Independent review
Completed
Major transport projects governance and assurance review
Index summary
Makes recommendations for improving the governance and assurance of major transport infrastructure projects, drawing on the experience of HS2.
Original evidence
Government Response
DfT published a response (policy paper, 18 June 2025) alongside the review. The department accepts all recommendations and states it is already taking steps to implement them, committing to apply the lessons learned to improve its approach to infrastructure delivery.
Recommendations
Recommendation R1
Recommendation · source text
All stakeholders to remember the importance of advocacy for the HS2 Programme going forward.
Recommendation R2
Recommendation · source text
Establish a Programme Board.
Recommendation R3
Recommendation · source text
Bring more independent/non-executive representation into the governance structures.
Recommendation R4
Recommendation · source text
Review and agree new Terms of Reference for the HS2 Ltd Board.
Recommendation R5
Recommendation · source text
Review terms of the Development Agreement and Framework Document, relevant to the HS2 Ltd Board, to reflect the current position of the Programme.
Recommendation R6
Recommendation · source text
Evolve the HS2 Ltd Board ToR, and the terms of the Development Agreement and Framework Document, relevant to the HS2 Ltd Board, as the Reset progresses.
Recommendation R7
Recommendation · source text
The revised Terms of Reference for the HS2 Ltd Board should set out the respective responsibilities and accountabilities of the Accounting Officer and the non-executive Directors operating under the Companies Act (2006)
Recommendation R8
Recommendation · source text
The HS2 Ltd Board should establish sub-boards to provide more granular oversight of selected projects and targeted operational issues, starting with one for MWCCs and one for the cost estimate/project controls.
Recommendation R9
Recommendation · source text
Appoint at least two new Board members with major project delivery experience as soon as possible.
Recommendation R10
Recommendation · source text
Document a new Board appointment process which confirms the Chair as the lead for all appointments other than the DfT and HMT representatives.
Recommendation R11
Recommendation · source text
The Sponsor Board to be closed down and responsibilities split between the newly formed Programme Board and the SRO and Sponsor Exec team.
Recommendation R12
Recommendation · source text
The Framework Document and the Development Agreement to be amended to reflect the closing down of the Sponsor Board and the revised role of the Sponsor.
Recommendation R13
Recommendation · source text
Review the governance that sits above the Sponsor with the objective of removing at least one layer of approval.
Recommendation R14
Recommendation · source text
Agree a Terms of Reference for the Programme Board and amend the Framework Document and Development Agreement to reflect its role.
Recommendation R15
Recommendation · source text
Recruit 2-3 Independent Members to the Programme Board with one acting as chair.
Recommendation R16
Recommendation · source text
Review the stakeholder engagement forums in the light of the new governance structure and then undertake regular reviews as the Programme progresses to operations.
Recommendation R17
Recommendation · source text
Recognise the distinction between the HS2 Ltd Corporate Shareholder and the Financial Shareholder.
Recommendation R18
Recommendation · source text
DfT to review how the DfT Shareholder Team and the Sponsor Team work together in respect of the Corporate Shareholder role.
Recommendation R19
Recommendation · source text
Establish DfT and HMT as joint Financial Shareholders.
Recommendation R20
Recommendation · source text
Establish a Shareholder Board with independent representation.
Recommendation R21
Recommendation · source text
Amend the Terms of the Framework Document and Development Agreement to reflect the new governance arrangements relating to the Shareholder Board and the role of the Financial Shareholders.
Recommendation R22
Recommendation · source text
Put in place a Shareholder agreement between DfT and HMT including detailed provisions for the management of contingency.
Recommendation R23
Recommendation · source text
Ensure that the Ministerial Taskforce has a permanent role in the governance of the Programme and meets regularly.
Recommendation R24
Recommendation · source text
The system of delegation should be reviewed in light of the new governance structure and evolved over time to take into account the Reset.
Recommendation R25
Recommendation · source text
Follow the advice of the DfT Lessons Learnt document to ‘act decisively when in exception’.
Recommendation R26
Recommendation · source text
Give the Programme Board a specific remit around interventions.
Recommendation R27
Recommendation · source text
Conduct periodic reviews of the Governance structure to ensure that it is fit for purpose for the stage the project has reached.
Recommendation R28
Recommendation · source text
HS2 Ltd to carry out a specific review on the preparedness and approach to achieving the end state operational railway.
Recommendation R29
Recommendation · source text
An Integrated Assurance and Approval Plan should be developed to reduce the multiplicity of assurance processes, limit duplication of assurance commissions, and build trust across all parties in the information provided.
Recommendation R30
Recommendation · source text
The Integrated Assurance Group should be re-established with a wider mandate than its predecessor that allows it to exert greater influence over all assurance activities. The Integrated Assurance and Approval Plan should be owned by the IAG and managed in conjunction with HS2 Ltd and the Sponsor.
Recommendation R31
Recommendation · source text
Include in the Integrated Assurance and Approval Plan a programme of assurance post contract awards.
Recommendation R32
Recommendation · source text
Review all relevant LOD3 commissions to assess implementation of recommendations or caveats applicable to the post contract award period.
Recommendation R33
Recommendation · source text
HS2 Programme resources should be strengthened to allow sufficient dedicated expertise to challenge the content, not just the process, of information passed up through the Lines of Defence model.
Recommendation R34
Recommendation · source text
The P-Rep role be reviewed and updated to take into account the current status quo with advisory services remaining a priority over assurance.
Recommendation R35
Recommendation · source text
The DfT should consider the future scope of the P-Rep role in terms of Phase 1 and Euston and assess whether the current 6 FTEs is sufficient.
Recommendation R36
Recommendation · source text
Assurance reviews should use a common and transparent approach to communicate risk. Decision makers should read into the findings to ensure that the full meaning and messaging is understood.
Recommendation R37
Recommendation · source text
The Programme Board has overall responsibility for overseeing and actioning the output of assurance reviews but should delegate where appropriate to HS2 Ltd and the Sponsor.
Recommendation R38
Recommendation · source text
Seek to reduce the number of external reviews on HS2 Ltd and ensure that reviews are coordinated, additive and complementary to existing knowledge.
Recommendation R39
Recommendation · source text
As part of the Reset, include in the transformation plan, led by the CEO of HS2 Ltd and the SRO, a prioritised set of recommendations and actions from the various reviews that have taken place.
Recommendation R40
Recommendation · source text
A culture of cost control and affordability must be established and prioritised on HS2 and any infrastructure project. This must be led from the top.
Recommendation R41
Recommendation · source text
Any decision to choose a new scope and design should be robustly challenged against alternatives based on an existing design that may be less desirable but offer a lower risk and cost.
Recommendation R42
Recommendation · source text
In future, time should be allowed in the Programme to iterate requirements, scope, design and cost so that affordability can be managed, i.e. Rail Systems.
Recommendation R43
Recommendation · source text
Use the Financial Shareholder to act as a challenge to political decision-making which impacts the Programme.
Recommendation R44
Recommendation · source text
Incorporate the findings and actions of the cost estimation and programme control review in the Improvement Plan for Project Controls immediately.
Recommendation R45
Recommendation · source text
Set up a Project Controls HS2 Ltd sub-board to oversee the implementation of the IPPC and to scrutinise and challenge the Cost Forecast.
Recommendation R46
Recommendation · source text
Ministers, via the Ministerial Taskforce, the Financial Shareholders and the Sponsor, must give time and space for proper planning and development.
Recommendation R47
Recommendation · source text
Agree the scope of Phase 1 as part of the Reset including decisions on future-proofing and descoping.
Recommendation R48
Recommendation · source text
The governance structure explicitly covers environmental issues and there is a clear mechanism for challenging the solutions proposed. It also needs to be recognised that whole government decision-making may be required.
Recommendation R49
Recommendation · source text
Review the use of P50 and P75 for the Target Cost and overall Funding Envelope and consider adopting different values for different parts of the Programme taking into account their maturity.
Recommendation R50
Recommendation · source text
In line with the NAO recommendation, Government should use cost ranges rather than point estimates particularly in the early stages of a project’s life.
Recommendation R51
Recommendation · source text
As part of the Reset, agree a new baseline cost and schedule and a date when this will next be updated.
Recommendation R52
Recommendation · source text
Review the way in which historic prices are used in infrastructure projects and consider whether a bespoke solution is required.
Recommendation R53
Recommendation · source text
Annual funding control periods must be avoided as they undermine effective management of the Programme.
Recommendation R54
Recommendation · source text
For projects like HS2, where it is contributing to a wider regeneration, create a business case for the overall vision such that different options can be explored in terms of programme/projects mix.
Recommendation R55
Recommendation · source text
Update the guidance for wider economic benefits in transport infrastructure projects, noting the progress that has been made post a similar recommendation in the Oakervee Review.
Recommendation R56
Recommendation · source text
Revise guidance on the cadence of Business Case updates for programmes that extend over a long period.
Recommendation R57
Recommendation · source text
Mark Wild should be given the freedom and funding to put in place a high calibre and enduring leadership team and this should be a top priority for the Reset.
Recommendation R58
Recommendation · source text
The use of consultants and interim roles in the senior leadership team should be a last resort.
Recommendation R59
Recommendation · source text
HS2 Ltd and the Sponsor must work together to build the brand of the Programme and make it an attractive place to work.
Recommendation R60
Recommendation · source text
Review how lessons learnt are captured and shared on the HS2 Programme.
Recommendation R61
Recommendation · source text
Review the effectiveness of the Knowledge Management system as an aid to corporate memory.
Recommendation R62
Recommendation · source text
Mark Wild to reset the capability in the Commercial and Delivery functions.
Recommendation R63
Recommendation · source text
A Remuneration Framework is put in place with HS2 Ltd to enable greater flexibility and speed in hiring and retention of existing staff.
Recommendation R64
Recommendation · source text
HS2 Ltd to consider setting up frameworks for specialist strategic and commercial advice to supplement those already in place.
Recommendation R65
Recommendation · source text
HS2 Ltd and DfT to agree a new indirect cost budget as part of the Reset.
Recommendation R66
Recommendation · source text
Review the capacity and capability of the SRO and the MRPG leadership team to deliver its objectives: HS2 Phase 1, Euston Station, a possible Phase 2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail.
Recommendation R67
Recommendation · source text
As part of the Reset, a review of DfT Sponsor capability is required.
Recommendation R68
Recommendation · source text
HS2 Ltd and the Sponsor team should develop a charter based on Psychological Safety, where each side can take risks in voicing opinions, challenging decisions and admitting mistakes without fear of negative consequences.
Recommendation R69
Recommendation · source text
A cultural reset is required to establish ways of working - modelling collaborative behaviours across all levels in both HS2 Ltd and the Sponsor.
Recommendation R70
Recommendation · source text
Redacted for commercial confidentiality
Recommendation R71
Recommendation · source text
Redacted for commercial confidentiality
Recommendation R72
Recommendation · source text
Redacted for commercial confidentiality
Recommendation R73
Recommendation · source text
A new governance structure is required to lead and drive the project to successful completion.
Recommendation R74
Recommendation · source text
The Euston sponsor capability within DFT needs to be enhanced.
Recommendation R75
Recommendation · source text
The options around the delivery model need to be reviewed and agreed.
Recommendation R76
Recommendation · source text
Agree the scope, EAC and funding with a ring-fenced and realistic budget.
Recommendation R77
Recommendation · source text
Phasing of the work should be considered as a method of delivering benefits earlier.
Recommendation R78
Recommendation · source text
Consideration to be given to appointing a specific Minister for Infrastructure and Construction.
Recommendation R79
Recommendation · source text
NISTA to be tasked with providing overall leadership of the delivery of the UK infrastructure programme reporting into a Minister.
Recommendation R80
Recommendation · source text
NISTA to conduct a review of the capacity and capability of the civils construction sector.
Recommendation R81
Recommendation · source text
Consider the scale of tasks for new delivery bodies to avoid overwhelming the organisation and structure the governance arrangements to reflect the scale and complexity of the programme.
Recommendation R82
Recommendation · source text
NISTA to review how the Government Financial Shareholder role is managed across the infrastructure programme.
Recommendation R83
Recommendation · source text
The governance structure should explicitly cover environmental issues and there should be a clear mechanism for challenging the solutions proposed. It also needs to be recognised that whole government decision-making may be required.
Recommendation R84
Recommendation · source text
Review the use of P50 and P75 values for future infrastructure projects.
Recommendation R85
Recommendation · source text
Inflation risk needs a bespoke solution within infrastructure projects.
Recommendation R86
Recommendation · source text
NISTA to establish a team of commercial/delivery specialists to support Departments and the wider public sector in the delivery of infrastructure projects.
Recommendation R87
Recommendation · source text
NISTA to develop an Infrastructure Capability Plan.
Recommendation R88
Recommendation · source text
NISTA to conduct a review on how delivery capability can be built, retained, shared and transferred from one project to another.
Recommendation R89
Recommendation · source text
For new projects/programmes, agree a pay framework upfront to reduce multiple decisions and create greater consistency and certainty.
No recommendations with this response.