A call for an independently led review of Renfrew’s flooding was defeated after councillors questioned why a flood barrier was not raised before the Clyde burst its banks.
Renfrewshire Council’s Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board voted by nine to six against an amendment seeking an independent person to lead the review.
The decision came at its meeting on Wednesday, 4th November 2026, where councillors examined the response to Storm Boelo and flood damage that has closed Renfrew Bridge.
Officers said the council had followed its established procedures using the information available. No specific flood warning had been issued for Renfrew by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).
They told the board that the Clyde reached its highest recorded level since digital records began in 1998. Actual tidal conditions were substantially different from those forecast.
Councillor Ben Smith proposed that the review should be led by someone independent of the council. His amendment, seconded by Councillor Iain McMillan, also sought to have the findings reported to full council.
Councillor Smith said: “I think that people whom we represent would feel more reassured if it was a person independent of the organisation that was looking into the matter.”
Officers said the council’s review would consider information from other agencies and include an external assessment.
Gordon McNeil, Director of Environment & Infrastructure Services, said: “We will make sure that, once we have undertaken our own look and we understand what is coming from other agencies, we will get someone external to provide a view on that and come back.”
Councillors also questioned why the Ferry Road flood barrier had not been raised before flooding began.
Officers said raising it takes under 30 minutes. Staff were on site within 20 minutes of the first recorded call to their team, at 12.10am, but the river had already breached its banks.
The barrier requires staff to operate it manually. By that stage, entering the water was considered unsafe.
Officers stressed that the flood barrier and the damage to Renfrew Bridge were separate issues. Raising the barrier would not have protected the bridge.
Water entered the bridge’s plant room on the Renfrew side and damaged electrical equipment. Investigations are examining why that room suffered significant water ingress while the plant room on the opposite bank did not.
No reopening timetable or repair cost was provided at the meeting. Officers said they were working with contractors, specialist advisers, insurers and legal representatives.
Councillor McMillan also asked how many residents had tried to report flooding before the police contacted the council, and whether calls had been answered by council staff or its AI telephone service.
Officers could not provide a full breakdown at the meeting. They later clarified that calls to the roads and lighting emergency number were answered by an operative based at Renfrew Bridge.
The review will examine emergency contact arrangements and whether additional monitoring could give the council live information about rising river levels.
Officers said they had looked to lower the trigger threshold as an extra precaution while awaiting SEPA’s findings and undertaking their own review.
A special council meeting on Monday, 9th November 2026 will consider the flooding and bridge closure further.