Before a 1.92 per cent rise in council tax was approved, the leader of the town’s Liberal Democrats proposed amending the budget to include £1m for affordable housing and £500,000 towards slowing down motorists on all residential roads.

However, when the borough’s head of finance, Alan Cross, was consulted he said he was “not comfortable” with the idea and councillors roundly opposed the notion of blanket 20mph speed limits. They were also worried about the idea of adding to the borough’s debts.

Cllr Jo Lovelock, leader of the council, said: “While this budget contains painful reductions, it also shows how we will tackle the gaps at the same time as maintaining those services that all residents expect, such as street cleaning, libraries and parks.

“The strains are showing after the loss of over 600 roles — we are all having to try and be patient.

“All our instincts are to drive things forward and the plan shows how that will be done, but inevitably things are taking longer and staff are working more hours than they should because they are committed to delivering services.”

Reading Borough Council’s corporate plan — entitled Narrowing the Gap — was presented alongside the proposed budget for the next three financial years.

The plan outlines an £8.1m of savings from the service budget in the financial year from April 2015 to April 2016 and another 500 council staff are to lose their jobs by 2018.

The proposed council tax increase of 1.92 per cent will mean paying an extra 58p per week for anyone in a home in council tax band D, an annual cost of £1,589.36.

Conservative councillors objected to the rise, believing that a £500,000 freeze grant from the Government for not raising council tax and the outsourcing of services such as waste collection could help balance the books.

Putting the overall reductions into context with the council’s whole £402,728,579 spending power Cllr David Stevens believed that the reductions were something “any well-run business could absorb”.

However, Cllr Tony Page refuted the argument on the basis that more than two-thirds of the borough’s finances are ring-fenced for essential services such as education and children and adult social care.