RBWM Full Council Budget Meeting 2024 – Public Questions
Members of the public have the right to ask a couple of questions of the council at the budget meeting.
- You submit up to 2 questions a few days before, which are no more than 60 words long.
- A response by the relevant Cllr is published the day before the meeting
- You get 1 minute to ask a supplementary question if you so wish
It was very amusing to see Ian Haggart ask 2 very similar questions to myself and we’d not shared notes beforehand!
My motivation with the first question was to attempt to get the lead member to realise the business deal they were looking to strike on the wheel needed much improvement. His written response was understandable but lacking, his verbal response to my supplementary was very disappointing and showed me the contractor could make some serious hay at our residents expense. He obviously didn’t heed John Baldwin’s advice and offer a date to come back with a fuller, actual response to the questions asked.
My driver for the second was to enable the lead member for finance to underline why this council is in such a poor financial position. Just look at those numbers and cry.
Here is a link to the agenda and all the other questions…
Jon Davey of Clewer & Dedworth West ward will ask the following question of Councillor Reynolds, Cabinet member for Communities and Leisure
- Comparing the budget and the Windsor Wheel application 23/02104 financial projection, would indicate RBWM has opted for a 10% profit share where RBWM pay for the re-turfing of Alexander Gardens and electricity costs, netting circa £40k while the contractor enjoys £700k profit. How can that be considered a good business deal by RBWM’s economic team?
Response
The Windsor Wheel is being brought to the town by a private company, the same as any other operator who leases a space in one of our parks, so isn’t the same as an RBWM Contractor relationship. We believe we’ll receive greater income from a profit share arrangement on the wheel, although the final contract is yet to be signed.
The £40k that is included in the budget is an initial figure, however obviously if the wheel is successful and generates more income then the council will receive more income. We anticipate the net figure received to RBWM will be significantly higher than this, As an Administration when setting the budget we’ve tried to be cautious on the figures from income generation activities as we’d rather have more income than planned for than less. This example is no different and is a prudent way of us being somewhat cautious on figures.
Overall I believe the wheel is going to be a great way to increase visitor dwell time and money spent locally with our fantastic businesses, as well as a great way for local residents to see their town from a different angle, and therefore income generated for the Borough for this is a fantastic bonus to have.
Supplementary Question
Thank you Josh
Turning Alexandra Gardens into a theme park all year round instead of a place of tranquility for residents and biodiversity is only acceptable, given a Section 114 looming, if the business case makes sense.
As I see it, you are leaving £500,000 on the table assuming a 50% occupancy.
The basic maths don’t even add up on the planning application summary!
AND RBWM are expected to pay the electricity from their share, while all the contractor’s costs are taken out…
This is currently a very one sided business deal.
Some might say, Tory Esc!
Please, please, PLEASE ensure you get a better deal before signing.
The Triathlon fees are based on Alexandra Gardens being worth £5k a day, using that model the £30k rent should be nearer £750k.
My question is 3 fold… has the Triathlon, set in the shadow of Windsor Castle, a huge sales factor for the event, been cancelled for 2024? Have all other parties who would have been using Alexandra Gardens this summer, been consulted and compensated for their loss? And has that lost income been factored into the budget?
Background to bringing these questions:
Jon Davey of Clewer & Dedworth West ward will ask the following question of Councillor Jones, Deputy Leader and Cabinet member for Finance
- It was confirmed at Cabinet by the CFO that failure to put up the council tax by the maximum each year has been the major cause of RBWM’s current financial position. In the interests of transparency and clarity, could a list of the actual years, the Gov recommended and RBWM actual percentage increases be published?
Response
Actual increases compared to maximum allowed increases are set out in the table below. RBWM cut Council Tax for six years in a row from 2010. We are not aware of any other Council in the country that has cut Council Tax for such a sustained period. As a consequence, the Council’s base budget is £19m lower than it would have been had Council Tax been increased by 1% a year over that period.
The Government does not specify or recommend what councils should do regarding Council Tax – it is a local decision for each council. However, when the Government refers to ‘increases in spending power’ to local authorities, this calculation is made on the assumption that councils are taking the maximum increase available.
| Year | Start | Actual | Result | Possible | Should | Difference |
| 2010/11 | 100 | -0.04 | 96.00 | 0.0449 | 104.49 | 8.49 |
| 2011/12 | -0.005 | 95.52 | 0.0349 | 108.14 | 12.62 | |
| 2012/13 | -0.015 | 94.09 | 0.0349 | 111.91 | 17.82 | |
| 2013/14 | -0.03 | 91.26 | 0.0199 | 114.14 | 22.87 | |
| 2014/15 | -0.02 | 89.44 | 0.0199 | 116.41 | 26.97 | |
| 2015/16 | -0.021 | 87.56 | 0.0199 | 118.73 | 31.16 | |
| 2016/17 | 0 | 87.56 | 0.0199 | 121.09 | 33.53 | |
| 2017/18 | 0.0093 | 88.38 | 0.0199 | 123.50 | 35.12 | |
| 2018/19 | 0.0186 | 90.02 | 0.0199 | 125.96 | 35.94 | |
| 2019/20 | 0.0277 | 92.51 | 0.0299 | 129.72 | 37.21 | |
| 2020/21 | 0.0199 | 94.35 | 0.0199 | 132.30 | 37.95 | |
| 2021/22 | 0.0199 | 96.23 | 0.0199 | 134.94 | 38.70 | |
| 2022/23 | 0.0199 | 98.15 | 0.0199 | 137.62 | 39.47 | |
| 2023/24 | 0.0299 | 101.08 | 0.0299 | 141.74 | 40.66 | |
| 418.52 |
Supplementary Question
Thank you for going that extra mile Lynne and for taking your responsibilities very seriously. It must be a nightmare at the moment trying to work our actual financial reality given what you’ve inherited.
From the numbers provided, using basic maths, accepting councils work in a different way to normal businesses. Essentially, if there had been more money it would have been spent to show a balanced budget.
That being said…
If we had started with £100m budget in 2010/11
We would now have a budget of £141m for next year
Instead we’re looking at essentially the same budget as 14 years ago!
As for the £418m we could a, should a, would a had!
Would it be fair to say, in round numbers, if the council was run like a business… then we’d potentially have £200m balance instead of a £200m deficit in the bank.
Background to bringing these questions:
