Labour MPs for Reading, Matt Rodda, Olivia Bailey and Yuan Yang voted against a Liberal Democrat amendment which would have expanded free bus travel for disabled people.

Reading Liberal Democrats say that our local Labour MPs have “failed disabled people” by making it harder for them to get fair and accessible transport. Liberal Democrat MP Tom Gordon’s amendment on the 11th September, sought to allow disabled bus pass holders to travel without time constraints, addressing concerns that existing limitations hinder access to employment, education, and essential services.

Despite significant cross-party support, the amendment was defeated by a vote of 300 to 69. Labour MPs from various regions, including Reading, Liverpool, Newcastle, Lambeth, Derby, and Amber Valley, voted against the proposal. Local Liberal Democrat groups have criticized these Labour MPs, accusing them of failing to support disabled constituents.

Reading Lib Dems say that Labour has “simply turned their back” on disabled people by voting against the amendment. The Liberal Democrats have also called on the Government to reverse their ‘bus tax’ by bringing the bus fare cap back down to £2 from £3.

Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats on Reading Borough Council, Councillor James Moore, said:

“The Labour Party has failed disabled people in our community.

“Instead of giving people in often difficult circumstances the opportunity to access the transport they need, Labour has turned its back on them.

“The Government keeps saying they want to help get more disabled people into work, but then won’t even help them get the public transport they need.

“By voting against giving greater access to transport for disabled people, this Labour government is failing to deliver the change people are crying out for.”

Here’s the funny thing about Uber in Reading: officially, it doesn’t exist here. The Reading Borough Council hasn’t given Uber a local licence, so technically the service isn’t allowed. And yet… open the app and you’ll almost always find a car just a few minutes away.

In fact, there are thought to be around 600 licensed drivers who could be working in or around Reading at any given time. If you’re here now, try it — check the app. You’ll see what I mean. I book rides this way all the time.

So how does that work if Uber isn’t licensed locally? It comes down to geography and the way licences operate. Drivers don’t have to live where they’re licensed. Many are registered in nearby areas like Slough, London or South Oxfordshire, and they’re free to pick up jobs in Reading. We even spoke to a few drivers who live here but are licensed in Southampton — as soon as they leave home to start their shift, they’re allowed to accept rides from anywhere. And that’s exactly how Reading stays on their map.

For passengers, it’s hard not to see this as a win. Reading has plenty of taxis and private hire firms, but Uber brings that familiar mix of convenience, clear pricing, and app-based ease that so many people now expect. Visitors are often surprised by how quickly they can get a ride here, despite the “unofficial” status.

Of course, not everyone is happy about it. Local taxi operators have long argued that it’s unfair and that the rules should be enforced to protect homegrown businesses. And there’s no denying it creates a bit of a grey area — riders get the benefit of Uber, but it’s happening outside of the council’s official system.

Still, the reality is simple: if you’re in Reading and need to get somewhere, Uber is just a tap away. Whether it’s a driver heading out from Maidenhead or one leaving their driveway in Reading with a Southampton licence, chances are someone will be ready to pick you up and get you where you need to go.

Additionally, it’s just a matter of time before Uber is allowed here.

The question of whether Reading Borough Council (RBC) should incorporate nearby areas such as Theale, Pangbourne, Calcot, Purley-on-Thames, and Tilehurst has been a topic of local discussionin the streets and local forum. While on the surface it might seem practical to expand Reading’s administrative boundaries, a closer look at infrastructure, education, and community services suggests that maintaining these areas within West Berkshire is the preferable option.

Population and Demographics

Reading currently has an estimated 178,196 residents across 67,700 households (2024), making it a dense, urban area. In comparison, West Berkshire has an estimated 163,367 residents in 66,658 households (2021 Census), with a population density of 232 people per square kilometer. Theale, Pangbourne, Calcot, Purley-on-Thames, and Tilehurst benefit from being part of this more dispersed and rural district, which allows for a better quality of life in terms of space, community, and accessibility.

Education

Education is another area where West Berkshire outperforms Reading. Secondary schools in West Berkshire have a higher rate of Good or Outstanding ratings at 92%, compared to 80% in Reading. Primary school ratings also favour West Berkshire, reflecting the district’s strong commitment to educational excellence. Incorporating these areas into Reading could risk administrative disruption in schools that are currently performing well.

Infrastructure and Services

West Berkshire also leads Reading in terms of infrastructure and public services:

• Roads: Only 3% of West Berkshire’s roads require maintenance, lower than Reading’s proportion.
• Children’s Services: West Berkshire’s services were rated as Good, while Reading’s received a “Requires Improvement” rating.
• Sports Facilities: The district provides more sports facilities per 100,000 residents, supporting community health and recreation.
• Recycling: West Berskshire collects glass recycling at the kerbside.
  

Residents of the areas under consideration already rely on Reading for shopping, entertainment, and rail travel to London. However, these practical links do not outweigh the advantages of remaining in West Berkshire’s jurisdiction.

Urban vs. Rural Characteristics

Reading is a dense, urban borough with a high concentration of its population. West Berkshire, on the other hand, is largely rural with dispersed communities, though it has population centres in Newbury and Thatcham and a large suburban area adjoining Reading. This rural character, combined with strong services, makes West Berkshire a better fit for these communities.

Conclusion

While RBC is a dynamic and growing borough, incorporating Theale, Pangbourne, Calcot, Purley-on-Thames, and Tilehurst is not recommended. West Berkshire currently provides superior infrastructure, higher educational standards, and a well-serviced rural environment. Keeping these areas within West Berkshire ensures residents continue to enjoy these advantages without unnecessary disruption.