Presentation by Matthew Harrison regarding an overview of the responsibilities of the Lead Local Flood Authority and how those responsibilities are applied during West Lindsey District flooding events.
Minutes:
The Chairman welcomed Mr. Matthew Harrison, Flood and Water Manager for Lincolnshire County Council and representative of the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) and invited him to deliver his presentation.
A presentation was delivered, which introduced the role and responsibilities of the Lead Local Flood Authority. It was explained that Lincolnshire County Council acted as the Lead Local Flood Authority for Lincolnshire and was responsible for managing flood risks arising from surface water, ordinary watercourses, and groundwater.
The responsibilities of Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) as the Lead Local Flood Authority were outlined, including the development and maintenance of a Local Flood Risk Management Strategy, the conduct of investigations into flooding incidents, and the publication of the outcomes. It was noted that works had been undertaken to manage flood risks from surface water, groundwater, and ordinary watercourses. The County Council acted as a statutory consultee on planning matters for all major developments, maintained a register of assets, and regulated ordinary watercourses outside of Internal Drainage Board areas. It was noted that Internal Drainage Boards acted as agents in these areas under a Memorandum of Understanding.
The presentation highlighted the collaborative efforts of the Lead Local Flood Authority with other Risk Management Authorities, key stakeholders, and local communities to meet statutory requirements. It was emphasised that the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy had been developed through strong partnerships to manage the impact of flood risks on people, businesses, and the environment.
Additional details were provided on how and where flooding should be reported, along with the most effective methods for doing so. The purpose of investigations under Section 19 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 was explained, along with the criteria for initiating such investigations. The process for logging flood reports was outlined, including discussions with Risk Management Authorities or riparian owners, joint sign-off of reports, and communication with property owners whose properties had been internally flooded.
It was noted that the County Council had no enforcement powers but had worked in partnership with Risk Management Authorities to develop schemes aimed at enhancing future flood protection. Data had been shared regarding flooded properties from 2012 to 2024. Details on Property Flood Resilience Repair Grants, including eligibility criteria and associated data collection, were also provided.
The presentation also included an explanation of the responsibilities of riparian owners. Updates on West Lindsey’s flooding issues were reviewed, including a live tracker which had monitored 22 active locations. It was reported that the tracker had been regularly updated with progress, a log of Section 19 recommendations, and records of concluded works requiring no further actions.
The Chairman thanked Matthew Harrison for his presentation and invited Members to comment.
Clarification was sought regarding the status of flood investigations, particularly the inconsistency between investigations marked as "completed" up to 2025, while their overall work status was listed as "ongoing." Questions arose as to whether this meant work would continue indefinitely or if the work had yet to be finished. It was explained that the data available only covered investigations from October 2023 onward, with older data from 2012 to be included later. The "ongoing" status referred to active work or discussions still occurring, which could involve partner organisations or planned actions, not an indefinite process.
It was acknowledged that Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) had no authority to compel action from individuals or organisations once information had been recorded, and some recommendations had not been acted upon for specific reasons. However, any relevant updates from those assigned recommendations would be recorded to ensure transparency. A report example from Market Rasen highlighted the need for additional water storage due to surface water runoff from supermarkets. Although tanks or capture systems were suggested, their implementation was hindered by private land concerns, required investments, and a lack of financial support from relevant parties.
The time taken to progress works identified in the 2023 investigation raised concerns, with frustration expressed by residents over the delays. While modelling exercises were seen as valuable, securing funding for follow-up works remained a significant challenge. Increased national pressure was suggested to facilitate such funding.
Concerns were raised about the number of agencies involved in flood management, with Members feeling that responsibilities were often passed between organisations, leading to inaction. Specific instances were cited, such as a private estate management committee assuming responsibility.
Highway drainage issues were also highlighted, with blocked drains remaining unresolved despite new drainage machinery. A case in Nettleham was mentioned, where it had reportedly taken 18 months to address a drainage issue, prompting questions about the effectiveness of the equipment.
Enforcement of riparian responsibilities, particularly by Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs), was questioned. While IDBs were acknowledged for their work, it was felt that enforcement powers were not always used effectively. LCC, as the Lead Local Flood Authority, was responsible for consents and enforcement relating to ordinary watercourses, including structures like bridges and culverts. However, enforcement actions were often time consuming and costly.
Regarding highways drainage, it was noted that these responsibilities lay within a separate LCC department, with efforts being made to improve coordination between the Floods and Water Team and highways colleagues. Increased resources had been allocated for highway drainage, with an expanded programme for cleansing and jetting works in place.
Concerns about the online system for Section 19 reports were raised, particularly regarding vague language such as "should consider" rather than definitive terms, which created uncertainty about progress. It was suggested that a lack of updates and prolonged timelines led to dissatisfaction, with reports spanning years without tangible results.
The low uptake of grants was attributed to a potentially complex application process. Feedback from applicants was considered important to improve the process. It was clarified that LCC did not have the legal power to compel authorities to take action but aimed to exceed statutory requirements by providing recommendations for mitigation.
LCC’s capacity to address recommendations, especially regarding highway drainage, was questioned due to limited resources. Delays in addressing these recommendations were linked to a high volume of work. Efforts were being made to allocate additional resources, although the grant application process was noted as challenging for flood-affected individuals.
The complexity of flooding in West Lindsey, notably in the Scotter ward, was discussed, with inadequate highway drainage and challenges from the tidal river system being identified as primary causes. The proactive contributions of local IDBs and the farming community in maintaining watercourses were recognised. Concerns regarding riparian owners' responsibilities, especially neglect of watercourses, were raised, with questions about how these issues were managed and whether they were addressed systematically.
The challenges of maintaining tidal rivers were discussed, with balancing environmental concerns and flood protection being noted as complex. Previous trials where sections of rivers were transferred to IDBs for maintenance were considered successful, but any further changes would require government approval.
In relation to planning applications, it was noted that multiple agencies, including the Environment Agency and IDBs, were consulted to assess drainage and flood risks. The County Council specifically focused on surface water runoff, while other agencies assessed drainage capacity.
The importance of feedback in the flood management process was highlighted, with frustration expressed by those affected by flooding due to a lack of updates. Local Councillors were noted as being seen as playing a key role in gathering and sharing feedback with flood management teams, though the process was complex.
Concerns were also raised about reservoirs in Market Rasen, which were designed to manage river water but did not effectively handle surface water, causing public confusion. The grant allocation process in 2022, which was more localised, was seen as more effective.
The inadequacy of current flood-related grants for homeowners wishing to adapt their properties was raised. Suggestions were made to consider government-backed schemes, such as interest-free loans for retrofitting homes, similar to energy efficiency schemes in other countries. The cost of living crisis was seen as a barrier to homeowners being able to afford such adaptations without financial assistance. The need for a collective effort to engage central government in investigating alternative funding mechanisms was agreed upon.
The importance of pushing central government for improved support, including interest-free loans for flood resilience, was emphasised, with the Flooding Task Force, led by the Floods Minister, suggested as a potential forum for future discussions.
Matthew was thanked for his presentation and for answering questions during the discussion. It was noted that government flooding legislation should be reconsidered, as it remained a significant challenge. The partnership model in Lincolnshire was praised for its effectiveness in flood management.
The importance of diplomacy was highlighted, especially without mandatory legislation. Gratitude was expressed for Matthew's work and the efforts of everyone involved in helping those affected by flooding.