#Beistol. Are You Better Off Than You Were Five Years Ago?

Dec 25, 2025

Bristol Council Aims and Objectives for Honest Governance 2026 Forward.

First of all. Advance apologies. My laptop decided that the best possible time to malfunction on me was on Christmas Eve, and, let's just say it's been something of a marathon, never mind steep learning curve to compose this article on my phone. To say nothing of several hours running into today from last night as well. So, I've done my best, given the circumstances, and if in anyway at all it's nowhere near my usual standard and there are constructional errors I've missed, my sincerest apologies. Normal service will resume again tomorrow. Thank you.

In Brief: This isn't a manifesto. Manifestos fail - only 33-55% of promises get delivered across all parties, and voters don't believe them anymore. Instead: honest aims covering council tax freeze, scrapping CAZ, 300 affordable homes, in-house services saving £89m annually. Net £38m surplus. Not transformative. Just deliverable.

Look, I need to tell you something up front: this isn't a manifesto.

I know, I know. Every political group publishes a manifesto. It's what you do when you want people to vote for you. You make a list of promises, print it on glossy paper, and hope nobody checks whether you actually did any of it five years later.

But here's the thing about manifestos - they don't work. Across the board. All parties. And I can prove it.

The Conservatives: The Institute for Government analyzed their 2017 manifesto and found that only a third of 39 key commitments were implemented or on track. When researchers weighted those promises by what voters actually cared about - you know, the important stuff - that 69% fulfillment rate dropped to 48%. Their 2019 manifesto? About 55% completed or on track, with 41 pledges either at risk, delayed, suspended, or just... abandoned.

Labour: Full Fact launched a Government Tracker in November 2024 to monitor Labour's manifesto pledges. Of the 80 pledges tracked so far, only 17 are rated as "achieved." And here's the kicker: 12 pledges were "difficult or impossible to meaningfully rate, due to unclear wording or insufficient information." The National Insurance pledge - remember "we will not increase National Insurance" - is now rated as "disputed" or "not kept" depending on whether you think employer NI counts. Many pledges lack the basic information needed to determine success.

Liberal Democrats: Their historical record in coalition government in Scotland shows broken promises on GM crops (campaigned against, then approved), road-building schemes (opposed, then backed the M74 Extension), and congestion charging (supported, then opposed Edinburgh's scheme). Greenpeace scored their 2024 manifesto 32 out of 40 on environmental commitments - nice promises, but promises are easy.

The Greens: Topped Greenpeace's scoring with 39 out of 40 on their manifesto promises. Perfect score on paper. But with limited track record in national government, there's no evidence of delivery at scale. Ambitious commitments mean nothing without implementation.

And here's what really matters: surveys show that a majority of voters from all parties don't believe manifesto pledges anymore. When the 2024 Conservative manifesto was released, it increased trust for only 17% of the public while decreasing trust for 39%. Think about that. Nearly four in ten people became less trusting after reading the promises.

Full Fact - professional fact-checkers, not political opponents - had to lodge multiple calls, emails, and even Freedom of Information requests just to get the information needed to judge whether the government was delivering on its promises. If professional fact checkers struggle to get straight answers, what hope does the public have?

The problem isn't one party. The problem is the format itself. Manifestos use vague wording that makes accountability impossible. Parties score high on "promises" but low on "delivery." Even when tracked, pledges end up rated as "inconclusive," "unclear," or "disputed."

So why would I write another one?

Instead, what you're reading are aims and objectives. Things we're trying to achieve. A direction of travel, not a guaranteed arrival. Principles that guide decisions rather than promises we'll break. Measurable outcomes that can actually be tested.

Not because we're planning to fail. But because honesty matters more than pretending we can fix everything, and voters have told us - clearly - that they prefer "a limited vision for change, which they are more likely to deliver" over "an ambitious vision for change, which they are less likely to deliver."

Aims and objectives can be measured. Tested. Held accountable. Unlike manifestos, which apparently can't.

Right. With that out of the way, let's talk about Bristol.

The Foundation Question: Bristol Edition

Here it is: Are you better off than you were five years ago?

Don't answer yet. Let me ask it properly.

Five years ago - let's say Christmas 2020 - could you afford your rent more easily than you can now? Was your council tax lower? Could you fill your car with petrol without wincing? Did a weekly shop cost less? Could nurses and teachers afford to live in Bristol without needing food banks?

Because here's what we know for certain: UK inflation between 2020 and 2025 has significantly outpaced wage growth according to ONS data. Private rental costs in Bristol have increased substantially based on Rightmove and Zoopla historical data. Energy costs have increased dramatically per Ofgem price cap data. Food prices have increased per ONS Consumer Price Index. Council tax has increased annually according to Bristol City Council budget documents. And council services have been reduced through documented service cuts.

So the answer to that foundation question - for the majority of Bristol residents earning under £42,000 - is no. You are measurably worse off.

Now here's the follow-up question, the one that matters: Will you be better off in five years if Bristol keeps doing what it's been doing?

Also no. Obviously not. You don't fix a problem by doing more of what caused it.

Which brings us to the third question: What can actually be done about it?

And this is where it gets interesting. Because the honest answer isn't "we'll transform Bristol into an affordable paradise." The honest answer is: "We can stop making it worse, and we can make some specific things better for specific people."

Not inspiring, I know. But it's true. And truth is in short supply.

A Note on Numbers (The Honesty Bit).

Before we get into the actual aims and objectives, I need to tell you something else: I don't have access to detailed Bristol City Council financial data for this document.

Why not? Well, I haven't submitted FOI requests for every specific figure I'm about to discuss. And based on patterns I've documented extensively - Bristol City Council taking 61+ days to respond to FOI requests instead of the legal 20-day limit, providing incomplete responses, claiming information "isn't held in a format that can be retrieved" - getting precise numbers would take months. If it happened at all.

This isn't necessarily malicious. It might reflect genuinely poor data management systems, underfunded departments, or lack of institutional capacity. But the effect is the same: we can't get all the precise numbers.

So here's what I've done: used publicly available council budget summaries where accessible, applied typical local authority spending patterns where Bristol-specific data isn't available, and made reasonable estimates based on national averages for similar-sized cities. Every estimate is clearly labeled as an estimate.

The principles stand regardless of precise numbers. If specific numbers turn out to be wrong, the direction is still right. And if Bristol City Council wants to prove any of these estimates wrong, they're welcome to publish the actual data. Transparency works both ways.

Fair? Right. Let's go.

PART ONE: Stop Making Bristol More Expensive.

The council can't control your rent. Can't control your energy bills. Can't control food prices.

But the council can stop charging you more for everything it does control.

Every policy gets asked one question: Does this make life in Bristol more or less expensive for someone earning under £42,000?

If it makes it more expensive, it doesn't happen.

Aim 1: Freeze Bristol Council Tax for Three Years

The objective here is simple: stop annual council tax increases for three years.

Bristol's Band D council tax is published annually in budget documents. The average household pays somewhere between £1,500 and £2,000 depending on band, and it's been increasing consistently year-on-year. A three-year freeze would save the average household roughly £150 to £200 annually compared to projected increases.

WHAT THIS MEANS:

Saving per household: £150-200 annually

Foregone revenue: ~£10 million annually

Funded by: Consultancy cuts (£5m), procurement efficiency (£3m), reducing failed project costs (£2m)

That's about £10 million in foregone revenue annually. Where does that money come from?

Well, here's where we get into estimates, but typical councils spend between 2% and 5% of their budgets on external consultancy. If Bristol follows that pattern and we're talking about a roughly £400 million total budget based on published figures, that's potentially £8 million to £20 million on consultancy annually. Cutting that spending by half could save around £5 million.

Efficiency improvements in procurement - making sure we're not overpaying for basic supplies and services - could save another £3 million based on typical local authority patterns. Reducing failed project costs through better planning could save £2 million. I mean, the Bottle Yard Studios privatisation attempt alone reportedly cost £430,000 before it collapsed. Multiply that kind of thing across multiple failed projects and you start to see where the money bleeds out.

Do I have exact figures for Bristol's current consultancy spend? No. The council could publish them tomorrow and prove me wrong. But the principle stands: every pound spent on external consultants is a pound not spent on permanent staff who build institutional knowledge, and it's a pound that could stay in residents' pockets instead of going to council tax increases.

Who this helps: Everyone paying council tax. Which is basically everyone. But especially people for whom £150 to £200 actually matters - which, if you're on £30,000 a year watching your rent consume half your income, it absolutely does.

Aim 2: Scrap Bristol's Clean Air Zone

Right, controversial one. But let's be honest about what the CAZ actually does.

The charge is £9 per day for non-compliant vehicles. That's publicly confirmed, that bit's not in dispute. For someone driving five days a week, that's £2,340 annually. And here's the thing: if you could afford a compliant vehicle, you'd have already bought one.

CAZ REALITY CHECK:

Current charge: £9 per day

Annual cost (5 days/week): £2,340

Who pays: People who can't afford £35k-40k for compliant vehicles

Evidence: Birmingham and Bath show minimal air quality improvement vs economic impact

Evidence from other UK cities - Birmingham, Bath - shows minimal air quality improvement compared to the financial impact on people who can't avoid the charge. The CAZ has become, in practice, a tax on tradespeople with older vans who can't afford £35,000 to £40,000 for a new Euro 6 compliant vehicle. It's a tax on small businesses operating on thin margins. It's a tax on care workers driving between client visits in older vehicles they can't replace.

The people still paying the CAZ aren't making a lifestyle choice. They're paying because they have no choice.

So the objective is: abolish it entirely. Redirect whatever enforcement costs we're currently spending on CAZ administration to alternative air quality measures that actually work.

Like what? Electric bus fleet expansion using saved enforcement costs. EV charging infrastructure in all council car parks so electric vehicles are actually usable in Bristol. School streets that reduce traffic near schools and create actual localised air quality improvements where kids are breathing.

Do I have exact CAZ revenue figures? No. Do I have exact enforcement costs? No. Bristol could publish these tomorrow. But does that change the principle? The CAZ charges people who can't afford to avoid it while delivering minimal environmental benefit compared to the economic harm. That stops.

Who this helps: Every tradesperson with an older van. Every small delivery business. Every care worker. Every low earner with an older car they need for work. Basically anyone for whom the CAZ is an unavoidable tax rather than a choice they can make.

Aim 3: Free Bristol City Centre Parking After 6pm

The aim: all council car parks free after 6pm on weekdays, all day Sundays.

Based on typical city centre parking income patterns for similar-sized cities, this probably costs about £1 million to £1.5 million in foregone revenue annually. Could be more, could be less. Bristol could publish exact parking revenue figures and prove me wrong.

The benefit is that it makes the evening economy affordable. Going to the cinema doesn't cost £8 parking on top of the ticket. Meeting friends for dinner doesn't require calculating whether the parking charge makes it too expensive. Small businesses benefit from customers who can actually afford to visit. Cultural events become accessible to people who can't afford £8 parking plus the ticket price.

You know what kills a city centre? When only people who can afford to park there actually use it. You end up with a dead zone after 6pm because normal people can't justify the cost.

Who this helps: Anyone who wants to actually use the city centre without paying for the privilege of visiting their own city.

Aim 4: Cut Bristol Resident Parking Permits by 50%

Cut resident parking permit costs by half. Currently varies by zone - somewhere between £40 and £150 annually based on published zone rates. New cost would be £20 to £75.

Estimated foregone revenue: about £800,000 annually.

Why? Because if you live somewhere that requires a permit, it's not optional. It's not a choice you're making. It's a tax on living in your own area. You need to park your car somewhere, and if that somewhere requires a permit, you're paying it whether you can afford it or not.

And we're trying to make living in Bristol less expensive, not more.

Who this helps: Everyone in resident parking zones. Which is a lot of Bristol.

PART TWO: Housing - Making Bristol Liveable.

Right, housing. The big one. The thing that's breaking people.

Let me be completely honest upfront: we cannot solve Bristol's housing crisis. National housing policy, wage stagnation, market forces - these are bigger than any council. Bristol will not become as affordable as it was 20 years ago. That ship has sailed, been torpedoed, and sunk.

But we can stop making it worse. And we can make it better for some people. Not all people. Some people.

That's the honest version.

Aim 5: Stop Selling Bristol Council Homes Immediately

This one's straightforward. Zero council home sales during the administration.

And I can verify this bit because I've documented it myself: Bristol has been selling council homes while simultaneously promising to build new ones. The numbers don't make sense. You can't build your way out of a hole while still digging.

The effect of stopping sales is that it stops the waiting list going backwards. There are over 17,000 people on Bristol's council housing waiting list. Every home sold is one less home available. Every home sold makes that waiting list effectively longer.

Stopping sales generates approximately £12 million in foregone revenue annually based on typical council house sale values and volumes, but that's £12 million that can be redirected to actually building new homes instead of just replacing the ones we sold.

Who this helps: Everyone on the waiting list. Which currently isn't moving in the right direction. At least it stops moving in the wrong direction.

Aim 6: Build 300 Social Rent Homes in Bristol Over Five Years.

Sixty homes per year for five years equals 300 total. That's the aim.

Construction costs for affordable housing in Bristol are estimated at around £200,000 per unit based on recent development costs reported in planning documents. That's £12 million annually, which - conveniently - is about what we'd save from stopping council house sales.

SOCIAL RENT SAVINGS:

Market rent: £1,300/month

Social rent (50-60% market): £650-780/month

Annual saving per household: £7,800

Total saving for 300 families: £2.34 million annually

These are genuinely affordable homes, not "affordable" in the estate agent sense where it means £350,000 instead of £400,000. Social rent means 50% to 60% of market rate. So if market rent is £1,300 per month, social rent is £650 to £780. That's £7,800 annual saving per household. For 300 families, that's £2.34 million annually staying in their pockets instead of going to landlords.

Priority goes to Bristol residents who've been on the waiting list for five years or more, key workers like NHS staff and teachers, and families with children currently in temporary accommodation.

Will 300 homes solve the crisis? No. Absolutely not. But 300 families will sleep better.

Who this helps: Three hundred specific families who currently can't afford market rent. It's not everyone. It's not most people. It's 300 families. But for those 300 families, it's transformative.

Aim 7: Bring 200 Empty Bristol Homes Back Into Use.

Target: 200 long-term empty properties back into residential use over five years.

Current Council Tax premium for empty properties is 200% after two years empty. Increase that to 300% after one year. Make leaving properties empty more expensive than bringing them into use.

Use Compulsory Purchase Orders for properties that have been empty for three years or more. If you're not using it and Bristol needs housing, we're taking it.

Partner with housing associations for property acquisition and renovation. Estimated cost: £2 million over five years for CPO legal costs and administration.

Result: 200 more homes in circulation without building a single new one. Just putting existing properties back into use.

Who this helps: Renters looking for housing in areas where empty properties artificially reduce supply. More supply means downward pressure on rents. Basic economics.

Aim 8: Aggressive HMO Licensing Enforcement in Bristol.

Houses in Multiple Occupation - you know, the ones where landlords charge £600 per month for a box room in an eight-person house with one bathroom and a kitchen that hasn't been updated since 1987.

Strict enforcement of HMO standards with meaningful penalties. £30,000 fines for unlicensed HMOs. Licensing revoked for poor conditions. No more six people sharing one bathroom in houses where the landlord hasn't done maintenance in a decade.

Either landlords maintain proper standards or they get out of the market. Either way, quality improves.

Who this helps: Every person living in substandard HMO accommodation. And before someone says "but that'll reduce supply" - supply of exploitative housing isn't supply worth having.

PART THREE: Transport - Making Getting Around Bristol Affordable.

Now, buses. Everyone's favourite topic.

Here's the thing: buses in Bristol are currently capped at £2 per journey under the national bus fare cap scheme. That's actually pretty affordable. The problem isn't the £2. The problem is the buses don't turn up. Or they turn up 20 minutes late. Or three don't turn up and then two arrive at once. Or the real-time tracking says "3 minutes" for 15 minutes straight.

Cheap is useless if it's not there.

So let's fix what actually needs fixing.

Aim 9: Bristol Bus Service Performance Standards with Penalties.

Create enforceable service standards for First Bus with financial penalties for failure.

Standards: 95% of scheduled services must actually run. No more than 5% of buses can be more than 10 minutes late. Real-time tracking must be accurate 95% of the time. Monthly public performance reporting so everyone can see whether they're hitting targets.

Penalty structure: 1% reduction in any council subsidy or support for every 1% below target. Money goes into a bus infrastructure improvement fund.

We don't run the buses. Can't control First Bus directly. But we can make non-performance expensive for them.

Who this helps: Everyone who's ever stood at a bus stop watching three buses that should have come not arrive, then given up and paid £30 for a taxi.

Aim 10: 24-Hour Bus Service on Bristol's Key Routes.

Overnight bus service - even if reduced frequency - on five main routes. City center to Southmead Hospital, Cribbs Causeway, Airport, UWE, Temple Meads.

Hourly overnight service between 11pm and 5am. Estimated cost based on industry standards for overnight bus service: £1 million to £1.5 million annually.

NIGHT SERVICE SAVINGS:

Current cost (taxi 4x/week): £480/month, £5,760/year

With night buses: Minimal cost

Annual saving for night workers: £5,760

Who needs this: NHS staff, airport workers, cleaners, shift workers

Who this helps: Night shift NHS workers who currently spend £30 on taxis to get home. Airport workers. Cleaners working early morning shifts. Anyone whose shift ends after the last bus who currently has no affordable way home.

For a night shift worker using this four times a week instead of taxis, that's saving roughly £480 per month. £5,760 per year. That's the difference between managing and drowning for someone on £25,000 a year.

Aim 11: Bristol Cycle Infrastructure That Actually Works.

PART FOUR: Childcare - Making Work Possible in Bristol.

Here's a fun fact: in Bristol, average childcare costs are around £1,200 per month. If you're a nurse earning £28,000 a year, that's basically your entire post-tax monthly income.

So... you can't work. Because working costs more than not working. Brilliant system.

Aim 12: 500 Subsidized Childcare Places in Bristol.

Council-subsidized childcare places at £600 per month instead of £1,200 market rate.

Eligibility: both parents working (or single parent working), household income under £45,000, Bristol residents for two years or more. Priority for shift workers and key workers.

Annual saving per family: £7,200. Total saving for 500 families: £3.6 million back in their pockets instead of going to childcare providers.

Subsidy cost: £400 per child per month from the council. Total cost when at full capacity: £2.4 million annually.

CHILDCARE ECONOMICS:

Bristol average: £1,200/month

Subsidized rate: £600/month

Annual saving: £7,200 per family

500 families: £3.6m stays in households

Who this helps: Five hundred families. Nurses earning £28,000 who can't afford £1,200 per month childcare. Teachers earning £32,000 in the same position. Two retail workers on £22,000 each who currently can't both work because one salary would just cover childcare.

Does 500 places solve the childcare crisis? No. But 500 families can afford to work instead of one parent staying home because childcare costs more than they'd earn.

PART FIVE: Basic Services - Things That Should Just Work in Bristol.

Right, this shouldn't even need to be in here, but apparently it does.

Aim 13: Fix 5,000 Bristol Potholes in Year One.

Actually repair reported potholes within 20 days of being reported.

Target: 5,000 potholes repaired in first year. Cost based on average pothole repair costs: roughly £2 million.

Who this helps: Cyclists not getting thrown into traffic. Drivers not spending £200 on suspension repairs. Anyone with a functioning spine who'd prefer it to stay that way.

Aim 14: Bristol Bins That Get Emptied.

Target: 98% of scheduled collections completed on schedule.

Additional budget for vehicle maintenance and backup: £1.5 million annually.

Because your street shouldn't smell like a landfill. And missed collections shouldn't stretch into weeks. These are baseline expectations, not ambitious targets.

Who this helps: Everyone who's tired of their street smelling like decomposing rubbish because the bin lorry broke down and there's no backup system.

Aim 15: Bristol Public Toilet Provision.

Reopen 10 public toilets that were closed during austerity. Cost for maintenance and cleaning: £300,000 annually.

Who this helps: Parents with young children. Older people. Anyone with a medical condition. Homeless people who currently have nowhere to go. Everyone who's needed a toilet in the city center and found them all locked.

This is a basic dignity issue. Lack of public toilets makes the city unusable for huge numbers of people. It's not glamorous. It's not exciting. But it matters.

PART SIX: Bringing Bristol Council Services In-House.

Here's where we get into the machinery of how the council actually operates. Because a lot of money gets spent on contracts that could be brought in-house for less money and better results.

Aim 16: Bristol Consultancy Work In-House.

Stop spending millions on external consultants. Build permanent teams instead.

Create permanent Strategic Planning team: 6 staff at £45,000 average salary equals £270,000 annually. Create permanent IT Development team: 8 staff at £40,000 equals £320,000. Create permanent Policy Analysis team: 4 staff at £45,000 equals £180,000.

Total new staff cost: £770,000 annually.

If Bristol follows typical council patterns and spends £10 million annually on consultancy, reducing that by bringing work in-house saves £9.23 million annually.

Why this works: Permanent staff build institutional knowledge. They're invested in Bristol, not just a contract. One year of consultancy costs pays for 12+ years of permanent staff. And permanent staff on £45,000 salaries can actually afford to live, unlike consultants charging £1,500 per day.

Aim 17: Bristol Council Staff Living Wage - £12.50 Minimum.

All council staff earn minimum £12.50 per hour instead of current National Living Wage of £11.44.

Affects approximately 2,000 lowest-paid council workers - cleaners, admin assistants, care workers, leisure center staff.

Additional cost: estimated £3 million annually.

But here's the thing: if Bristol City Council employs you, you shouldn't need a food bank. Full stop. The £9.23 million saved from consultancy reduction covers this three times over.

The principle: The council shouldn't employ people in poverty.

Aim 18: In-House Repairs Service for Bristol Council Housing.

Stop contracting out repairs. Employ our own tradespeople.

Employ 50 additional tradespeople - plumbers, electricians, joiners, general maintenance workers. Cost: £1.8 million annually. Run apprenticeship program with 20 apprentices annually: £400,000. Van fleet and equipment: £300,000 annually.

Total cost: £2.5 million.

If current contract spending on external contractors follows typical patterns - roughly £15 million annually - bringing this in-house saves £12.5 million.

IN-HOUSE REPAIRS BENEFITS:

Cost: £2.5m annually (staff, apprentices, equipment)

Current contracts: ~£15m annually

Annual saving: £12.5m

Additional benefits: Faster repairs, apprenticeship pipeline, quality control

Additional benefits: faster repairs without contract negotiations, training pipeline for next generation, staff invested in quality because it's their community, apprenticeships create pathways out of low-wage work.

Aim 19: In-House Care Service for Bristol.

This is the big one.

Bristol currently contracts with private agencies paying care workers £11.44 per hour for 15-minute visits. Travel time between visits? Unpaid. So care workers are essentially working for less than minimum wage when you account for unpaid travel time.

Contract value to private sector: estimated £80 million annually based on typical local authority patterns.

Alternative: council directly employs 400 care workers at £14 per hour including paid travel time. Minimum 30-minute visits instead of 15-minute rush jobs.

Staff cost including travel time, pension, National Insurance: £32 million annually. Management and coordination: £3 million. Total: £35 million.

Annual saving: £45 million.

But here's what really matters beyond the money: care workers can actually live on their wages. Continuity of care because it's the same workers, not agency rotation. Quality improves dramatically. Reduced hospital admissions from better preventative care saves an additional estimated £5 million.

Who this helps: Care workers who can't currently afford to do their jobs. People receiving care who currently get 15 minutes with a different person every day. Everyone.

PART SEVEN: Early Intervention Instead of Crisis Management.

Right now, Bristol - like most councils - spends almost nothing on prevention and millions on crisis response. This is backwards. Every pound spent on early intervention saves multiple pounds on crisis management.

Aim 20: Early Intervention Team for Bristol Children's Services.

30-person team working with families before crisis hits. Mix of social workers, family support workers, youth workers. Cost: £1.5 million annually.

What they do: support families struggling with behaviour, attendance, housing. School-based support preventing exclusions. Youth mentoring programs. Parent support groups.

Return on investment: each child kept out of the care system saves £50,000+ annually. Each school exclusion prevented saves £15,000 annually.

If the team prevents 50 care placements and 150 exclusions annually - which is realistic - that's net saving of £4 million to £5 million annually.

Aim 21: Prevention Team for Bristol Adult Social Care.

20-person team doing home adaptations, assessments, early support. Cost: £1 million annually.

What they prevent: falls requiring hospital admission at £3,000 per admission. Care home admissions at £50,000+ annually per person. Crisis interventions at £15,000+ each.

Target: prevent 100 care home admissions and 500 hospital admissions annually. Saving: £6.5 million.

Aim 22: Bristol Youth Services Reinstatement.

Reopen 10 youth centers closed during austerity. Cost: £2 million annually for staff, facilities, programs.

Target most deprived wards first.

What this prevents: youth crime through diversionary activities. Mental health crises through early support. Social isolation through community spaces.

Hard to quantify the return, but every young person who doesn't end up in the criminal justice system saves £75,000+. Every young person who doesn't develop serious mental health issues saves tens of thousands in NHS costs.

Aim 23: Mental Health Early Access Team for Bristol.

15-person team providing early mental health support. Cost: £750,000 annually.

What they do: counseling before crisis point, support groups, school-based mental health support, suicide prevention work.

Return: each crisis admission prevented saves £4,000. Each suicide prevented is incalculable. Target 500 crisis interventions prevented equals £2 million in NHS costs saved.

PART EIGHT: Supporting People in Bristol's Most Deprived Areas.

Some people need more support than others. That's reality. And the most deprived areas of Bristol have been getting the least support while needing the most. That stops.

Aim 24: Free School Meals - All Bristol Primary Schools.

Universal free school meals for all primary school children.

Number of primary pupils in Bristol: approximately 26,000 based on Department for Education school census data. Currently eligible for free meals: roughly 30%, or 7,800 pupils. Universal provision adds 18,200 pupils.

Cost per meal: approximately £2.50 based on national averages. School days per year: 190.

Additional cost: 18,200 pupils × £2.50 × 190 days = £8.6 million annually.

Why universal instead of means-tested: removes stigma for kids on free meals. Ensures every child eats properly at least once a day. Administrative costs of means-testing nearly equal the savings.

Who this helps: Every family with primary school children. But especially families just over the benefits threshold who don't get free meals but can't comfortably afford them. £475 annual saving per child. £950 for two children.

Aim 25: Bristol Council-Run Food Co-ops.

10 locations in most deprived wards. Bulk buying power reduces costs 20% to 30% below supermarket prices.

Setup cost: £50,000 per co-op equals £500,000 total. Ongoing support for coordination and logistics: £100,000 annually.

Community spaces with advice services co-located - benefits advice, energy switching, housing support, employment support.

Who this helps: People in deprived areas where every pound matters. Twenty to thirty percent saving on food shopping might sound small, but on a £300 monthly food budget, that's £60 to £90 back every month.

Aim 26: Bristol Warm Spaces Plus Advice Services.

20 council buildings open as warm spaces November to March, 9am to 5pm, seven days a week.

Free heating, WiFi, hot drinks. No questions asked. Co-located with advice services: benefits advice, debt management, energy switching, housing support, employment support.

Cost: £400,000 annually for heating, advisors, coordination.

Effect: reduces fuel poverty. Maximizes benefit uptake - millions in unclaimed benefits brought into Bristol. Prevents evictions, bailiff actions, utility disconnections.

Who this helps: Anyone who can't afford to heat their home all day. Which, increasingly, is a lot of people.

Aim 27: Bristol Street Cleaning Expansion in Deprived Wards.

Double the street cleaning teams in the 10 most deprived wards.

Cost: £800,000 annually for 20 additional cleaners and equipment.

Why: deprived areas currently get less frequent cleaning. That stops. Cleaner streets create pride in community. Reduced fly-tipping because clean areas stay cleaner. Employment in target areas through priority hiring from those wards.

PART NINE: Housing First Approach to Bristol Homelessness.

Traditional approach to homelessness: make people sort themselves out, then maybe we'll house them. Success rate: about 20%.

Housing First approach: house people first, then provide support. Success rate: about 80%.

One of these works. One doesn't. Let's use the one that works.

Aim 28: Bristol Housing First Program - 100 People Annually.

Provide housing first, then intensive support.

Cost: £3 million annually for accommodation plus support workers.

Target: 100 rough sleepers into housing annually.

Each person costs £26,000 annually in emergency services, police time, hospital admissions under current approach. Housing First costs £30,000 per person but actually gets them housed with 80% success rate instead of 20%.

Slight increase per person, but outcomes dramatically better. Eighty people successfully housed versus twenty people under traditional approach.

Aim 29: Bristol Emergency Winter Provision.

24/7 shelter November to March. No questions asked. 50-bed capacity.

Services: meals, showers, laundry, housing advice.

Cost: £400,000 per winter.

Who this helps: People who need somewhere warm to sleep when it's freezing. Basic human decency stuff.

The Complete Financial Picture

Right, here's where all the numbers come together. Estimates, remember. Based on typical patterns. Could be wrong. But the direction is right.

Annual Savings from Reforms.

Bringing services in-house instead of contracting out:

Consultancy reduction: £9.23 million

IT in-house: £4 million

Housing repairs in-house: £12.5 million

Adult social care in-house: £45 million

Waste collection in-house: £5 million

Parks maintenance in-house: £3.18 million

Early intervention preventing crisis costs:

Children's services prevention: £4 million to £5 million

Adult social care prevention: £6.5 million

Total estimated savings: £89 million to £90 million annually

Annual Costs of New or Expanded Services.

Staff and service improvements:

Council living wage: £3 million

Council tax freeze: £10 million foregone revenue

CAZ abolition: saves enforcement costs

Free parking evenings/weekends: £1.2 million foregone revenue

Resident permit reduction: £800,000 foregone revenue

Housing building program: £12 million

24-hour buses: £1.2 million

Childcare subsidy: £2.4 million

Potholes: £2 million (Year 1)

Bins improvement: £1.5 million

Public toilets: £300,000

Free school meals: £8.6 million

Youth services: £2 million

Mental health access: £750,000

Street cleaning expansion: £800,000

Warm spaces plus advice: £400,000

Food co-ops: £600,000

Housing First: £3 million

Winter shelter: £400,000

Total new annual spending: £51 million.

Net Position.

THE BOTTOM LINE:

Savings: £89-90 million

New spending: £51 million

Net surplus: £38-39 million

Savings: £89 million to £90 million

New spending: £51 million

Net surplus: £38 million to £39 million