Written evidence submitted by Transport for the West Midlands (JUJ0038)

Organisation Summary and Reasons for Responding

Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) is the transport authority for the West Midlands metropolitan area and operates as part of the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA). TfWM coordinates and invests in public transport services—including buses, trains, and the West Midlands Metro tram network—while also managing key transport infrastructure and strategic planning across the region. Its mission is to deliver a safer, greener, and more inclusive transport system that supports economic growth and improves the quality of life for its citizens.

We are submitting evidence to the Transport Select Committee on Joined up Journeys as integration of our transport modes is vital to achieving the goals set out in the new West Midlands Local Transport Plan. We see how good integration promotes healthier lifestyles, reduces carbon emissions, and enhances connectivity—especially for short journeys and first/last mile travel. Seamless multimodal options make transport more accessible and equitable, particularly for those without access to a car, and helps us reach those wider goals like social isolation, inclusive growth and reducing health inequalities. By designing transport systems that encourage active travel alongside reliable public transport, TfWM can support a more sustainable, inclusive, and resilient future for the West Midlands.

With this evidence, we therefore want to support the Government, so it can shape transport services, networks and options around those journeys people require and make in their daily lives and what kinds of changes need to be made for transport users with different needs and across different places to fully deliver on effective integration.

a)     What are the key features that make a transport system feel joined up to the user? How would ‘integrated’ transport look different to current services and networks?

Taking a people-focused approach

With a joined-up transport system starting with people and not just focusing on the vehicles or modes themselves. Integration should be built around people’s different and diverse needs through human-centred design— with then the modes, routes, and infrastructure fitting around the journeys people need to make and their desired origins and destinations, whilst appreciating these also need to support the greatest number of people.

A good customer service experience

To deliver on a people-focused approach, this means putting customers at the heart of every transport decision – be it in planning, delivery, and operations of transport. Great experiences then build trust, loyalty, and repeat journeys.  This means understanding customer needs, co-developing solutions, benchmarking performance, and defining “good” experiences—measured, monitored, and embedded in culture, governance, and decision-making, supported by the right skills, training, and tools.  Across TfWM, we have developed five customer service principles. These being: Dependable Journeys, Safe & Secure, Easy to Use, Fair, and Inviting which are considered at every stage from planning and ticketing to waiting, boarding, and travelling. We also believe all operators must own the network experience, not just their own mode, with fully trained staff equipped with digital and physical tools to support diverse passenger needs and manage incidents, delays, or diversions or other such barriers passengers face.  All of which enhance integration.

Network Planning

Urban and regional transport networks should be viewed and delivered to work as one integrated transport system, linking to a wide range of origins and destinations people require. Each mode, be it bus, rail, tram, walking, cycling or micromobility—should have a clear role, complementing each other to meet both peak and off-peak need. The network must also be willing to adapt and be shaped by any land use changes and development while ensuring access for all, including lower-density areas through demand-responsive services, active travel including safe, inclusive cycle parking, micromobility and other shared service options, to fill any gaps where turn up and go frequency or regular frequency services are difficult to justify.  Requirements of a nighttime transport network and appropriate integration measures should also be considered to support up to 30% of the WMCAs workforce[1], of which many are lower-paid roles often held by young people, women, and ethnic minority groups without access to a car.

Good interchange points

Seamless switching between all modes is critical – be it public transport, active travel or at a Park and Ride site (switching from a car) or a combination. All public transport modes, and their stops and stations, cycle hire, secure cycle parking (including parking for adapted bikes) on-demand services, and other micromobility options should be co-located, all in close proximity to form an interchange, and timetables aligned between such modes. Those obvious interchanges (bus and rail stations) should offer core standards, be safe, comfortable and provide key amenities (i.e. ticket machines, seating, waiting areas, toilets, Wi-Fi, lockers, play areas, and consider good public realm). Larger zonal interchanges (spanning larger areas of a city or town centre) should support interchange between rail stations, tram stops and streets with key bus stops. Then smaller local mobility hubs in local areas should provide EV charging, safe and inclusive cycle parking, e-scooter/cycle hire and car clubs to connect neighbourhoods to the wider network.

Interchange points must further be built into all new housing, transport projects, and community facilities, with road and pavement space prioritised for public transport and active travel.   It is important to also explore where community facilities, key amenities and public spaces may be interchange points in their own right, and when good, connected neighbourhoods with essential services are then close to home, people may not need to interchange at all.

Clear, consistent and accessible information

Real-time travel accessible information across all modes—via apps, signage, displays, and announcements—is essential. It must be available in accessible formats for disabled users, people with cognitive impairments, and non-English speakers. Equally important is intuitive system branding: just as road signs and maps use colours and line thickness to signal hierarchy, public transport needs smarter, clearer network maps and information design to help users instantly understand the network. For example, in London, over and underground lines being named (i.e. Lionness Line or Victoria Line) and colour coded has shown to greatly improve passenger navigation and their understanding of the network, with more national backing required for this to happen elsewhere in the country for our rail lines.

Integrated Ticketing and Payments approach

A single, consistent simple payment system should cover all modes, covering contactless, mobile, account-based, and cash payment systems—so passengers never need separate tickets for each different leg of their journey. The West Midlands is delivering this through Swift, with fare capping and one-platform pricing already in place for bus and tram, with rail to follow within two years as part of bus franchising and rail reform. But initiatives like the ‘Hopper Fare’ in London (covering unlimited bus and tram journeys within a set time) would further enhance integration in other regions, if this was affordable and achievable.

Inclusive, safe and accessible physical transport infrastructure

Transport must be inclusive by design, not just in vehicles but across the whole journey. Step-free access, tactile paving, dropped kerbs, inclusive cycle parking, safe crossings with full consideration of road safety issues, lighting, seating, and clear wayfinding should be built into every interchange, as core design principles. Placemaking, safety, strong branding, and trained staff further create a seamless, people-first network.

Together, all these elements, if done well can create smoother, intuitive and effortless transfers, with well-placed stops and stations, connected by active travel links, and integrated timetables and ticketing.

b)    What stops effective integration happening now, and how can these barriers be overcome?

TfWM feels there are many elements required for good integration, but certain barriers and obstacles need to be overcome, including:

Modes and vehicle coming first over people

A key barrier is thinking around integrated transport as only being about the modes of transport themselves or the vehicles, and not about people, places and their desired destinations.

Securing leadership buy-in

Improving the transport system can often require difficult trade-offs to be made and sometimes politically difficult decisions. These can add to the difficulty of making changes that could lead to better integration and is a particular issue where unpopular political decisions need to be made now but when the real benefits will take time to emerge often beyond political cycles. Achieving consensus on major long term transport priorities to deliver positive change can be challenging and we need to take note that this requires sustained collaboration, adequate resources, and perseverance over time.

There is also a lack of ownership of integration from senior officers across many transport organisations with no senior responsible officer or culture embedded on the importance of good integration.

The fragmented nature of national, regional, and local policies divide funding, management, and decision-making which further creates barriers. This siloed approach across multiple government levels, agencies and operators leads to conflicting objectives, inconsistent services, and poor coordination, stopping holistic planning and wider societal goals, which could be achieved through a more integrated multimodal transport system. For example, transport and land use planning often lack alignment, with local development plans failing to embed sustainable transport from the start. Similarly, efforts to repurpose railway land for integration face red tape, high costs, and limited ambition.

Fragmented transport networks / lack of joined up working across all modes and operators

Local and regional transport authorities often lack control across all modes, leaving no single body to coordinate the whole network. Roads, rail, buses, trams, towpaths, active travel, and micromobility are all managed by different organisations with little incentive to integrate. Stronger government support, clear accountability, and consistent design standards could empower authorities and operators to deliver joined-up networks, with MCAs leading on final decision making, investment and overall delivery of integration.

Limited funding and full appreciation of the importance of bus

Buses carry 80% of public transport journeys in the West Midlands and form the backbone of our network. They are central to delivering on effective integration yet aligning them with other modes remains challenging. Bus franchising offers TfWM a chance to create a more integrated and accessible network—helping reverse patronage decline.

Yet currently, no dedicated budget exists for integration in project development, nor long-term maintenance costs for sustaining integration. Bus operators (a core part of integration) further face severe financial pressures, noting councils in England faced a £452m shortfall last year for concessionary bus fares and subsidised routes. Devolved, long-term funding via the Integrated Settlement and Transport in City Region (TCR) funding is key to secure more flexible funding and reduce reliance on farebox income—but only with sustained and fully backed national government support for ensuring Integrated Settlement funding becomes a long term commitment to MCA’s.

Poor branding and integrated ticketing slow to materialise

Strong branding across all modes and integrated ticketing has progressed much slower than anticipated in the region and is seen as another barrier to integration. TfWM’s fare capping began with Swift Go in 2021 and expanded in 2024 to include tram and all local bus operators, moving us closer to multimodal "tap and go" travel across bus, tram and rail. Longer term, work with Midlands Connect and operators on a national tap-and-cap system will be vital, but this requires stronger collaboration powers and measures and clearer government support through national mechanisms like duty to co-operate agreements in place.

Lack of national government policies and objectives around integration

More clarity on the Government’s national objectives and policies around integration is a further barrier. The absence of any updated Local Transport Plan (LTP) guidance leaves us relying on 30 acts, disconnected strategies and guidance notes when producing these, making joined-up planning and delivering on integration policies difficult. This legislation, policy and guidance documents are also not in one centralised place. So, by the government providing LTP guidance and the arrival of the Integrated National Transport Strategy (INTS) (which should include clear and robust standards and policies to deliver on good integration), may go some way to removing barriers and ensure MSAs develop strong policies in this area.

Lack of data sharing and whole system platforms

Limited data sharing and poor digital integration between systems—such as bus-priority signals, traffic data, and limited MaaS platforms—make it hard to coordinate services, align timetables, and integrate modes, leading to fragmented journeys. Missing active travel links and limited investment in areas like bike hire, cycle parking, or shared mobility also restrict multi-modal travel. Poorly coordinated roadworks and poor large event planning further may add disruption. But stronger use of shared digital platforms like Street Manager and real-time systems could help partners plan and manage disruption more effectively across the key partners involved. By the new INTS also picking up on this area and those opportunities gained from better data connectivity and an integrated data ecosystem being formed, should further help.

Limited measuring on the wider impact of existing travel concessions and where future concessions maybe required

National government should conduct broader studies to measure the real impact of travel concessions. A recent review found that free passes for those 60–66-year-olds (costing over £200 million annually in London, Scotland and Wales) —are not evaluated for their effects on car use, mode shift, employment, or environmental and behavioural change. This lack of monitoring applies to most concessionary schemes, unlike in many European countries where such outcomes are routinely measured against wider government goals.  So, appreciating what broader outcomes could be delivered, would likely benefit MCAs/Local Transport Authorities (LTAs).[2]

The government should also consider how additional concessions for groups such as younger people and low-income individuals could be delivered, while reviewing the current ENCTS scheme and the wider impacts such concessions may have on different groups.

No clear national government position on wider issues which directly or indirectly impact integration

National government often overlooks everyday transport challenges beyond the vehicles and modes themselves. Providing clearer policies on these areas such as pavement parking, micromobility regulations, securing cycle/scooter hire partners to grow their markets, local speed fine retention, road space reallocation, multi-modal ticketing, freight growth, and the taxi agenda would better align public and private transport and put people at the centre – in turning helping further on integration.

c)     What kinds of interventions and policy decisions are needed to provide joined-up transport, including in areas beyond transport such as planning?

Strong Policy which puts people and places at its heart

As we echo throughout this response, our transport system must start with people, their needs and destinations, and their right to equitable, safe and inclusive transport. Therefore, clear policies from national government on integration including LTP guidance being released, on these issues will strongly help.

Despite the lack of national guidance, the West Midlands Local Transport Plan sets out a vision for connected neighbourhoods within a 45-minute region, based on a combination of walking, wheeling, cycling, scooting, or public transport—without needing a car or full driving license.

Our LTP aims to reduce car dependency, promote sustainable travel, and minimize transport’s impact on people, places, and the environment. It focuses on creating walkable, wheelable neighbourhoods with mixed land uses, linked by high-quality public transport, while recognising that people travel differently and solutions must fit local needs. We also appreciate good accessibility depends not just on transport networks, but also on land use and digital connectivity, ensuring everyone has reliable, sustainable travel options, with seamless interchange as a key element of accessibility.

Well thought through Integrated Transport Networks

Central to our LTP vision above is the creation of an integrated public transport system of three joined up networks, which will help us deliver on this:

• A Regional Rail and Light Rail (West Midlands Metro) network (with all the city region’s strategic centres served).
• A Core network (mostly core “turn up and go” frequency bus (e.g. cross-city bus), with rapid transit lines for high volume and major development corridors).
• A Secondary bus network (lower frequency bus and Demand Responsive Transport, providing comprehensive network coverage).
• Supported by inclusive infrastructure, interchange points, vehicles, ticketing, information, branding, technology; governance and good civil enforcement such as inappropriate parking and speed enforcement. The government being open to reviewing our major roads like some of those on the KRN and exploring re-classifications of some (if appropriate) may further help more innovative, and community-based schemes being developed, especially where severance may be an issue.

This also supports clear roles for different types of transport, with each one having strengths for the following trip lengths:

• 0 - 1 km walking
• 0 - 3 km cycling
• 3 - 8 km core bus; for high demand flow corridors: Bus Rapid Transit and tramway
• 8 - 25 km light rail and heavy rail
• 25 km plus heavy rail

This vision for an integrated network connecting neighbourhoods to town and city centres and prioritising sustainable travel for short trips, means moving the dial from our current situation - where 60% of journeys under 2 miles are made by car. Streets should instead be designed for communities, linking homes to local centres, shops, green spaces, and key services and amenities. Then good walking and cycling access to public transport, with good cycle parking being available across our streets is essential for longer onward journeys.

Joined up thinking across modes

Good integration requires joined-up planning across all modes including public transport, active travel, and micromobility. It’s not just about efficiency but meeting the real journey needs of people and removing their barriers. Since most urban trips can’t be made by a single direct bus trip, high-quality interchange is critical.

However, there does need to be more consideration of orbital bus routes, and how they can reduce the need for transfers, appreciating these often face challenges, such as poor reliability at congested junctions and poor junction priority, routing through awkward historic road layouts, and low demand in some areas. This recognises around 65–70% of people’s journeys don’t require access to strategic centres[3], and the WMCAs Everyday Economy Report (2025) shows people in lower-paid local jobs travel much shorter distances for work[4].  Additionally, only 36% of communities are within a 15-minute walk or cycle of key amenities[5]. The government must therefore take note of local routes to lower paid jobs, shops, schools, and health centres in network planning as part of approaches which secure thriving, high use bus networks balanced with ensuring accessibility for all.  Birmingham’s Outer and Inner Circle routes show what’s possible, as do London and Dublin, but outside these areas, orbital services remain rare, and so the government should explore better ways to integrate orbital routes with key corridors, as they are vital for local trips, especially for vulnerable groups, with access to jobs and key services in local centres often mattering just as much as strategic centre access.

Smarter integration of freight and logistics further plays a role in wider transport policy.  Our emerging mobility hub programme, for example could open up opportunities to improve last mile delivery journeys.

Integrating transport policy with wider growth ambitions, health, net zero ambitions and land use planning

MSAs must now produce mandatory Local Growth Plans, setting out clear economic policy. Transport should be at the heart of this growth, ensuring sustainable access to jobs and reliable business connections. Spatial Development Strategies are also required to meet housing targets, promoting compact, mixed-use, transit-oriented and walkable development around transport hubs. These strategies—alongside statutory Local Transport Plans—should form the “holy trinity” of planning policy, driving an integrated transport network, yet firm national government guidance and enforcement will be needed to truly deliver on this vision.

Good integrated transport further supports health policies through reducing isolation and loneliness, supporting physical activity, and enhancing wellbeing. Routes to essential services—hospitals, GP surgeries, care facilities, and leisure and recreational venues should prioritise sustainable modes, with community and subsidised options for vulnerable groups fully integrated. Integration must also address transport’s negative externalities, including air pollution and noise, to protect public health.

Appreciation of the government’s net zero ambitions and ways we can integrate walking, wheeling, scooting and riding with public transport is further key, along with ways planning policy can help limit car-centric sprawl is also important (as we cover elsewhere in the response).              

Making streets safer through reducing KSIs and targeted road safety measures — like traffic light and average speed enforcement, plus near-miss detection — supports a safe systems approach. Tackling anti-social behaviour, protecting women and girls, and improving public spaces will further make our transport network more people-centred and support joined-up, place-focused planning.

Greater accountability across all modes, transport bodies and operators

All policies, be it transport, land use, economic, health, social, or environmental—should appoint project leads to plan integration from the start, with capital and maintenance funding set aside for joint initiatives and all regional, public, and private bodies across all modes (covering roads, pavements, rail, tram, bus, active travel, micromobility to our canal towpaths) should share accountability, led by a senior officer responsible for integration across all transport organisations or bodies.

Embracing new technology and innovation

Future technology & innovation like AI, drones, autonomous vehicles, and micromobility will further reshape how our transport network works and integrates, with strong legislation and regulations needing to keep pace with this.

New digital tools should also be driving progress in integration. TfWM’s new accessibility mapping tool goes beyond simple distance measures to bus stops/stations and shows which key amenities people can actually reach along with levels of accessibility—capturing real lived experience. The DfT’s new Connectivity Tool could add further value by mapping access to essential services, but it’s not yet available to Combined Authorities or designed for the large-scale analysis MSAs need.

Stronger governance and funding arrangements in place

As we have said throughout this response, good integration depends on MSAs/LTAs having strong powers, stable funding, robust governance, and central government support to align housing, land use, economic growth, and transport. While capital investment is welcome through TCR/Integrated Settlement, reduced revenue—especially for buses—threatens the wider network. Without sustained funding across all sustainable modes, services will likely continue to decline, patronage will drop, and integration will fail.

Government must further support rapid network modernisation without neglecting those core issues which remain a barrier to integration, such as declining bus speeds, delivery of more active travel infrastructure, addressing road safety issues, keeping fares affordable, long-term funding, and achieving behaviour change, modal shift and net zero. Achieving integration also requires moving beyond siloed planning to a whole-system approach which then delivers on those broader benefits.

d)    How should transport integration and its benefits be measured and evaluated—including the impact on economic growth, decarbonisation and the Government’s other ‘missions’?

There are many parts to measuring and evaluating transport integration, including:

• A clear and shared definition of integration, and logic mapping showing how defined elements of good integration in answers to questions a) and c) connect to the government’s wider missions.
• Embed ‘missions-based’ metrics for how integration supports behaviour change, wellbeing, levelling-up, road safety targets, regeneration, our growth sectors, inclusive growth, climate resilience, net zero and growing the market for public transport.
• Making best use of monitoring and evaluation guidance in HMT Green Book and DfT Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) for a consistent, holistic approach.
• Use of appropriate datasets both operational and strategic, and local (where available and informative), and national (e.g. DfT National Travel Survey) data to meaningfully benchmark integration – but this depends on government following ‘FAIR’ data principles.
• Mixed-method evaluations covering quantitative metrics (e.g. air quality, fleet composition, charging infrastructure, travel times, casualty reduction, speed compliance) and qualitative insights (e.g. user satisfaction, safety perceptions and wider behaviour insights), and metric for non-users too, to understand integration barriers.
• Evaluate not just outputs (infrastructure built, services aligned) but outcomes (door-to-door travel time, mode shift, reduced car dependency).
• AI tools like Vivacity sensors and mobile phone data on motorist travel patterns (for insight into where demand for public transport is not being met).
• Data on reliability because network performance matters to transport users – timetables can’t tell the whole story about journeys they experience and must plan around.
• Inclusivity and equality through evaluating impacts across demographics and geographies and ensuring Health and Equality Impact Assessments are completed.
• Distributional analysis to show who benefits (by geography, income, protected characteristics), noting TfWM’s Human Intelligence work on user profiles and our Data Insight Service work on All-Traveller Segmentation.
• Appreciating possible wider social and environmental benefits and data to measure and evaluate them – e.g. reduced travel needs if integration points were provided with more or better facilities, such as ‘pop-up’ health advice – with social value/impact indicators to consider too.

e)     How should the cost of interventions needed to deliver transport integration be assessed and appraised? Will proposed changes to methodology in the Treasury’s ‘Green Book’, including the introduction of ‘place-based business cases’, change this?

The emerging Integrated National Transport Strategy focuses on accessibility, information, journey planning, and ticketing – towards a coherent, seamless integrated transport system which is locally-led to meet community needs.

This goes beyond new transport infrastructure or services, which appraisal was first developed for. So, at the strategy launch, the DfT announced reforms to align appraisal to meaningful outcomes like jobs, business growth, access to education and housing, healthier communities, safety and mode shift, particularly in deprived areas (which should also help deliver our LTP goals on like carbon, climate, and inclusive growth).

And the current Green Book review gives scope for further appraisal reforms (see also our April 2025 CIHT call for evidence on long-term funding response) to:

• Consider costs holistically, including long-term operating efficiencies from integration, as well as capital spend (just one area where co-designing with users and staff could help).
• Monetise more integration benefits, like improved user confidence (e.g. from simplified ticketing), or tackling social exclusion, VAWG, and other Public Sector Equality Duty goals.
• Build on new place-based business cases, and better-recognise cumulative benefits from schemes (including non-transport) packages in cross-functional business cases.
• Reflect more cross-sector benefits/savings to other budgets (NHS, housing, local government, education, welfare and work and pensions) which integrated transport often provides.
• Encourage scenario testing on integrated system resilience and adaptability (important for inclusive growth and net zero– clear ‘what good looks like’ guidance would help too).
• Reconsider conflicting DfT outcomes such as those around people living and travelling ‘where they want’.

Reforms would further complement bus franchising, but where financial appraisal has been the rule taking care not to reduce responsiveness to user needs by slowing down decision-making unnecessarily – simplifying appraisal should be a reform objective too.

Meanwhile, if Integrated Settlement/TCR will provide more consistent funding for integration schemes, noting cost pressures in questions a) and c) answers, TfWM’s new Regional Strategic Model will better-forecast modal integration, and an updated Facility Valuation Model will monetise more interchange elements.

And while appraisal challenges, like core elements of good integration, are common to many places, national reforms must also recognise local differences. The strategy should not mean new one-size-fits-all requirements, but reflect devolution aims to truly empower local leaders to meet community needs.  For example, assurance that TfWM will have a role to play in shaping local and regional integration through the nationalised West Midlands Train franchise.

f)      Will integration in itself deliver other benefits such as wider transport options in more places, and behaviour changes such as mode shift? What other impacts could it have?

No, integration alone won’t deliver wider benefits. Integration will only improve when all key organisations adopt clear, well-managed policy frameworks that align across multiple government agendas and not just transport alone. So clearer, internal processes are key for ways broader organisations understand integration and ways their work impacts this area.

Transport authorities further need a deeper understanding of why people choose the travel modes they do. Applying behavioural science and gaining deeper insights—through nudges, incentives, and clear information—can reveal what truly encourages shifts to sustainable travel and more lasting behaviour change occurring with people feeling happy to integrate. So understanding behaviour insights into integration more widely is needed.

Then once these two areas are more enhanced, benefits could be seen such as:

Social Benefits: Inclusive, fair transport—with simple navigation and equitable ticketing then opens up access to jobs, education, healthcare, and key opportunities. Well-designed interchanges can double as safe, social, attractive spaces and vibrant community hubs which has been the case for our Mobility Hub pilot areas.

Economic Benefits: Integrated transport can unlock growth and increase land value, attract investment, and boost local business and new commercial opportunities. When networks reflect people’s needs, they drive sustainable travel, expand access to jobs and amenities, and improve place-making. Smarter, more efficient networks also cut duplication and improve viability and expand the travel to work area for people. A 2024 TfWM study found 75% of businesses see strong bus networks as vital for location choice, and 41% would relocate if services were cut. Good interchanges can also make mode-switching easier, encouraging sustainable travel and creating a virtuous cycle of increased use and investment.

Environmental Benefits: With fewer car trips, cleaner air, less parking demand, and more room for walking, cycling, and green spaces can also be achieved.

Health Benefits: Safe and attractive active travel often boosts wellbeing, but barriers—like safety concerns and people’s low confidence levels or wider health barriers must also be tackled. Appealing interchanges and behaviour-led design (drawing on behaviour science) then helps people choose healthier, sustainable travel.

User Experience: Through easier ticketing being provided where integration measures are fully considered along with smoother connections, greater reliability, safer interchanges and environments more generally, this then boosts confidence, satisfaction, and public trust.

To conclude, a truly joined-up transport system must put people first. Beyond just transport infrastructure, it must champion accessibility, inclusivity, and lived experience to make sustainable travel the easy choice. By improving on those wider processes through seeing integration as cross cutting across all agendas, considering user experience and embedding behaviour science, transport can power equitable, resilient, and thriving communities and deliver on those wider social, economic, health and environmental benefits.

g)     What is needed to ensure that integration is inclusive and meets the diverse needs of transport users? Will integration necessarily lead to better outcomes for accessibility?             

As we point out throughout this response, improved access and integration should focus on people and enhancing places, not just transport modes. True integration connects people to places, which then leads to better outcomes in many areas. When people and places are central—and supported by effective processes—access to opportunities and overall accessibility improves. Key elements supporting this include:

Importance of co-design and co-production

Co-design and co-production should take place and involve all those affected by a transport service, scheme or proposal. A diverse range of participants should collaborate with professionals to design, make decisions, and deliver solutions that meet inclusive design standards and provide accessible information for all protected characteristic groups.

Improving on processes which should capture good scrutiny of projects is also vital. Within WMCA, Design Excellence Panels are being established. These are made up of industry experts, to review WMCA and partner-funded schemes, with a focus on key areas including good accessibility and design.

All transport organisations should further commit to delivering on good accessibility across all modes, ensuring compliance with standards (e.g., Equality Act) so vehicles and infrastructure include ramps, step-free access, lifts, priority seating, and other necessary features and fully take note of those insights pointed out from the Parliamentary "Access Denied" report and the WMCA "Making the West Midlands an Exemplary Region for Disabled People" report. 

Finally, alongside all the above, co-designing and good collaboration with all groups should also pick up on behaviour science and those wider issues people may face when interchanging.

Staff training, better information and stronger awareness of the needs of diverse passengers

All front facing transport staff must receive mandatory disability awareness and sensitivity training, including effective and alternative communication methods which fully support a range of diverse passenger needs. Interchanges should also offer assistance services, including wheelchair assistance and pre-arranged travel help. Priority boarding policies should also be explored, which consider passengers with disabilities, neurodiverse conditions, elderly travellers and parents with young children. The need for inclusive cycle parking hubs provided across our communities as well as key transport hubs is also vital.

All transport related organisations should further appoint disability champions to ensure inclusivity for people with physical, neurodiverse, and hidden disabilities, and the government should address staff shortages in local passenger transport, ensuring technology solutions do not compromise support for the most vulnerable passengers.

All frontline transport staff, regardless of the mode they are employed in should also receive basic training on the wider network. For example, bus drivers should be able to answer simple rail questions (e.g. platforms for certain trains, station entrances), and rail staff should know key bus routes and stop locations near to that station, as an example. This ensures passengers get helpful, joined-up information across the network.

Consider stronger Inclusive Ticketing and Fare Policies

The government should consider national funding for discounted or free fares for groups facing financial barriers such as carers, low-income individuals, and young people—available via multiple payment methods, including contactless, cash, and digital wallets, with more long-term revenue funding supporting MSAs/LTAs to deliver on more travel concessions. This may also mean a government review of the current ENCTS scheme, with those wider benefits it delivers upon, clearly evaluated – such as enhanced well-being, improved access to work and modal shift/reduced car ownership etc.

Ticket machines should also be fully accessible, with braille, voice guidance, and of a wheelchair-friendly design.

Customer Feedback and ensuring processes are in place for continuous improvements to be made

National government should consider the benefits of accessibility advisory panels across all transport organisations, along with better ways to implement quick-response systems for complaints and conduct user-informed accessibility audits. All these measures ensure all passengers—regardless of ability, age, or needs—can travel safely, independently, and with dignity. Embedding such policies across all transport partners, operators, and agencies will support an equitable and integrated public transport system.

Consider ways interchanges enhance place making

Enhancing placemaking is further crucial to delivering on accessibility and creating accessible streetscapes. Aligning transport plans with Local Growth Plans, Spatial Development Strategies and local plans creates people-centred, well connected vibrant places. Good interchanges which can be safely accessed, with safe crossing points act as social hubs and landmarks, encouraging investment and growth. Zonal interchanges across city and town centres especially can boost footfall for shops, cafés, and markets by improving access to key amenities.

Consider internal, organisational processes

To further deliver on good integration, transport organisations (who may be responsible for different areas of integration/modes) need stronger processes and clearer governance within their own organisation. While MSAs can lead on this (as mentioned in Question B), they currently lack control over all modes and areas such as local roads, rail, buses, trams, towpaths, active travel and micromobility, with each body or operator focused only on their own priorities and little incentive to integrate. So stronger support by government, for MSAs to set design standards for integration and lead on design review panels, oversee investment, be final decision makers for all large integrated related projects and coordinate operators and other transport bodies would all help.  This should be reinforced through processes like Single Assurance Frameworks (which lay out the systems, processes and protocols required throughout the whole lifecycle of a project/programme), design reviews, and Integrated Sustainable Appraisals (ISA’s), ensuring health and equality impacts are assessed and user needs—especially for protected groups—are embedded into every programme, with these processes clearly laid out and defined, which other bodies should fulfil through appropriate mechanisms. Any updated LTP guidance and the new INTS should further explore how an ISA will inform transport programmes and align with LTP delivery.

h)    Will the meaning of integration vary across different kinds of areas and for different kinds of journeys? (such as rural and suburban areas, and inter-city journeys)

Integration core principles should focus on connecting people to places, not just transport modes, emphasising on areas such as safety, reliability, affordability, customer experience and insight, clear information, and simple integrated ticketing. While contexts may vary, universal ticketing and inclusive design support effective integration.

Interchanges are also often tiered – ranging from small stops to major city / zonal hubs and be tailored through measures supporting local needs, geographies, demographics, corridors and journey types, but always following common area-specific design principles.

In rural areas, reliable links to communities and key amenities are essential. Low-frequency buses, alongside semi-fixed bus services, flexible on-demand services, shared taxis, micromobility, and community buses connect rural towns to the rail network; helping keep our communities within the 45-minute region.

In suburban and edge-of-conurbation areas, integration measures should ensure good and safe access to local and main district centres, and seamless use of the core bus and rail and rapid transit network provision. This should be supported by park-and-ride and micromobility. Local Travel Points also play a role, offering cycle and e-scooter hire, car clubs, EV charging, secure bike parking, and parcel lockers to connect local neighbourhoods with the wider network and local amenities.

In urban centres, transport must be seamless. Reliable bus, tram, and rail networks should connect smoothly with active travel and micromobility, backed by integrated ticketing, real-time information, and strong interchange hubs. But making sustainable transport the default over cars and delivering on seamless integration means further tackling congestion through civil enforcement of pavement parking, local control of speed fines, updated micromobility regulations, more use of road space reallocation, multi-modal ticketing, and coordination happening across wider transport areas like freight, logistics, and taxis.

Then city-region travel needs a high-frequency rail and rapid transit network with inclusive, well-designed interchange points, supported by a reliable and extensive “turn up and go” bus network. Consistent standards, facilities, and unified branding and marketing should make journeys feel seamless and part of one network, with onward regional and national travel options available from main hubs.  Yet achieving this requires strong cross boundary coordination and frameworks in place across local, regional, and national bodies and national government and operators, backed by clear national policies, collaboration agreements, and sustained funding.

i)       What lessons can be drawn from attempts to integrate transport elsewhere in the UK and around the world? What examples should the Government seek to emulate?

There are many good examples where integration and measures have been successful.

• In terms of making transport inclusive, the Parliamentary "Access Denied" report on disabled people draws on good practice.  Brighton and Hove Buses in particular make good accessibility the norm through their inclusive policies and see the value in the purple pound and how commercially viable improved accessibility is to its citizens.
• For aligning wider policy agendas with transport policies, this is done well in London and one of the reasons London is so good in terms of integration – through its joined-up policy frameworks across economy, planning and transport and a less fragmented system in terms of responsibilities. The government exploring governance structures and policy alignment more widely, will help new MSAs replicate the London approach.
• Within TfWM, the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games and its transport planning through use of the regional coordination centre demonstrated the value of integrated planning, real-time monitoring, and stakeholder coordination.
• The West Midlands Key Route Network (KRN) further provides good examples of integration measures along our corridors.  Through delivering on a vision of safe, efficient, reliable, and resilient highways for all users, this drives coordinated infrastructure and operations across all modes, demonstrates strong integration through consistent design standards in terms of branding, accessible crossings, safe waiting areas, clear information, and cross-transport ticketing—backed by coordinated traffic and network management that cuts delays and helps reliability.
• Birmingham’s Healthy Streets approach has shown to improve road safety on our streets –which then has encouraged more short trips made by walk, wheel and cycling across local communities or to take up public transport options. Through embedding the 10 evidence-based Healthy Streets Indicators, building in improvements on existing conditions, and embracing these changes in decision-making, it has been effective in many communities.
• We have also explored bus stop bypasses and undertaken a review of this area which draws on many elements referenced under Question G – especially in terms of co-designing and engaging with communities.
• The Home Offices Report on the Safety of Women and Girls (2025) as well as the DfTs and Catapults Assessing shows how to grow the market for interventions to improve transport safety for women and girls.
• Outside of major international cities one the best examples of an integrated transport system are in Freiburg, Germany where many opportunities to replicate good practice can be found.

October 2025