Recommendation 24

The IPA pointed to the Lower Thames Crossing as a recent example of where it has made meaningful impact on a programme’s delivery. It stated that the programme had an ambitious schedule and was larger than any other scheme that Highways England had taken on before. The IPA refused to give support to the outline business case, advising that its delivery schedule was unachievable and that it needed to revisit its cost, as well as strengthen its governance model. The IPA said that Highways England revisited its plans for the programme and subsequently addressed all the key elements that the IPA had highlighted.48 42 Committee of Public Accounts, Delivering major projects, Thirty-first Report of Session 2015–16, HC 710, March 2016, Conclusions and recommendations, para 2 43 Q 4 44 Committee of Public Accounts, Delivering major projects, Thirty-first Report of Session 2015–16, HC 710, March 2016, Conclusions and recommendations, para 2 45 Qq 5, 10 46 Q 10 47 Letter from Infrastructure and Projects Authority to Committee dated 6 January 2021 48 Q 16 14 Lessons from major projects and programmes