The Environment Scrutiny Committee of Lincolnshire Council met on Friday 11 September 2026 to discuss flood risk management, the future of Project Groundwater, waste performance, and the Environment Policy Action Plan. The committee reviewed performance indicators for waste management and flood investigations, and discussed potential future performance indicators.

Flood Risk Management and Project Groundwater

The committee received an update on the progress of Section 19 flood investigations, noting that all previously active investigations were up-to-date before the storms at the end of August. Following these storms, two reports of internal flooding were confirmed, with a further 12 potential internal flooding locations being investigated. The committee also heard about the ongoing capital flood risk programme, with three schemes completed or nearing completion in Merrimley Fen, Toynton St. Peter, and Cherry Willingham.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to Project Groundwater, a DEFRA grant-funded project focused on understanding groundwater flooding mechanisms in Lincolnshire. The proposal was to extend the project for a further three years beyond March 2027 by repurposing existing flood resilience funding. This decision was met with mixed reactions. Councillor Bunny expressed concern about the impact on individual properties that may not qualify for capital schemes and highlighted the need for better community engagement. Councillor Reeve argued that the funds should not come from the existing Flood Resilience Fund, which he believes is crucial for responding to future flooding events, and questioned the cost-effectiveness of the proposed staffing and monitoring. Councillor Carrington echoed concerns about depleting the reserve fund, emphasising its importance for future major flood events, and advocated for a long-term, internally funded solution. Councillor Parkinson raised concerns about the short-term reallocation of funds and the lack of a long-term financial plan. Councillor Woods sought clarification on the tangible outcomes for residents from the project. Officers explained that the repurposing of funds was necessary due to the limited availability of other funding streams and that Project Groundwater is a statutory function. They also highlighted that the Property Flood Resilience Grant had seen low take-up, suggesting that repurposing the funds might yield better results. The committee was informed that while the £5,000 grant for property flood resilience was intended as a helping hand, DEFRA is considering increasing this to £10,000 nationally. Councillor Robertson noted that the £5,000 grant was insufficient for many properties, with quotes for repairs running into tens of thousands of pounds. Councillor Pog voted against the proposal on political grounds, citing concerns about funding allocation, despite acknowledging the value of the project. The committee ultimately agreed to scrutinise the report and its recommendations to the Executive.

Waste Performance and Environment Policy Action Plan

The committee reviewed the Quarter 1 performance for waste management. Household waste collected per household was below the target, indicating less waste than the national average. The recycling rate, while below the 55% target, had seen a significant increase since the introduction of food waste collection, reaching its highest rate since 2022. Recycling rates at recycling centres were also below target, attributed to the hot weather affecting green waste tonnage. Landfill performance remained strong, with a low percentage of waste going to landfill, although a planned outage at the Energy From Waste Facility was expected to temporarily increase landfill use. A new measure for kerbside recycling quality showed significant improvement, with contamination rates decreasing substantially.

The committee also discussed the Environment Policy Action Plan, which aligns policies with the council's plan to create desirable living environments. The plan focuses on enhancing the natural landscape, creating memorable spaces, and managing resources sustainably. Discussions touched upon the impact of large-scale infrastructure projects, such as solar farms and pylons, with officers explaining that the policy aims to consider the scale and effect of such developments. Concerns were raised about the influence the council has over nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) and the need for clearer plans for mitigating their impact. The active travel and cycling infrastructure plan was supported, with questions raised about funding sources. The committee also discussed the potential for incorporating energy efficiency measures, such as solar panels on council buildings, into performance indicators.

Regarding flood risk within the action plan, Councillor Carrington expressed concern that the 2100 Plus adaptation strategies might lead to the abandonment of large areas of the East Coast to the sea. Officers assured the committee that all scenarios, including re-fortification, partial re-wetting, and a do-nothing approach, are being evaluated collaboratively with partners, and that the council retains autonomy in its decisions. Councillor Reeve shared a disturbing account of an Environment Agency manager suggesting a focus on habitat protection over human settlements, which officers refuted, stating that the agency considers life and businesses as paramount. Councillor Brooks provided reassurance that he would not support abandoning any part of the East Coast.

The committee also discussed potential new performance indicators for the Environment Policy Action Plan, including those related to water resource management, tree survivability, resource savings, and energy efficiency of council buildings. The issue of fly-tipping was also raised, with clarification that while district councils collect fly-tipped waste, the council bears the cost of disposal. The committee was informed that national indicators already exist for tracking fly-tipping tonnage.

Work Programme

Looking ahead, the committee's work programme includes updates on the Lincolnshire Coast 2100 Plus programme, a solar overview, water resource management, and changes to the National Planning Policy Framework. Councillor Woods suggested including topics such as Lincolnshire drought and water resilience, highways drainage, surface water flooding, and energy infrastructure and grid capacity. Officers agreed to consider these suggestions, noting potential overlaps with other committees and the need to frame them appropriately for the Environment Scrutiny Committee's remit. The committee also agreed to approve the planned work programme, subject to consideration of items raised during the discussion.