For more than thirty years, the case for dualling the A1 north of Newcastle has been consistently made, repeatedly evidenced and widely accepted across the North East, yet the route remains incomplete.
There is now little serious dispute about the principle. Local authorities, business organisations, transport experts and political leaders across parties have long agreed that the remaining single carriageway sections between Newcastle and the Scottish border represent a safety issue, a constraint on economic performance, and a weakness in a nationally significant transport corridor. Despite that consensus, delivery has not followed.
Why is A1 dualling in the North East incomplete?
The safety case is established. The economic case is well documented. The strategic importance of the route connecting England and Scotland is widely recognised. The question is therefore no longer whether there is a case for dualling the A1, but why that case has not translated into full implementation.
This is not a new debate. It predates metro mayors, combined authorities and the current devolution framework. It has survived successive governments, shifting national transport priorities and repeated infrastructure planning cycles. While sections of improvement have been delivered – including the Morpeth to Felton dualling scheme – the broader corridor remains incomplete.
A pattern of incremental progress rather than strategic resolution
The introduction of mayoral devolution was intended to strengthen regional decision-making by improving alignment between local authorities, clarifying priorities and giving regions a stronger voice in shaping investment. In the North East, that framework is now in place, with a Combined Authority, a directly elected mayor and a more unified regional leadership structure than in previous decades.
On the A1, there is clear alignment. The scheme is repeatedly identified as a priority across civic and business leadership. It sits within a broader understanding of the region’s infrastructure needs and its economic growth ambitions. However, despite that consensus, the ability to move from agreed priority to funded delivery remains constrained.
Recent calls for renewed engagement with the Secretary of State for Transport reflect a wider and recurring pattern: regional consensus being restated at national level, rather than translated into delivery through devolved mechanisms.
The current devolution settlement
This raises a fundamental question about the current devolution settlement. While regions are now better placed to identify priorities and build consensus, the final decisions on major infrastructure investment remain firmly within central government.
That structural reality is not unique to the A1. It is also evident in wider regional ambitions, including major industrial and energy proposals such as the Green Super Port, which are positioned as nationally significant infrastructure linked to energy security, offshore wind expansion, advanced manufacturing and long-term economic growth.
In both cases, the process follows a familiar sequence: establish regional priority, build consensus, develop the evidence base, and then seek national approval for delivery.
The question is whether this model is sufficient for the scale of ambition now being set by regions such as the North East. Because after more than three decades of agreement on the A1, the issue is no longer clarity of need. It is the relationship between regional consensus and national decision-making.
If devolution is to evolve beyond consultation, it will need to bridge that gap more effectively than it currently does. The A1 remains unfinished. But it also now functions as something more than a transport issue.
It is a test of how far devolution in England has actually gone – and how far it still has to travel.
Friends of Bylines Network
There has never been a greater need for grassroots journalism that investigates the stories that really matter, holds power to account and champions the voices of everyday citizens. We are proudly powered by volunteers but what we do isn’t free.
STAND WITH US for independent, citizen-led journalism that makes democracy stronger, and you will even get some exclusive benefits.
