Transport is never just about transport. It is the juice that oils the economy and yet it is so often neglected. Transport secretaries are often politicians on the way up or down with little interest or knowledge of the area. And other politicians pay no heed to the transport implications of their decisins. Yet, every facet of the economy has a transport element.
London is a perfect example of a city entirely dependent on the effectiveness of its transport system. The capital was in decline in the 60s and 70s to such an extent that there was talk of abandoning part of its Tube system and closing the North London line. There is such a synergy between the transport system and the economy that it is almost impossible to disentangle the two but it is no coincidence that the revival of the bus system, the increase in investment in the Tube and the creation of the London Overground system which includes the now extremely successfully North London line (now renamed the Mildmay Line).
The symbiotic relationship between economic success and the transport system was well illustrated by a recent speech from Tom Copley, London’s deputy mayor for housing stressing the point that without improvements to the transport system, the housing targets in the London Plan cannot be met. In particular, he cited the extension of the Docklands Light Railway. the potential extension of the Bakerloo Line and the West London Orbital line which would connect West and North London. All these projects have long been on the drawing board, but although Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, has agreed that the DLR extension should be built, she has not provided any funding fmor it and the Bakerloo Line scheme seems even further behind in the government’s plans. Copley argued that the new DLR extension would open the way for 30,000 homes to be built and the other schemes would also offer crucial incentives for housing developers, an estimated 107,000 if the Bakerloo reached Hayes and a further 15,800 for the West London Orbital line.
Yet, central government has been very wary of committing itself to a programme that would spark London’s economy. The important link between the economy and the transport network in London is too often neglected. Let’s be frank. London is the economic powerhouse of the country. It generates a far higher GDP per head than any other region. However, it has now become almost taboo to say this as levelling up has become the watchword. No one would argue that the regions, particularly deprived areas, need an economic stimulus with major investment. But the trouble is that this policy has often equated with taking resources away from the capital or at least failing to invest in it. That needs to change. Those long mooted projects need to go ahead. Just look at the amazing success of the Elizabeth Line which took more than a generation to come to fruition – but no one would begrudge the £19 bn that was spent on it.
Please consider becoming a paid subscriber—your support makes this work possible. Premium members recieve an additional weekly article. To subscribe, click the orange button below or the orange box at the top of this post labeled “Upgrade to Paid.”
Join us — you won’t want to miss a thing! Questions ? Email wolmarsubstack@gmail.com



So you are advocating yet MORE money for transport in London! You point out that London "generates a far higher GDP per head than any other region". There's a reason for that - it gets the required infrastructure investment!
Unlike the rest of Europe, the UK is 'capital centric', and to a very marked degree. We need infrastructure investment elsewhere to change that - HS2 was going to be one such enabler, but that has withered on the vine. The elephant in the railway room at present is the gap between Handsacre where HS2 will terminate in a Staffordshire field (where WCML + HS2 means a 6-line railway becomes 2 line with flat junctions at Colwich and Stafford!), and Crewe, where it would link the rest of the country to the high speed spine.
UK will not achieve its potential without addressing transport in all the areas where it constrains success and growth. We must stop being drawn into the spurious argument around competing demands on constrained/capped funding and focus on all proposals which deliver “local” benefit to our economy.