Green Party support in Reading is not nearly as great as many of us might have supposed,–but, at all events, it is very evidently behind Labour generally. The image can be best interpreted as gradual development, but with the strength being concentrated in specific places, and not in the whole town.

At the council level, the Greens are well established to be the main opposition on the Reading Borough Council. They now have eight seats, and this is a sign of slow improvement over the last few years and not a breakthrough. On other wards, they have established a strong foundation and can now compete with the Labour on an equal footing, even winning seats outright.

Their general vote share in local elections is in the mid-teens, although by quite a bit by ward. Green support is more robust in areas with younger populations or with more mixed socio-economic profiles.

Some more recent polling indicates that the Greens may be encroaching even further into traditionally Labour-controlled areas. Previously perceived as a Labour stronghold, such wards as Battle are now viewed as a more competitive area, in part due to the socio-economic issues in the area, and central goverment policy in the Middle East. Most of the other wards like Abbey, Thames and even Emmer Green have also come into the limelight as potential battlegrounds, according to the pollster of Britain Votes.

Assuming that those projections are correct, the effect might be tremendous. Britain Votes has suggested that the labour party might lose up to seven seats in the forthcoming elections on Thursday, May 7. That would give them around 24 councillors just short of the 25 needed to overall control the council (the first time in years that the council had less than 25 councillors altogether).

Practically that would be a substantial shift in the political life of Reading. Whereas the Labour, though probably remaining the largest party, would still have influence, the Greens, and possibly other parties would have had much more sway than previously which can only be good for democracy.

All in all the Greens in Reading are no longer a fringe party. They are a reputable and increasingly influential political block, which may not yet be in a position to dominate the politics of the town-wide.

With just a week to go until polling day, Liberal Democrat Councillor Meri O’Connell has warned that the spiralling cost of social care is leaving Reading Borough Council “struggling to do the basics”.

Total spending on social care by local authorities reached a record £29.3bn in 2024/2025, up by £12.4bn since 2015/16. This means social care now accounts for up to 80 per cent of council budgets, which have already had to make vast cuts to other council services.

Councillor O’Connell has now warned that any further cuts to social care funding could be “the point of no return” for the sector, and urged the Government to intervene, with new investment to relieve councils, tackle carer vacancies, and offer free personal care to those currently suffering without support. The party has argued that new investment in social care, including helping more people leave the hospital, could end the A&E crisis and corridor care within a year, and save money on expensive hospital stays.

Councillor O’Connell also called on the Government to finish its commission on social care, which is currently scheduled to be completed in three years, with reforms reportedly potentially not in place until 2036.

Public satisfaction with social care is at 13 per cent, and dissatisfaction is nearly 50 per cent, research by the King’s Fund has found.

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Councillor Meri O’Connell said:

“Reading Borough Council is being stretched to breaking point by spiralling social care costs, and that means they don’t have the money to fix potholes or keep local services running properly.

“This social care crisis is the elephant in the room at these local elections. No other party is talking about it.

“The Liberal Democrats will fix social care, making sure vulnerable people get the care they need while freeing up councils to focus on filling potholes, cleaning streets and improving  local services.”

Reading’s Liberal Democrat councillors have voted against the Council’s 2026/27 budget, citing concerns over depleted reserves and last-minute financial planning that leaves future years unbalanced.

Speaking at last night’s Full Council meeting, the three Lib Dem councillors challenged the Labour administration over a budget that was only balanced two weeks earlier through an emergency £3.6 million draw from the Financial Resilience Reserve, leaving the Financial Resilience Reserve set to fall to just £269,000 by 2027/28.

Reserves running on empty

Councillor Anne Thompson highlighted the scale of the Council’s financial pressures: “To balance the budget, we will draw down £7.302 million from reserves — almost double the size of the drawdown a year ago. Our reserves are shrinking. The General Fund Revenue Reserve has fallen from £49.8 million to a forecast of £30.2 million in just one year, a 39% decline. You don’t have to be a mathematical genius to know that this can’t go on much longer.”

Cllr Thompson criticised the government’s funding settlement, noting that Reading receives nothing from the £865 million Recovery Grant despite having above-average deprivation in income, education, crime and barriers to housing. “Had the Recovery Grant been distributed through the fair funding formula as originally intended, Reading would have received an additional £2.05 million. That is a deliberate political choice by the Labour government in Westminster, and it is not fair.”

She added: “Our Adult Social Care caseload has grown by 311 people in nine months. Our looked after children numbers are rising when numbers are falling nationally. Yet we have three Labour MPs. Where were their voices for Reading when these decisions were being made?”

Last-minute budget raises concerns

Councillor James Moore focused on the administration’s handling of the budget: “This budget was not balanced in December. It had a £4.4 million gap as recently as ten weeks ago. It was only finally closed two weeks before this meeting by drawing an additional £3.6 million from reserves at the last minute. That is not long-term planning. That is firefighting.”

Cllr Moore pointed to a pattern of financial management problems: “Year after year of overspending — £9.3 million last year, £4 million forecast this year. Year after year of underdelivering on savings. The savings programme has delivered 73% of what was planned last year, and KPMG’s own forward look suggests only 66% will be delivered this year.”

He highlighted what he described as misplaced priorities: “We have requested a hearing loop system for Tilehurst Community Centre — a permanent accessibility improvement that would benefit the one in six people in the UK who suffer from hearing impairment. We’ve been told there are cost pressures that prevent it. Yet there were no cost pressures when it came to funding the Mayor’s £920 flight to watch football in Germany last year.”

Council Tax rises continue

The budget approved by the Labour-controlled council includes a 4.99% Council Tax increase — the maximum permissible without a referendum — for the third consecutive year. For a typical Band C household, the Reading element of Council Tax will rise by around £94 per year.

Cllr Thompson noted that public support for the increases is weakening: “The budget engagement showed 50.5% of respondents now oppose the Council Tax increase — a significant shift from last year when 60% supported it.”

Future years unbalanced

Despite the reserve draw, the Medium Term Financial Strategy shows budget gaps of £1.996 million in 2027/28 and £207,000 in 2028/29 still to be found.

All three Liberal Democrat councillors voted against the budget.