Dave Dury, principal client lead for local authorities (Ireland, Scotland and the North), Mott MacDonald

For the first time in many years, the sector has a nationally articulated vision that seeks to unify objectives around accessibility, safety, sustainability and the lived experience of travel. Yet the strategy’s ability to deliver real change will depend less on the words it contains than on other government policies and strategies, including devolution.

Devolution is not a peripheral enabler of the strategy – it is fundamental to its success.

National transport decision making in recent years has been affected by instability and the strategy seeks to change that. Frequent political shifts, changing ministerial priorities and reactive policymaking have made long term delivery difficult.

A core purpose of having an integrated national transport strategy is to act as a stabilising framework: something that civil servants, delivery bodies and local leaders can point to when short term political headwinds arise.

Devolution matters here because it anchors that stability locally. Where transport powers and funding are devolved, decisions are shaped by place-based priorities rather than week-to-week national messaging. The strategy provides the direction; devolution should provide the means to keep moving in that direction over time.

Major city regions have often been the focus of integrated transport success stories. That focus is understandable: they have led the way on integration, governance and delivery. But this focus risks overlooking a critical part of the network; large regional towns that sit between cities, connect economies and absorb the strain of growth.

Places such as Warrington, Doncaster (main image above) and Blackburn are shaped by historic car-led development and their position on strategic national corridors. As a result, they experience congestion, severance and transport inequality disproportionate to their size.

Warrington illustrates this dynamic particularly clearly. Located between major motorways, rail corridors and freight routes, it absorbs regional traffic while also trying to support local growth, housing delivery and access to employment. Without integrated planning, increased development risks compounding congestion and inequity.

The strategy gives Warrington a national framework to justify intervention – but devolution aims to give it the authority to act on that framework in a way that reflects local conditions. One without the other risks leaving towns with ambition but no leverage, or governance but no clear direction.

Devolution as the bridge between vision and delivery

The strategy is not an investment plan; it is a framework. Many of the funding mechanisms it relies on exist or will come through devolution deals that create multiyear settlements for mayoral authorities. This is both its strength and its vulnerability.

Where devolved authorities have strong delivery records, the strategy reinforces credibility and consistency. Where devolution is still emerging, as in Cheshire and Warrington, the risk is that ambition outpaces capacity and resources. Maintenance funding is a key example of the challenge with many authorities struggling to maintain existing assets, they are likely to find it difficult to reorient their networks without meaningful, long term support.

However, the strategy also contains significant nonfinancial enablers, such as shared platforms and “build once, deploy many” solutions, including integrated ticketing systems that are being developed in one region and made available to others.

These approaches illustrate how devolution, supported by a national strategy, can reduce duplication and accelerate change even where funding is constrained.

The government’s proposed New Towns programme adds urgency to the strategy/devolution relationship. Previous approaches to growth relied heavily on “predict and provide” models that locked in car dependency and fragmented networks. The Integrated National Transport Strategy (INTS), by contrast, emphasises vision-led planning, so places are designed around outcomes such as accessibility, wellbeing and connectivity from day one.

For New Towns, this represents a critical opportunity. With the strategy setting expectations around integrated, sustainable travel and devolved authorities shaping local delivery, transport’s potential is an enabler of inclusive growth rather than a constraint. Early decisions about street design, public transport provision and access to jobs and services will determine whether new settlements reduce or reinforce existing inequalities.

The strategy also sets out to introduce a transport poverty measurement, which could strengthen business cases by explicitly linking mobility to opportunity and social outcomes. Applied early, these measures could ensure that New Towns are judged not only on network performance but on the real benefits they deliver to residents.

A better outcome for society – if alignment holds

Perhaps the most significant shift signalled by the INTS is its focus on how travel feels, not just how systems perform. Integration, safety, affordability and ease of use were all highlighted as central to public trust and behavioural change. This is where the strategy has the potential to deliver a genuinely better societal outcome.

Devolution allows those human-centred priorities to be interpreted through local knowledge: understanding where interchanges fail, where streets feel unsafe or where disconnected services restrict access to work, health and education.

When national vision and local leadership are aligned, transport planning can move beyond individual schemes towards systemic improvement.

Nonetheless, while the strategy makes good progress, there are risks that remain. Without sustained funding, skilled capacity and political commitment, the ambition of the INTS could falter. Yet the combination of a long overdue national strategy and an expanding devolved governance landscape offers a rare chance to reset how transport is planned and delivered.

For towns like Warrington and for future new towns yet to be built, having the strategy and devolution together is not optional. It is the difference between aspiration and action – and between transport systems that merely move people and those that genuinely improve lives.

Dave Dury, principal client lead for local authorities (Ireland, Scotland and the North), Mott MacDonald

Like what you’ve read? To receive New Civil Engineer’s daily and weekly newsletters click here.