Reading List

Reading Borough Council passed the vote on the annual budget and Band D residents will see an average 2.2% rise in Council Tax this year (compare to other councils in Berkshire).

But the evening almost descended into chaos as the vote proceeded without Conservatives present. In the event the vote passed supported by 19 Labour councillors and opposed by the 8 LibDem Councillors.

The budget meeting went on for 6 hours as it was delayed by 5 successive amendments, each of which had to be debated in full.

Council Leader Cllr Jo Lovelock stated, "This budget achieves the right balance in uncertain times."

But the debate has spilled out onto the blogosphere as disagreements over the correct balance continue.

Cllr John Ennis was triumphant. He describes how the tactical manoeuver to call the vote whilst back-room discussions among opponents were ongoing saw Labour's proposals passed without amendment. He says tories attempted to 'hoodwink' the council by proposing a 0% rise involving no cuts to services without providing any details of how they would achieve this.

Conservative Cllr Richard Willis was bitter at the 'dirty tricks' played by the ruling party, but as LibDem leader Cllr Kirsten Bayes explained "The mayor was in the room and the meeting was quorate. You have to respect the democratic and legal procedures of the council."

As a council ruled with 'No Overall Control', Reading is in the slightly unusual position of having a Labour administration with a Conservative Mayor, and it was the veteran Cllr Fred Pugh who called the vote.

Cllr Willis goes to lengths to detail why his group were 'incensed' by Labour's conduct, which saw the vote 'bounced' in this way.

The Conservatives had circulated stories of a Lib-Lab pact beforehand and had their bluff called when the LibDems spoke against the proposed 2.2% rise and said they were willing to work together with the Tories to come up with solid solutions.

In an illuminating post Cllr Gareth Epps describes how LibDems had specific proposals which could have reached the £1.5m savings required to create a 0% rise, and states a deal could have been reached.

Conservatives were locked in discussions on their response to the LibDem offer of cooperation when the vote was called.

According to Cllr Ennis, the

"whole episode totally exposes the Tories as a sham. They can only gain support by trying to make the next election a referendum on our administration. They are bankrupt of ideas, offer no alternative or change and they are not fit to run Reading."

Cllr Willis struck back, saying Labour's tactics "smacks of the desperation with which they have continued to cling onto power in Reading" while arguing that the "Lib Dems also proved once again to be all over the place."

Meanwhile LibDems have seemingly refused to be bullied by the larger two parties.

Cllr Bayes said it was unfortunate that the outcome was reached in this way and expressed disappointment at the Conservative disorganisation and Labour's financial management, stating that she did "genuinely think the rise did not have to be as big this year," adding,

"I am glad we were able to stand up for our residents in what are very difficult times, and we will keep working to make the Council as efficient and effective as possible."

And Cllr Daisy Benson gives a detailed account of how the LibDems are being attacked for being prepared to listen without prejudice to alternative proposals from any source. She explains how she believes residents aren't interested in gestures, but in action.

Meanwhile Cllr Glenn Goodall posts an aggregated collection of his tweets from the floor of the chamber... it's live reporting and it really gives a sense of being there.

Oranjepan says:
setting a budget in election year inevitably mixes party politics with civic responsibility - so from the state of this debate it's clear this year's election will be highly contested.

-

Update: Cllr Emma Warman returns to the blogosphere for the first time since October to express her astonishment that the LibDems weren't prepared to support the Labour party as they had 12 months ago.

She notes with frustration that LibDem leader Cllr Bayes offered to help defeat the Labour proposals by imposing a series of conditions and concludes this shows their opposition to her party's ideologically-based agenda of cuts.

Cllr Warren Swaine replies swiftly. He seems to think it is impossible to reach an agreement when there is nothing to agree to.

-

More on Reading's Budget for 2010/11

The proposed changes in Council Tax is regularly the biggest debating issue of the year on the local scene - and it looks like 2010 will be no different!

The jockeying for position has already begun as each party sets out their stall ahead of the general election to offer indications about how they propose to balance economic and social pressures at hand.

RBWM grabs the headlines

Grabbing all the headlines has been the Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead, which has decided to buck the trend of perpetual rises to slash Council Tax rates by 4%.

The Conservative-dominated council has been held up as a model authority by party officials, which they suggest indicates exactly what they are possible of achieving when in power.

Leader of RBWM, Cllr David Burbage trumpets the move. He explains that the cut fulfils a 2007 manifesto pledge to deliver below-inflation rises every year - and that this was done by reducing expenditure by £6.2m without impacting frontline services.

He cites the example of car-maker Toyota's 'lean' business model as one which should be followed by councils, describing how his Conservative group are "rolling out Lean throught the council" - however this manages to overlook the recent scandal to hit the company which saw the recall of over 8 million vehicles after safety concerns were 'resisted' by the reliance on flawed reports which directors covered up by issuing 'misleading' statements.

Toyota president Akio Toyoda has since explained that "priorities became confused" at the company.

Unison's head of local government services group Heather Wakefield writes on this precise point in Public Finance magazine that the model of finding efficiency savings in 'back office administration

"is a crude mechanism that conveniently overlooks the fact that well functioning administration and technical support behind the screen are critical to effective and efficient front-line services,"

adding that "what this all means for Windsor & Maidenhead’s vulnerable elderly and children is clear to see."

Neville Hobson looks at the lasting implications and wonders whether their organisation can survive such a damaging blow to their public trust.

But the announcement that RBWM would be the second council in the country to make real-term cuts in council tax drew a range of excited responses from ideological 'cutters'.

The Daily Telegraph also noted that Prime Minister Gordon Brown had issued a directive that he would reduce the cap on rises from 5% to 3% due to the current economic circumstances.

The Tax-Payers Alliance described the development as all the more remarkable because it followed rises of 1.9% and 2.5% in the two preceding years.

Elsewhere in Berkshire

Meanwhile a similar refrain has coloured the issues throughout the county.

Commenters on Slough Forum were unimpressed by the lack of debate on the issue - with Slough likely to remain Labour-controlled for at least the short-term Catweazel suggests the only option is to move to Maidenhead!

Bracknell blogger Darren Bridgeman analyses the budget proposed by the ruling Conservative party in Bracknell Forest. Surprisingly Bracknell will have a near maximum 2.9% rise this year - the highest in the county.

Reading's Cllr Richard Willis was particularly impressed by the tough stance taken by his colleagues in Maidenhead saying it would cut the burden on the public. He argues that local services are 'inadequate' in a number of areas, and paid for by taxes which are the highest in the county (although this discounts any local factors within the borough).

Cllr Willis also offers the pledge from Reading Conservatives that Council Tax will be frozen if they gain control of the authority in May's local elections.

Reading's Labour party responded to this through Cllr John Ennis. He launches a volley against the Conservatives in Reading for failing to provide any concrete counter-proposals and he challenges them to be clear with the public about precisely what they would cut.

He highlights the case of Wokingham where the relatively low rise of 1.9% will be accompanied by 150 job cuts among council staff as the Conservative-dominated authority seeks to find savings of £9.5m after being severely hit during the Icelandic financial crisis.

Leader of Wokingham's opposition Liberal Democrat group, Cllr Prue Bray gives a particularly interesting insight.

She explains that Wokingham tories have passed an incomplete budget which will require a 'supplementary estimate' later this year, as she says, "the Tories have put together a budget which leaves out some of the things they know they are going to be spending money on."

She goes on to comment:

"The idea that you can actually PLAN to raid the reserves because you are deliberately setting an inadequate budget is, to say the least, unusual. What would you do if there was a real emergency?"

And in an odd reversal of affairs Woodley's ruling LibDem Town Council were attacked by Conservatives as 'out of touch' for setting a reduced rise of 1.45% - below the 1.9% set by Wokingham Borough (Woodley Town lies within Wokingham Borough).

Somewhat ironically a Conservative spokesperson described them as "inconsistent, unreliable and [showing] a complete lack of experience with financial matters."

But the final word goes to another Town Councillor, this time Wokingham's Robin Smith, who advocates for a complete reform of the taxation system, starting with an adaptation of the Council Tax.

He says, "everyone hates Council Tax no matter what you do."

-

Update: Independent Cllr Tony Jones describes as 'bogus' Labour's claim that a 2.2% rise in Reading was kept "as low as possible, while protecting services."

LibDem Cllr Glenn Goodall takes aim at the Conservatives for moaning about cuts to sandwiches, while they 'put nothing on the table'.

In the event Conservatives in Reading were embarrassed when they missed the vote on the budget, allowing the Labour proposals to pass unamended.

The potential for another marathon 3-day session (as happened last year) was averted as the 18 Conservative councillors sat outside the chamber and Labour won the vote by 19 votes to 8.

-

More on Reading Borough Council's Budget for 2010/11

The proposed Council budgets for Berkshires 6 unitary authorities have all been released, so it is worth bringing the headline facts together to offer a chance to compare and contrast them.

Here are the changes to Band D rates by authority (and those from last year):

Bracknell Forest: +2.9% (+4.9%)
Reading: +2.2% (+3.99%)
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead: -4.0% (+2.9%)
Slough: +2.5% (+4.9%)
West Berkshire: +1.9% (+3.9%)
Wokingham: +1.9% (+4.68%)

Oranjepan asks:
Notably the proposed changes are much lower across the board than 12 months ago - is this influenced by the national economic outlook, or because we are in a general election year?

-

NB. Council Tax pays for a broad and specialised range of services required to be provided by the local authority to the community. These services include:

Education and Learning - adult and community learning, early years and childcare, schools and non-advanced education.
Health and Social Care - children and young people's services, care services for the elderly and those with disability.
Community and Living - community events, libraries and arts and leisure facilities.
Transport and Streets - traffic calming, street naming and numbering, parking, road maintenance and cycle routes.

Some of the amount collected also pays for Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service, Thames Valley Police Authority and your town or parish council.

The rate of Council Tax anyone pays is based on several factors:

the property you live in (i.e. its banding based on the historic capital value of property at 1/4/91);
how many adults occupy the property; and
the amount of income that the local authority needs to deliver its services once account is taken of grants and other income.

-

More on Reading Borough Council's Budget for 2010/11

Local Conservatives have got themselves hot under the collar at the tactics journalists will go to to tell a story.

The issue surrounds ongoing questions over whether or not the Conservative party is a 'tax-cutting' party. It follows the ambivalent description from shadow Chancellor George Osborne MP that a future Conservative government would "share the proceeds of growth". How this applies in the current recession is unknown.

This week Mr Osborne refused to oppose a government proposal to increase income tax on earnings above £150,000 pa with the addition of a new top-end 45p tax band.

Apparently Wokingham MP John Redwood was tapped up to be the lone voice of opposition to a Labour plan to raise income tax. He explains that the tax rise could delay economic recovery, although he neglects to address questions of how the currently ballooning deficit can be kept under control.

RBMW council leader, David Burbage, is less detailed but more explicit about the threat to his party from such a line of questioning.

Normally an internal debate on party policy wouldn't be much to comment about, but this row has spilled over into the MSM as journalists note the massive divide between 'ordinary' Conservative party members and their 'leaders'.

The favorite of the tory faithful, Iain Dale, cites Boris Johnson, who spoke out on this national issue (despite no longer being a national figure). Dale also highlights a corruscating attack against David Cameron's right-hand man by the party's membership site.

And rumble on the story has...

Osborne's deputy, shadow Business spokesman Ken Clarke MP, has been forced to 'clarify' his statement during a TV interview that cutting inheritance tax is an "aspiration" and "not a high priority".

Conservative party bosses moved quickly to deny they face a 'tough choice' to reject tax cuts in favour of stabilising public finances, but nobody is convinced.

In a rare show of unity The Times, Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail all agree that the Conservatives are in disarray over the issue.

Oranjepan says:
These senior Tories protest too much for there to be no truth to reports of internal divisions at the very top of the party - with a general election looming the public needs to be clear about the choices on offer and whether a party is likely to keep or renege its' promises.

-

Update: Sky News' Joey Jones writes on Adam Boulton's blog (another renowned Reading expat) that a lack of clarity cannot help tory election hopes.

Mark Reckons Ken Clarke is a loose cannon.

Cllr Willis gives his opinion of Conservative tax policy and only muddies the water further.

Council Tax disputes continue to enflame political debate across Berkshire as opposition parties have warned residents that rises are set to continue as the economy spirals downwards and borough revenues suffer, while suggestions continue that any below-inflation rises in council tax will be offset by massive increases on various charges such as parking fees, burial charges and miscellaneous fines.

Here is a round-up of the headline amounts residents across the county can expect to pay in Council Tax for 2009/10 for Band D properties (as calculated according to local house prices between 1991 and 1994):

£1,305.50 +4.9% - Bracknell Forest
£1,467.43 +3.99% - Reading
£1,335.19 +4.9% - Slough*
£1,490.28 +3.9% - West Berkshire**
£1,277.05 +1.9% - Windsor & Maidenhead***
£1,434.55 +4.68% - Wokingham

*excluding local parishes
**Newbury
***Maidenhead

It should also be added that house prices vary according to area and cannot make accurate comparisons, consequently tax levels are adjusted to account for the proportion of properties in each band in different local authorities.

Therefore a better form of comparison are the average annual figures of Council Tax payable per household across Berkshire for 2009/10 [1]:

£1,237 - Bracknell Forest
£1,190 - Reading
£1,087 - Slough
£1,436 - West Berkshire
£1,386 - Windsor & Maidenhead
£1,482 - Wokingham

-

Notes: The average level of Band D Council Tax for all unitary authorities across England in 2009/10 will be £1,413.85, which represents a mean average rise of 3.0% and compares to the average Band D rate in 2008/09 of £1,373.08, a rise of 3.9% from 2007/08. Rises are capped at 5%.

The adjusted annual rate of inflation fell from 3.1% to 3.0% in the first two months of 2009.

Reading's LibDems appear to be the victors in the political finance debate after forcing the ruling Labour group to submit to their demands, while the main opposition Conservative group was shown to be ineffectual and was reduced to issuing a protest motion.

Redlands LibDems and Katesgrove LibDems provide the substantive information of the changes they introduced.

-These include the overall measures:
i)Reducing tax increases as far as legally permitted according to central government 'economic competence' regulations.
ii)Ensuring the Council's overdraft isn't over-extended during the economic downturn by replenishing reserves.

Oranjepan says:
It is interesting that Conservative Party leader David Cameron's advice to "fix the roof while the sun shines" in his response during the national Budget debate is at odds with his party message at local level.

-Savings:
i)A freeze on councillors' allowances and reduction on 'refreshments' at council meetings
ii)£200,000 cut in council marketing and PR, as well as a reduction in excessive fees and costs due to management, consultants and agency staffing
iii)A cross-party budget review group to identify further waste.

Oranjepan says:
It is interesting that Conservatives voted against all these measures, despite a lot of noise about the issues of over-inflated wages (from group strategist Cllr Willis) and 'a performance improvement programme' (from group leader Cllr Cumpsty). They obviously want extra perks for themselves, but not for anyone else.

-And the 'targetted' measures:
i)Reducing charges for bulky waste collection for low income households
ii)A “Green Hit Squad” to tackle fly tipping
iii)A communications budget for the local police Neighbourhood Action Groups (NAG) - for the setting of local policing priorities according to resident's concerns
iv)More speed guns for the police – to catch drivers who break the law (instead of the eyesore fixed cameras designed to raise revenue but are not accepted as court evidence and indiscriminately invade everyone's civil liberties).

Oranjepan says:
Again, it is interesting that the Conservatives failed to support these measures despite using them as campaigning issues (see here and here).

-

As Cllr Warren Swaine says on his personal site:

"...any neutral observer of the process would have to conclude that there was anything other than a pact as Labour were dragged kicking and screaming to support the Lib Dem budget amendments.

It's a verifiable fact that since this council went to no overall control last May, the Conservatives have constantly voted with the Labour party and against the Lib Dems. They are the real party in bed with Labour".

-

Here is the text of the Conservative motion proposed by Cllr Mark Ralph:

'To recognise that any increase in Council Tax will present real difficulties to those reliant on savings impacted by low interest rates, those on low and fixed incomes and to some of our more vulnerable residents.
To commit to fully explore the help available to alleviate hardship that is likely to result and communicate this to residents of the Borough before demands for payment are made'

Following the agreement over Reading's new budget for the forthcoming financial year, everyone has started reaching for their calculators to see what the impact will be - which is apposite.

The Chief Committee Officer for the borough provides the official record and the local evening newspaper reports in a more informal tone.

The final figures come out as:
Band A – £978.29
Band B – £1,141.33
Band C – £1,304.38
Band D – £1,467.43
Band E – £1,793.53
Band F – £2,119.62
Band G – £2,445.72
Band H – £2,934.86

Another lengthy council session reached no decision on Reading's annual budget and lead to warnings from Chief Financial Officer David Peasley that failure to reach agreement could see services temporarily halted.

Council Leader Cllr Jo Lovelock (Labour) repeated declaredly her impatience with the refusal of the town's eight Liberal Democrats to be 'bounced' into supporting her minority administration.

Conservative leader Cllr Andrew Cumpsty also pushed for a more polarised debate saying that the parties are too far apart to make negotiations worthwhile.

LibDems defended their position on pragmatic grounds, stating that they remain open to negotiation (and what lengths they have gone to achieve it) but added that agreement is possible only when parties are prepared to make concessions.

Councillors will now will reconvene for a third time on Monday evening as each side battles to influence the direction for the next generation. The meeting starts at 6.30pm and is open to the public.

In the meantime Conservatives have launched a press campaign to appeal to the public over the heads of elected representatives while they attempt to bring about the collapse of the current regime.

Oranjepan asks:
Why are Reading's Conservatives attempting to mount an undemocratic coup to bring about tax restraint while their party colleagues across the county are doing the exact opposite?

Update: Janes theone throws a couple of curve balls.

LibDem Cllr Warren Swaine accuses the tories of lying to the public and issues a rallying call to stand up to the bullying tactics of the larger two parties.

An intemperate Reading Chronicle describes the delicate process of negotiating under a minority administration as 'farcical'.

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

Reading's local politicians will reconvene tonight after another marathon session in which they failed to reach a decision on the borough's Annual Budget.

Residents will now need to wait to find out by how much our £100m+ income will vary and how it will be spent.

Jane collects a couple of reactions from opposition bench councillors Richard Willis (Con) and Glenn Goodall (LibDem), but Labour have yet to react to their humiliation and are still publishing their proposals as news.

The rundown: Labour proposed a rise in Council Tax to increase spending on areas of weakness, which was defeated by an alliance of opposition parties.

The LibDems moved a compromise amendment to trim spending on waste (on consultancy and agency fees), introduce a levy on bulky waste and keep wasteful tax rises to a minimum, but this was also laid to waste - this time by a grand alliance of the two larger parties.

The Conservatives made it plain that they support a variety of across the board but unspecified service cuts and charge increases as they seek to implement a unilateral freeze on Council Tax. However they actively worked only as wreckers to any agreement without introducing any proposals themselves.

Oranjepan says:
Cllr Willis's references make it plain that the Conservatives are preparing to mount a revolution outside of an election year. Will they succeed? We'll find out tonight!

Update: Welcome back to the blogosphere to Cllr Emma Warman (Con). She says her party opposed raising the Council Tax to stop Reading being squeezed dry, but she doesn't explain why Reading's group of opposition Conservatives contradict Conservative groups across Berkshire where they are in charge. Neither does she explain why no alternate proposals were forthcoming from her side.

Reading Chronicle fails to meet it's publishing deadline.

Former LibDem Councillor Annette Hendry has added an informative comment:

I sat and listened to the Budget debate from the public gallery on Tuesday. I was particularly worried that Reading has a bunch of Conservative Cllrs, who are aspiring to take control next year, but seem unable to make any positive contribution to setting the Council's annual budget - a basic responsibility for a council. Their speeches raised more questions than they answered. Where will they get the extra money they want to spend on some services while freezing council tax? If they're so concerned with keeping down costs, why did they oppose the cuts put forward by the Lib Dems? Why did the Tories have no specific costed suggestions of their own to make? Why did the Tory leader oppose the budget by saying, "It's not right for these times", without any indication of what would be right? This poor performance won't do. Neither is it advisable to make statements like, "If you want the lowest possible council Tax then Conservatives will provide that", when Conservative controlled Wokingham have just announced a Council tax rise of 4.68%! This compares with Labour's proposed rise of 4.24% and the Lib Dems' proposal of 3.9% in Reading.

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

Wokingham Borough Council has announced the annual average increase in Council Tax (based on band D properties) will be 4.68%.

Conservatives rushed to defend their budget claiming that local challenges in social care meant it was their 'toughest' yet and blamed underfunding by central government, although they also showed that it is in line with increases being levied in other Berkshire councils.

Meanwhile Wokingham's opposition LibDems pinpointed Conservative failure as the cause of the larger-than-expected rise.

LibDem leader, Cllr Prue Bray, explained that the annual increase is limited to 5% maximum and that additional funding into services labelled 'inadequate' by inspectors is only possible by painful cuts elsewhere.

Cllr Bray also criticised the Conservative's dishonesty in their attempt to accept power but avoid responsibility.

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

On Thursday Wokingham residents will finally discover how much extra council tax they will have to pay after being kept on tenterhooks by the ruling Conservative group.

Council leader David Lee explains that redundancies are to be expected as they plough an extra £1m into Children's Services and £2.7m into Community Care after his administration was slammed by recent inspections.

Meanwhile Conservatives have attempted to deflect attention from this series of bad news stories by blaming LibDems on Woodley Town Council.

The tories accuse the LibDems of wastage, while the LibDems have struck back saying they have been defending much needed public services and amenities: LibDem Cllr Coling Lawley said "without the town council stepping in there would be no leisure services in Woodley."

In West Berkshire the feuding between the Conservative-run borough council and LibDem controlled town councils continued as LibDems argue it is possible to avoid neglecting vital services while keeping costs down.

Former Newbury MP, now Cllr David Rendel, said "Despite some tough financial times it is clearly possible to do more with less without punishing the taxpayer. Liberal Democrat-run Newbury Town Council and Thatcham Town Council have both managed to set much lower tax rises."

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

West Berkshire has become the third local council in the county to announce the increase in Council Tax levels.

The authority has declared that the average rise (based on band D properties) will be 3.9%. This adds to above-inflationary rises for parking and other income streams.

Meanwhile, Bracknell Forest became the fourth as the Conservative-dominated council declared it would push for a near-maximum rise of 4.9%.

Maidenhead will see an increase of 2.9%, while Reading has announced a rise of 4.24%.

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

Reading's three main political parties have set out their stalls regarding the latest round of council tax rises.

Reading Conservatives were first off the mark, making a typically large splash against all and any tax rises.

This preempted the official Labour group proposals to "both protect vital services and keep the council tax increase as low as [possible]."

And finally we have had the LibDem response, arguing for reform of the system to make it fairer and more responsive.

The LibDems explain that the low increase in the central government grant (which makes up about 3/4 of all councils income) has forced the hand of local authorities - according to their spokesman, pretty much anything local politicians can say about these local taxes is spin designed only to influence local voters.

Council's are restricted in their ability to raise income to a maximum increase of 5% on property tax and are simultaneously prevented from varying other tax levels by the Exchequer, so there is a natural inclination to squeeze every last drop from other sources such as parking fines, speeding fines, littering fines, as well as late payment fines - all of which hits the most vulnerable the hardest.

Oranjepan asks:
How can cabinet members on our local council actually influence any changes or meet local priorities while they remain target-driven from Whitehall?

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

Reading's Council Tax will rise by 4.24% this year.

At least it will if the minority Labour party group get their way, according to reports in the local press.

The announcement comes as council's across the county announce their budgets for the upcoming financial year. Maidenhead were the first to declare, stating that their rise would amount to 2.9% on an average house.

Labour Leader Jo Lovelock told the Evening Post, "this year’s budget is more challenging than usual."

Reading Chronicle takes a slightly different angle, highlighting the impact on council jobs.

Oranjepan says:
1.9% in an election year, 4.24% in a year when there are no council elections in Reading - say no more!

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.

Richard Willis has picked up a report published by the unofficial Conservative pressure group the Tax-Payers Alliance stating that the number of Council workers earning high wages has increased unjustifiably in recent years.

The claim is that Reading currently has 139 employees earning over £50,000pa and 52 on more than £60,000pa - and that this is the cause of recent large Council Tax rises.

However questions of partiality and bias hang over the paper; without providing information on the number of workers who earned just less than the threshold in 2006 it is made impossible to judge whether the increase is a result of excessive wage inflation or if it has been caused by a huge influx of new middle managers.

Reading Chronicle reports Conservative MP Rob Wilson arguing recent rises in Council Tax are not being spent on frontline services, as Labour claims.

And yet when council tax rises have been lower in Reading's Labour-dominated council than in local boroughs run by Conservatives they have faced criticism of "selling off the family silver" in order to do so.

Oranjepan asks:
why is it that according to Conservatives our council taxes are in all cases both too high and too low - except where they are being set by Conservatives?

=

Here is a list of Council Tax rises for most Berkshire local authorities in the past two years.

Reading - 3.5% (07/08), 1.9% (08/09)
Bracknell Forest - 4.94% (07/08), -(08/09)
Slough - 4.99% (07/08), 4.85% (08/09)
West Berks - 2.9% (07/08), 3.9% (08/09)
Wokingham - 3.24% (07/08), 4.94% (08/09)
Windsor & Maidenhead - 3.8% (07/08), 2.3% (08/09)

[07/08]
[08/09: Reading; Slough; West Berkshire; Wokingham; Windsor & Maidenhead]

Windsor & Maidenhead have announced that in the year ahead (09/10) Council Tax there will rise by an average of 2.9%. They are the first local authority in Berkshire to publish figures.

NB. Rises are capped at 5% by central government. The headline figure is generally calculated as the rise of tax on Band D properties. Council income from Council Tax amounts to about 1/4 of the total (Berkshire borough councils each budget on incomes around the £100m mark).

I would be grateful if any reader could provide the comparable figure for Bracknell Forest in 2008/09 to complete the list.

=

Click here for a full comparison of Council Tax rises in the different local authorities across Berkshire.