Key points from the response:
- ICE believes local stakeholders are best placed to plan and deliver local infrastructure and to understand the unique regional circumstances, requirements and opportunities. However, across all combined authorities, there are questions about whether metro mayors have the powers, funding and governance arrangements required to deliver ambitious, place-based plans linked to key national objectives, including net-zero and levelling up.
- Additional devolved powers are most effective if supported by the right strategic frameworks. Subnational infrastructure planning could be further strengthened by evolving subnational transport bodies to become subnational infrastructure bodies, tasked with creating regional infrastructure strategies, backed up by spatial strategies.
- Granting metro mayors more powers over their Key Route Networks could also empower them to develop new revenue-generating schemes for their roads to replace the current generation of road taxes, and help address the long-term need to ensure sustainable revenue for road maintenance and upgrade.
ICE submission to the Department for Transport on the Key Route Network consultation
Content type: Policy
Last updated: September 2021
You may also be interested in@headerSize>

- Type
- Policy
ICE private roundtable: delivering major transport projects — national and local challenges
The ICE hosted the Rt Hon Richard Holden MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Transport, for a discussion with infrastructure leaders about the delivery of major transport projects in the UK, reflecting on the systemic barriers affecting performance at national and local levels.

- Type
- Infrastructure blog
CCC report shows it’s time to supercharge the UK’s electrification ambitions
The UK must speed up the electrification of transport, homes, and industry to reap the benefits of reducing emissions.

- Type
- Infrastructure blog
Another report? Does the civil engineering market study simply state what we already know?
ICE Policy Fellow Paul Mullett takes a critical look at the Competition and Markets Authority's findings and wonders, “are we brave enough?”