provided the UK with a unique opportunity.

NISTA, the 10YIS and the release of the UK’s dynamic infrastructure pipeline combine to offer a platform for the UK to think more strategically. Not only about what infrastructure it builds, but also about how it delivers it.

This is an opportunity worth grasping with both hands.

Read the full policy paper