West Berks Council seeks money from Reading, Another miscalculation? Options

[Bloggo]

The article today refering to the Leader of WBC Graham Jones approaching Reading BC for money to pay for maintenance for schools in the Reading area poses a few questions for me.

In the first instance why would WBC have funded repairs to schools in Reading if it did not need to and have asked Reading to pay up-front?

Was the expenditure of this money by WBC a mistake and if so who is responsible for it?

Surely this money would have appeared in a WBC budget submission and have been accounted for?

Reading clearly believe that they have no obligation to refund money to WBC. Wouldn't it seem likely that before it became public knowledge that WBC and Reading would have discussed it to avoid the embarrassment of Graham Jones appearing like Oliver Twist asking for more?

Is this another example of a West Berks Council overspend and an attempt to claw back funds?

[Berkshirelad]

By "Reading Area", I presume that what is meant is WBC schools located in Tilehurst and the like which have a very high proportion of Reading children attending.

[JeffG]

It's always struck me as odd that Calcot/Tilehurst is in West Berks and not part of Reading Borough.

[Bloggo]

It's always struck me as odd that Calcot/Tilehurst is in West Berks and not part of Reading Borough.

Yes, I guess it was all about the boundary lines agreed when the County Council became the 3 Unitary Authorities.

[blackdog]

Yes, I guess it was all about the boundary lines agreed when the County Council became the 3 Unitary Authorities.

Um. There are 6 unitary authorities - the boundaries of which were effectively set when they effed up the county boundaries and abolished the various boroughs in 1974. The residents of Tilehurst opted to be in Newbury District rather than Reading as the rates were generally lower.

On the orginal topic - how much does West Berks pay Reading and other neighbouring authorities for the maintenance of schools used by West Berks residents? How do local authorities charge each other for educating each other's kids?

[Ziggy]

how much does West Berks pay Reading and other neighbouring authorities for the maintenance of schools used by West Berks residents? How do local authorities charge each other for educating each other's kids?


No idea, but a lot of folk in south Newbury send their children to Hampshire primary schools. Falkland is full to busting and there are no satisfactory alternatives within easy reach.

[Berkshirelad]

No idea, but a lot of folk in south Newbury send their children to Hampshire primary schools. Falkland is full to busting and there are no satisfactory alternatives within easy reach.

Burghclere is over-subscribed as, I believe, is Woolton Hill. However, Ecchinswell has spaces and is good.

[Strafin]

how much does West Berks pay Reading and other neighbouring authorities for the maintenance of schools used by West Berks residents? How do local authorities charge each other for educating each other's kids?

Nothing I would have thought. Surely pupils only go to schools within their catchment areas and don't stray across boundaries, and where they do the school surely would have a budget for x amount of pupils, regardless of where they are from?

[blackdog]

Nothing I would have thought. Surely pupils only go to schools within their catchment areas and don't stray across boundaries, and where they do the school surely would have a budget for x amount of pupils, regardless of where they are from?

Whilst I suspect that you are right regarding the amount West Berks pays other authorities you are way out of date regarding where kids go to school.

As I am beginning to understand it school operating/teaching budgets come from government grants - so there is no need to worry about West Berks educating Reading kids or Basingstoke & Deane educating Newbury kids as none of them are paying for it anyway. WBC are now trying to share out the costs that do come out of their budgets - school maintenance. I hope they have done their sums in advance and are sure they are nett suppliers of school spaces and not liable to larger counter claims from our neighbouring authorities.

[user23]

No

The article today refering to the Leader of WBC Graham Jones approaching Reading BC for money to pay for maintenance for schools in the Reading area poses a few questions for me.

In the first instance why would WBC have funded repairs to schools in Reading if it did not need to and have asked Reading to pay up-front?

Was the expenditure of this money by WBC a mistake and if so who is responsible for it?

Surely this money would have appeared in a WBC budget submission and have been accounted for?

Reading clearly believe that they have no obligation to refund money to WBC. Wouldn't it seem likely that before it became public knowledge that WBC and Reading would have discussed it to avoid the embarrassment of Graham Jones appearing like Oliver Twist asking for more?

Is this another example of a West Berks Council overspend and an attempt to claw back funds?

No. I don't think you've read the article properly. They haven't funded repairs to schools run by Reading BC.

It's because some parents who pay Council Tax to Reading BC are sending their children to West Berkshire schools, because they're a lot better. Us West Berkshire residents then have to pay extra towards educating these children and Reading get to keep the money allocated to educate them.

You can read more here.

[blackdog]

NoNo. I don't think you've read the article properly. They haven't funded repairs to schools run by Reading BC.

It's because some parents who pay Council Tax to Reading BC are sending their children to West Berkshire schools, because they're a lot better. Us West Berkshire residents then have to pay extra towards educating these children and Reading get to keep the money allocated to educate them.

You can read more here.

But its not as if WBC council tax payers are footing the bill. Schools are not funded via council tax. The fact that WBC schools are attracting pupils from Reading is good for the schools - it shows they are competing successfully for pupils. Funding is from central government funding and is based on the number of pupils - more pupils = more money.

Surely the only issue is where WBC has to fund associated developments - for instance school crossings or traffic control measures. Graham Jones suggestion that Reading could fund some of this sort of expenditure via S106 contributions makes some sense.

[Strafin]

I'm just happy someone finally posted a link to the story so we can better understand the situation.

[user23]

But its not as if WBC council tax payers are footing the bill. Schools are not funded via council tax. The fact that WBC schools are attracting pupils from Reading is good for the schools - it shows they are competing successfully for pupils. Funding is from central government funding and is based on the number of pupils - more pupils = more money.

Surely the only issue is where WBC has to fund associated developments - for instance school crossings or traffic control measures. Graham Jones suggestion that Reading could fund some of this sort of expenditure via S106 contributions makes some sense.

I'm guessing from the story that some elements of the schools must be funded from Council Tax.

[Chelsea Greg]

I think the problem here is with the not so subtle differences between the way WBC is run and the genuine efforts of RBC. Whereas RBC has adopted a hands on/community based policy WBC is still painting by numbers. A vast majority of WBC staff seem to think getting paid to turn up is reason enough for their continued employment. A diversion of inter-council funds is a means to an end and local councillors are finally realising this cross-pollination is the lesser of two evils. The situation is very similiar to the recent shakeup of the civil service where a culling of 'dead wood' was a necessity...

[user23]

I think the problem here is with the not so subtle differences between the way WBC is run and the genuine efforts of RBC. Whereas RBC has adopted a hands on/community based policy WBC is still painting by numbers. A vast majority of WBC staff seem to think getting paid to turn up is reason enough for their continued employment. A diversion of inter-council funds is a means to an end and local councillors are finally realising this cross-pollination is the lesser of two evils. The situation is very similiar to the recent shakeup of the civil service where a culling of 'dead wood' was a necessity...

The problem has arisen not because of RBC has adopted a hands on/community based policy but because people from Reading want to send their children to WBC schools, because they're so much better. WBC foots the bill for these students, and RBC get the money via their residents' Council Tax. Does this seem fair?

What you've said about cutbacks is a fallacy given Gershon and previous initiatives. Remember, 10 years ago a private company came in to WBC to try and make savings over 25 years. They pulled out after 5 or so because, as I understand it, there were none to be made and still operate as a private company, i.e. make a profit. This was prior to the cutbacks in local government over the last 10 years and again as I understand it some of how WBC can only function due to the good will (for that read unpaid work) of their staff.

Uninformed statements like yours can only discourage people to work for nothing for the betterment of their community, after all would you work for someone for free if they were as ungrateful as you seem to be?

There will be more cuts enforced by whoever takes power after May 6th; expect these to impact on local services to varying degrees depending on who is making them.