The Strategy broadly succeeds in setting out a clear vision. Its three guiding principles — people, place and partnership — and its eight priorities provide a useful organising framework, and the choice to define priorities by what users need rather than by transport mode is welcome. This mode-agnostic framing is precisely the shift that techUK has long advocated for, and it mirrors wider industry views that that integration must be understood as a whole-system property rather than a series of modal fixes. However, we do not believe that the Strategy fully considers what integration means at different scales and in different geographies. For example, in our earlier evidence, we highlighted that integration in a major city region is a fundamentally different proposition from integration in a smaller town or a rural area, and a single national objective risks obscuring those differences.
Where the Strategy is less clear is in translating vision into measurable objectives. It is vocal on direction but lighter on specific, time-bound targets which can be assessed for value, and against which progress can be judged. On this basis, we support any commitment by the Committee to conduct ongoing monitoring and evaluation, and the implementation of concrete metrics to each priority from the outset will be of particular use. This is particularly true given the track record of government ambitions and strategies on transport integration failing to be delivered in the long-run.
The Strategy’s approach is broadly realistic, and its emphasis on building on what already exists — like replicating proven tap-and-go models from London, Liverpool and Nottingham, and using the Bus Open Data Service to extend live tracking through a partnership with Google Maps — is sensible. Integration is a comparatively infrastructure-light intervention that can deliver disproportionate benefit. However, feasibility rests on three conditions that the Strategy does not yet fully resolve.
First, interoperability: seamless multi-operator, multi-modal ticketing and information depend on common data standards and the willingness of all parties to share data in compatible formats. Data quality, formatting and sharing have historically been the principal blockers to integration, and the Strategy would benefit from being more prescriptive about the standards it expects. Balancing the mandating of data sharing and the protection of commercial and competitive interests is challenging, and a clearer steer on the balance that the Government intends to strike would be beneficial.
Second, capacity: as the Strategy devolves responsibility to local leaders, delivery will depend on local authorities having the technical skills and analytical capability to procure and operate sophisticated systems. The Strategy acknowledges capability-building but the scale of the gap – and the measures required to bridge it – should not be underestimated.
Third, the role of the private sector: many of the capabilities the Strategy seeks already exist in the market, and techUK encourages the Government to treat industry as a delivery partner through clear, stable and well-communicated requirements, rather than as a vendor engaged scheme by scheme.
The Strategy’s coverage of data and technology is encouraging, and the parallel Transport Data Action Plan is a welcome companion. Nevertheless, several areas would benefit from greater depth. Emerging modes – in particular self-driving vehicles, shared micromobility and autonomous delivery, and drones – receive limited attention, yet these will be integral to solving the first- and last-mile challenge. With passenger services under the Automated Vehicles Act beginning this year, this Strategy should explicitly anticipate how such services will be incorporated into ticketing, information and interchange, rather than treating them as a separate workstream.
Second, the Strategy could say more about the enabling infrastructure on which a digital, increasingly electrified and connected transport system depends. This includes resilient digital connectivity, electricity grid capacity, and cyber resilience.
Finally, we would highlight the opportunity the Strategy has to be more explicit about the tools that turn data into better decisions. Technologies such as digital twins, advanced analytics and AI-enabled network management can help authorities anticipate disruption, optimise services and target investment where it delivers most value. These capabilities are central to the Strategy’s ambition to “champion data and technology” and naming them more directly would give industry and local government a clearer signal of where to invest. techUK’s members are already deploying these tools across infrastructure sectors and would welcome the chance to demonstrate their application.
The Strategy sets a direction of travel and signals an intention to align local funding settlements, statutory guidance and appraisal with its priorities, which is welcome. But operators will need more detail before they can act with confidence. At present, the document tells them where the Government wants to go, but not yet, in operational terms, what they will be expected to deliver, by when, or to what standard.
For technology suppliers and the authorities that procure from them, this clarity matters. Investment decisions, product development and partnership models all depend on stable, well-defined requirements, and ambiguity slows the very innovation that the Strategy hopes to unlock. We would encourage the Department to bring forward, at pace, supporting guidance, technical standards and delivery frameworks that sit beneath the Strategy.
The Strategy intends to encourage greater use of public transport and active travel, and many of its measures -- simpler payments, better information, more reliable journeys and improved accessibility, etc – directly address the friction and uncertainty that currently deter people from travelling sustainably. Reducing the “pain” of interchange and giving travellers confidence that a journey will work end-to-end is, the evidence suggests, among the most effective ways to make public transport competitive.
Sustained modal shift tends to require integration to be combined with measures that influence the relative attractiveness of public transport use. These are politically difficult choices that often sit with local leaders, and the Strategy’s success will depend on whether the powers and funding it devolves are sufficient to make them. Technology is a powerful enabler of modal, but it works best in service of a well-designed network.
techUK and our members stand ready to support the Department, local authorities and operators in turning the ambition of Better Connected into the seamless, data-enabled journeys that passengers want and that the Strategy rightly seeks to deliver.
ENDS
July 2026