Business

Wokingham's Lib Dems are concerned about how much the council is borrowing to fund the town centre regeneration.
advertisement

Wokingham town centre plans could be "poisoned chalice" say Lib Dems

By Jon Nurse
February 28, 2013

Ambitious plans for Wokingham town centre could be a poisoned chalice for the borough, the council’s opposition has warned.

As the borough council approved its new budget on Thursday, Liberal Democrat Councillor Tom McCann cautioned the authority’s huge reliance on borrowing.

Cllr McCann said: “The borrowing of large amounts of public funds to promote private enterprise and raise incomes is not new but has a very bad track record.

"In the 1960s places like Bracknell town centre have proven to be a poisoned chalice to that council and the community.

“The ruling group believe the only way to revitalise the town centre in their eyes is to borrow more than £62 million and mortgage the future to the whole council.

“We turn and say the council has failed the residents of Wokingham borough by saying they will all take second place to this over-ambitious plan. Shame on you.”

Cllr Anthony Pollock, executive member for finance, responded: “We have costed it, analysed the risks and it will be successful.

“It is a lot more modest than the developments in Reading and Bracknell – the risks are less. Yes, they are there but we have our eyes fixed firmly on them.”

A large investment for the borough is its commitment to regenerating Wokingham town centre, a pledged sum of £62 million over the next three years.

Cllr McCann added: “This council is about to increase its borrowing over the next three years to £181 million; in order to do this it has to raise its borrowing limit to £289 million within three years.

“You will have borrowed more money over five years than this council has in its whole existence since 1974, leaving it with £16.7 million interest per year – costing each household more than £250 in interest per year.”

Opposition councillors delivered eight scathing critiques of the Conservative-led budget, following a theme that the leadership was indecisive and lacked strategic planning.

Cllr Prue Bray, leader of Wokingham Liberal Democrats, warned: “There have been a lot of costly mistakes in the last 10 years: u-turns that have wasted time and money, poor project management, delays and failures to plan ahead. We cannot go on like this.

“Finances will get even tighter over the next few years. They have to up their game or there is a real risk that the council might find itself in very serious difficulties indeed.”

Cllr Pollock replied: “In 2009 we knew budgets were going to get tighter and were one of the few councils in the country who anticipated the cut in grants.

“We do long-term planning, we are aware of the risks coming over the horizon. We are up for the challenge because we have vision, clarity and leadership.”

| Submit Comments | View Comments (39)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 15 of 39

Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next Page Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

So not ALL people who live off benefits then.

Thanks.

Megaman
28/02/2013 at 12:48

The deal was made through Wokingham Enterprises Ltd so that the public could be better excluded. We can not make sure we are even getting a good deal. Google 'Wokingham owned companies. Open for business. Not scrutiny.'

Kaz4Wokingham, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 12:16

Megaman, see below:

Lenin, Kremlin
28/02/2013 at 11:56

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5sVN9vQ_fNEC&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=those+on+benefits+more+likely+to+vote+labour&source=bl&ots=O1keFkRlA1&sig=lS7Z8BXjdFDkW1DaO-UGyk_eB5Y&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tUQvUdizJ8Pi4QTw3YDQAQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=those%20on%20benefits%20more%20likely%20to%20vote%20labour&f=false

Lenin, Kremlin
28/02/2013 at 11:55

Landlords who let to charity shops usually do so as an alternative to the shops sitting empty. The let will usually just cover costs and generate little if any income.

The huge worry is that the council are planning to increase the number of shops when at the other end of the town the number of empty shops is rapidly increasing.

We need a council policy that directs new businesses away from the out of town sites into the town. We urgently need some character shops in the town. This means that provision must be made for craft centres, antique centres etc should be provided with appropriate accommodation and planning permission refused out of town. There are areas like Broad Street Walk that are ripe for such development if the landlords of the current empty shops cannot provide appropriate rents.

We need the council and our local MPs to put pressure on the government to reduce the rates imposed on shops in town centres particularly in areas that have numbers of empty shops. Empty shops in this case must include those being used for art displays or charity shops etc that would otherwise be empty.

PoneRana, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 11:46

Lenin, how good it is to see open-minded, fact-based debate on here.

Megaman
28/02/2013 at 11:39

Additionally - charity shops do not open in the town centre because there are not enough of them and because the market says we need more charity shops. They are sometimes there due to their more favourable treatment in terms of rates, and also that they have more raw cash reserves and are considered far more reliable a tenant than a risky independent trying to start up. Hopefully WBC will be more leniant towards these independents.

Anyway - I'm not an analyst or expert but clearly pretending to be. I'll stop ;)

alex_f, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 11:08

nah all scroungers vote for Labour the official benifits for all party

Lenin, Kremlin
28/02/2013 at 10:59

Just to expand on my previous point - I'm sure we aren't all curry or Pizza lovers. They just do well as Wokingham is the main dining town in the area. I have no doubt that if something different came along, e.g. a Wagamamas or a Mexican, it would be just as full - look at Nandos, packed all the time and that wasn't even in town until last year. Market forces have dictated what we have at the moment but that shouldn't necessarily mean that a market won't support it. There are other external factors such as, dare I say it corruption, and who landowners might know or typically partner with (e.g. the company which has 18 broad street / Lloyds TSB appears to have mostly Italian restaurants in its portfolio - I can only guess that it will be an Italian when the current application goes through and forever more...).

alex_f, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 10:58

@Damiano_Tommassi - my opinion is this brings at least some mediation (less corruption? can I say that!!) and strategy to the letting of units.

Town centres are competing with out of town developments and large malls - which are able to do this (e.g. have fashion quarters, food courts). They can decide to have a good spread of food offerings for example (not overloaded with particular cuisines and a lack of variety with others like Wokingham is - we aren't all raving curry or Pizza lovers in Wokingham!), and a mix of different retail offerings to suit. You're right though that market forces dictate this to a degree, but I think it is one reasonable bit of the equation to begin to compete again with these developments (along with of course parking, events etc).

alex_f, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 10:49

(Should the council be dictating which shops should and shouldn't open? Isn't that what market forces are designed to do?)

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 10:41

Lenin - the word you're looking for is 'decent'; should've 'tried harder at school', perhaps. I think you'll find a lot of them vote Tory, too.

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 10:39

@Stig2 - just on the 'in the hands of the landlords' point - hopefully with WBC keeping the developments this is less of a problem, i.e. they can actually dictate as the landowner if a charity shop goes in a particular unit.

alex_f, Wokingham
28/02/2013 at 10:37

Personally I would just cut council expenditure by removing their obilgation to home the countless Labourite scroungers who did not try hard enough at school to obtain descent grades, and have not subsiquently put in the effort to obtain a professional living.

Lenin, Kremlin
28/02/2013 at 10:28

I'm not sure we do agree, Lenin!

I am dubious that the council, which happen to be Tory, may be selling off Wokingham's assets, leaving the town with debts that it has no realistic way to pay off. I am questioning whether the sums add-up and whether it's feasible to make a return on investing £90m (plus interest payments) in our high street. I don't know if they've made a case that 'it will cost us £17m/yr for 10 years, but we are promised £30m from the sale of Elms Field/supermarket/hotel, and we have leases in place for the new buildings that we're erecting (no sniggering!) that are guaranteed to pay £2m/year'.

I'm not knocking the Lib-Dems for raising similar concerns. Or for the fact that one of their party in national government is accused of something (it's not like there aren't many bad eggs in the other parties).