BeyondtheVote
Sign in
The local authorityCouncil · Unitary · England · 1 of 63 unitary authorities

Reading.

Labour Party-controlled unitary. £190m net revenue. 16 wards across 3 parliamentary constituencies.

TypeUnitary
Seats48 councillors · 16 wards
Last election7 May 2026
Websitereading.gov.uk ↗
Net revenue · 2025-26
£190m
Core spending power (MHCLG)
Band-D bill
£2,487
For the council slice (incl. precepts)
Composition
29/48
Labour Party 60%
Westminster
3
constituencies overlap · 1 MP party
Dispatch
31 May 2026

Labour Party chamber, Labour Party MPs.

Reading is a unitary controlled by Labour Party (29 of 48 seats). Net revenue is £190m for 2025-26. It covers 16 wards spanning 3 parliamentary constituencies.

§ 01Composition.48 seats · last contested 7 May 2026

Who sits in the chamber.

Lab 29Green 11Con 5LD 3

Labour Party 60% · last contested 7 May 2026

Councillors — the people.

CouncillorWardElected
Jacqueline DominguezGrnAbbey2026
David StevensLabAbbey2024
Mohammed AyubLabAbbey2023
Pratikshya GurungLabBattle2026
Wendy Pamela GriffithLabBattle2024
Amjad Iqbal Tahir TararLabBattle2023
Jacopo LanzoniLabCaversham2026
Matt YeoLabCaversham2024
Jan GavinLabCaversham2023
Isobel BallsdonConCaversham Heights2026
Saadia SaadatConCaversham Heights2026
Jenny McGrotherLabCaversham Heights2024
Showing 12 of 48·All 48 councillors
§ 02Revenue mix & Band-D bill.MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table

Where revenue comes from.

66%
Council tax
£126.0m · median 59%
24%
Central grants
£45.3m · median 30%
10%
Business rates
£18.4m · median 11%

This is a high-council-tax unitary authoritie: 66% of revenue from council tax, above the cohort median (59%).

Source · MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table · derived (CT exact; grants/rates split from SFA baseline)

Band-D bill.

Council slice£2,118
County / upper-tier£0
Police£283
Fire & rescue£86
GLA precept£0
Total Band-D£2,487

Parish precepts apply on top, vary by parish

For household tax breakdown

Use the income slider on My place to see income tax, NI, VAT and council tax against your earnings.

§ 03Service spend, ranked against peers.10 buckets · vs 62 other unitary authorities

How does Reading split its revenue across services, compared with peer unitary authoritie-class councils? Each row is one of the ten standard service buckets. The vertical line at the centre is the cohort median share; the coloured square is where this council sits. Squares to the right of centre mean a bigger share of revenue than the median peer; to the left, a smaller share.

Education39.0% of net spend · cohort median 36%
19 of 61+9% vs median
Adult Social Care22.7% of net spend · cohort median 27%
56 of 61-17% vs median
Children's Services17.3% of net spend · cohort median 15%
21 of 61+17% vs median
Waste & Recycling5.9% of net spend · cohort median 6%
24 of 61+3% vs median
Corporate & Central4.0% of net spend · cohort median 3%
9 of 61+40% vs median
Public Health3.5% of net spend · cohort median 4%
33 of 61-5% vs median
Housing & Homelessness2.9% of net spend · cohort median 2%
14 of 61+54% vs median
Highways & Transport2.5% of net spend · cohort median 3%
35 of 61-6% vs median
Culture & Leisure1.4% of net spend · cohort median 2%
51 of 61-35% vs median
Planning & Economic Development0.7% of net spend · cohort median 1%
54 of 61-49% vs median
How to read these bars

The subtitle on each row (“X% of net spend”) is what share of this council’s revenue goes to that service. The rank (“15 of 61”) is where this council sits within the cohort, sorted by that share descending. The delta (“+26% vs median”) is a relative reading: the council allocates 26% more of its revenue to that service than the median peer would. A small absolute difference can still be a big relative one.

Higher share doesn’t mean waste — it can reflect demographic need (more older residents), rurality, or a policy choice (e.g. keeping a service in-house). Lower share doesn’t mean efficiency — some councils move costs to fees, ringfenced accounts, or grants. £-per-head would be sharper than share-of-revenue; LAD population is pending ingest. Comparisons are within the same council type only.

§ 04Top suppliers.22,287 payments · £193.3m gross · 3 Dec 2025 – 30 Apr 2026

Every invoice over £500, published under the Local Government Transparency Code. Best-effort, not statutory — counts and totals net negatives (refunds/reversals).

Top by total — last 180 days

SupplierPaidSharePmts
RE3 LTD£9.74m5.0%6
HOMES FOR READING£8.29m4.3%5
READING TRANSPORT LTD£6.79m3.5%38
MORGAN SINDALL (CONSTRUCTION) PLC£6.55m3.4%14
THAMES VALLEY POLICE£5.19m2.7%9
REED£4.76m2.5%20
BRIGHTER FUTURES FOR CHILDREN£3.94m2.0%2
BLESSED HUGH FARINGDON RC SCHOOL£3.83m2.0%34
AFFINITY (READING) LTD£3.46m1.8%5
BERKSHIRE HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST£3.19m1.6%9

By service area · top supplier

ServiceTop supplierPaid
EducationTHE AVENUE SCHOOL SPECIAL NEEDS ACADEMY£1.41m
Corporate And CentralALLPAY.NET.LTD£0.87m
Adult Social CareVOYAGE CARE£0.79m
Highways And TransportGREEN METRO CARS READING LTD£0.38m
§ 05Westminster constituencies — the overlap.16 wards split across 3 parliamentary seats
ConstituencyWards% of councilCurrent MP
Reading Central956% Matt RoddaLab
Reading West and Mid Berkshire531% Olivia BaileyLab
Earley and Woodley213% Yuan YangLab
Sources, methods & last update
Method The dispatch paragraphs are AI-generated from the public sources listed below. Every figure links to its source. If we’re wrong, please tell us — corrections within 48 hours.
CompositionDemocracy Club (live)
DCLEAPIL v1.0 (historic)
Net revenueMHCLG Final LGFS
Core Spending Power table · 2025-26
Service spendDerived from MHCLG CSP shares
vs 62 other unitary authorities
Band-DMHCLG CSP · precept schedules
Police, Fire, Parish on top
SuppliersCouncil publication under LGTC
22,287 payments · 3 Dec 2025 – 30 Apr 2026
Westminster overlapONS Open Geography Portal
2023 boundaries
PopulationONS mid-year estimates
Pending ingest at LAD level