Skip to main content

CIHT welcomes NAO report on roads infrastructure funding

The UK’s Chartered Institution of Highways & Transportation (CIHT) has welcomed the National Audit Office’s (NAO) report, Maintaining strategic infrastructure: roads, which highlights how long term funding certainty is crucial to how the UK manages its road infrastructure. Funding pressures on highways authorities have encouraged efficiency and innovation in how budgets for road maintenance are spent, but public value will be lost unless funding becomes more predictable, according to the report. The r
June 9, 2014 Read time: 2 mins
The UK’s Chartered Institution of Highways & Transportation (CIHT) has welcomed the National Audit Office’s (NAO) report, Maintaining strategic infrastructure: roads, which highlights how long term funding certainty is crucial to how the UK manages its road infrastructure.

Funding pressures on highways authorities have encouraged efficiency and innovation in how budgets for road maintenance are spent, but public value will be lost unless funding becomes more predictable, according to the report.

The report by the NAO also welcomes the six-year funding certainty outlined in the government’s Infrastructure Bill provided for capital projects and maintenance, and therefore the potential to achieve better value for money.

“Stop/start funding makes long-term planning more difficult for highways authorities. The 1837 Department for Transport understands the threat posed to road maintenance from the uncertainty of funding, but establishing a new government company to address the problems will not, in itself, be enough. The Department should work with the Treasury and the Department for Communities and Local Government to address the unpredictability of funding for both the strategic and local road networks,” says Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office.

Andrew Hugill, CIHT director of Policy and Technical Affairs commented: “We have consistently called for a need for certainty, and continuity of investment over a sustained period if overall improvements to the transport network are to be delivered effectively and efficiently. Giving certainty to the entire transport sector, including skills, resources and the investment needed for effective delivery will result in benefits to health, environmental, social as well as economic agendas.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • US transportation 'needs political leadership'
    November 9, 2012
    Long-time industry leader John Worthington reflects on where transportation in the US is heading – and where it should be going. Interview with Jason Barnes. The US’s new transportation bill reflects much of what is wrong in the sector in general and in ITS in particular, according to John Worthington. While a decision is welcome, he says, it does little more than provide certainty of funding for anything other than day-to-day operations. Worthington, former Chairman and CEO of TransCore, is back in the ITS
  • Funding shortfall for US Interstate upgrades
    May 11, 2012
    Andrew Bardin Williams investigates tolling on the federal Interstate system as maintenance and upgrade requirements increasingly outpace funding The I-95 corridor through North Carolina is one of the most heavy trafficked interstates in the US, seeing upwards of 46,000 vehicles per day in some stretches-and North Carolina’s Department of Transportation (NCDOT) estimates this number will to rise to 98,000 vehicles per day by 2040. Along with the rest of the federal interstate system, the North Carolina str
  • Neology enters National Highways framework 
    February 15, 2022
    Appointment allows firm to provide solutions such as average speed enforcement
  • Road pricing is inevitable – because the ‘user pays’ principle is fair
    June 14, 2018
    We pay for roads through our taxes: the poor pay proportionately more, and effectively subsidise the rich. It would be fairer to accept the ‘user pays’ principle, says Dr John Walker. Road pricing is already used worldwide to combat congestion and pollution, to compensate for falling revenues from fuel duty (‘gas tax’), to provide an alternative (and fairer) means of charging motorists than the 80-year old fuel tax and to improve the efficiency of and expand transport infrastructure. However, it could and s