Transport Technology Forum · UK public procurement notice

The Department for Transport (DfT) proposes a Single Tender Action (STA) to re-procure the Transport Technology Forum (TTF) provision through the Local Council Roads Innovation Group (LCRIG), a Community Interest Company (CIC). This decision is underpinned by the unique and essential characteristics required for the effective operation of the TTF, which align directly with LCRIG’s organisational status, track record, and sectoral positioning.

1. Strategic Importance of the TTF

The TTF remains a key mechanism through which DfT communicates and engages with the transport technology sector. It provides a vital platform for sharing and promoting DfT’s strategic objectives, ensuring that policy direction is both clearly disseminated and actively supported by sector stakeholders. The TTF must be managed by a provider capable of acting, in some contexts, as a direct representative of the Department—requiring strict adherence to Civil Service principles of impartiality, neutrality, and professionalism.

2. Requirements for Neutrality and Integrity

The effective operation of the TTF depends upon it being perceived as a neutral, collaborative space that fosters open dialogue across both public and commercial participants. This necessitates a provider with no vested political interests, commercial bias in subject areas relevant to the TTF, or involvement in lobbying or advocacy activities that may compromise neutrality. Furthermore, the provider must not use the TTF as a vehicle for commercial promotion, dispute resolution, or arbitration.

LCRIG, as a Community Interest Company, is structurally bound to act in the public interest, with no profit-distributing shareholders and a legal mandate to operate for community benefit. These attributes make LCRIG uniquely suited to uphold the TTF’s principles of neutrality and impartiality, unlike commercial or politically affiliated organisations.

3. Data Stewardship and Sector Trust

Effective operation of the TTF involves the ongoing maintenance of comprehensive and sensitive sector contact databases. This function demands a provider with proven data stewardship capabilities and established trust within the sector. The provider must meet all data protection obligations under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and, crucially, retain the confidence of stakeholders regarding appropriate and secure use of such information.

LCRIG has a demonstrated track record in managing sensitive sectoral data responsibly and maintaining sector trust, bolstered by its CIC status which inherently limits any opportunity for data misuse for commercial or lobbying purposes.

4. Sector Expertise and Added Value

The TTF requires a provider with demonstrable experience and visibility within the transport technology sector—one that can not only support DfT objectives but also enhance the Forum’s impact through additional resources, insight, and connections. LCRIG is already active across the local roads and transport technology community, and its continued delivery of the TTF ensures continuity, sector confidence, and the ability to rapidly mobilise operational capability with minimal transition risk.

5. Justification for Single Tender Action

Given the specialist nature of the TTF’s remit and the narrow field of providers capable of fulfilling its strategic, operational, and ethical requirements, a competitive procurement would not be viable without significant risk to delivery quality and sector trust. LCRIG’s unique organisational form, proven neutrality, and embeddedness in the sector mean that no alternative provider could currently deliver the TTF to the required standards without compromising impartiality, continuity, or stakeholder confidence.

While other organisations may exist that have experience in transport-related events or stakeholder engagement, they typically operate with commercial interests, political affiliations, or lobbying agendas, which would conflict with the impartial and non-commercial principles required for managing the TTF. Competing this requirement would risk awarding the contract to a provider unable to satisfy the specific neutrality, data stewardship, and non-advocacy criteria central to the TTF's operation. The risk of sector disengagement, reputational damage to DfT, and a loss of stakeholder trust significantly outweighs any potential benefits of open competition in this case.

Conclusion

Awarding the TTF provision to LCRIG via STA is a proportionate and justified procurement approach. It reflects the public interest requirements of the TTF, aligns with DfT’s operational needs, and ensures that the Forum continues to operate as an impartial, trusted, and effective platform for engagement between DfT and the wider transport technology sector.