GeoSmart - Find a freedom of information request

New questions have been received on this query for answers to a previous FOI - 11019721- received on 16/12/24 Re: EA Report of the 26th of February.

The new questions are:

1) How did LCC Officers deal with the much needed technical expertise before September 2024 when GeoSmart were commissioned?

2) (raised in Q3 response) Who in LCC agreed to the scope of the Peer Review for GeoSmart?

3) (raised in Q4 response) Did the Committee agree with the scope of the brief and who actually wrote it and approved it?

4) (raised in Q8 response) If it was agreed by LCC at the Victoria Atkins Meeting on 1 March 2024, to carryout an Independent review, why did it take until September 2024 to arrange this, when the EA Final Report was available, from February 26th 2024?

5) (raised in Q14) Did GeoSmart speak with farmers on whose land the FAS was constructed and adjoining land that was affected both up and down stream of FAS?

6) (raised in Q14) Why did the brief to GeoSmart not include meetings with the farmers and landowners? 

I can confirm that the information requested is held by Lincolnshire County Council. I have detailed below the information that is being released to you.

1. The EA, as subject matter experts, had already provided reports and answers in relation to the operation of the Flood Relief Reservoir post flood event. As it is their asset there was no reason for LCC to question the integrity of the work undertaken as it is for the EA to demonstrate what happened and what remedial actions had been undertaken. The Peer review was conducted as it was agreed to be in the public interest following the MP meeting on 1st March 2024. The requirements of the brief required technical expertise to be brought in as this was to review technical based reports, and the validity of the approach taken by the EA. Powers for main maintenance and management of river assets and flood relief features lies with the EA, not LCC, so as an organisation it would not be expected that such expertise would lie in house within LCC. Prior to the MP meeting of 1st March LCC had no reason to review or assess the technical reports produced by the EA, as this is something they had already undertaken in their role. The Peer review report was not commissioned in September 2024. The review was commissioned in May 2024 and completed in September 2024. This was a bespoke piece of work that required some technical knowledge. The wider Section 19 reports that LCC were already working on (post October 2023) are not technical in nature (the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 stipulates the requirements) and therefore technical expertise on modelling for example (which formed part of the Peer review) was not a requirement.

After the meeting in March, work began putting the contract in place to complete this work. Consultants then began this work in May, and this was then completed in September

2. The brief was written on the basis of the ask that was put to LCC and that is what has been produced. LCC instructed GeoSmart via the brief as to what was expected as GeoSmart were not present at the MP meeting so had no input into the decision as to what the scope would include. The wider Section 19 Investigation report that has been undertaken looks more broadly at the flooding that occurred across the town, however, as stated above, these are not technical reports, and as described under the relevant Section of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 are designed to identify the causation of flooding and which Risk Management Authority have flood risk functions and if they have exercised them.

3. The brief was written by the Floods and Water Team. Opinion cannot be offered as to the level of scrutiny individual members provided to the report. It is for the individuals present to consider the information before them in the role as serving member of the committee.

4. Please see the response to question 1

5. Whilst LCC received a lot of information and evidence from individuals, groups and organisations we have no record of being contacted by the landowners in question offering information to be taken into consideration. Whilst we were aware of interested landowners we had no contact details or confirmed names to be able to make contact. Through the Town Council and Public meetings, as well as guidance provided on the LCC website information was made available how to contact LCC as part of the flood investigation process. As part of the broader town wide Section 19 Investigation, interviews and meetings were held with those who had been directly affected by the flood waters to their properties to gather evidence, in addition to information supplied by other organisations/indivuduals, as part of the evidence gathering process. Aside from the fact no contact details are held, it is the current understanding that the farmers were not directly affected by the flood waters, which is why no information is held on file. The local knowledge and information held by the landowners is information that should be provided to the EA as part of the overall review of the operation of the reservoir asset.

6. See answer above