“Acolaid” Ten Month Update
One or two comments on my previous “Acolaid” article seemed to imply that I had somehow picked an unrepresentative three month period, so I requested the stats for the ten months, back to May last year. May is the earliest fair starting point as that was the last set of local elections when a large number of existing Councillors were elected. Any earlier would not be comparing like with like.
In this set of figures Cllr Benson pips Cllr Page for first place. However, as the more recent figures showed, that level of use of the Acolaid system has not been sustained over the last quarter.
The stats by political Group are:
Labour
Cllr Tony Page (Abbey) – 159
Cllr Mike Orton (Whitley) – 112
Cllr Bet Tickner (Abbey) – 106
Cllr Jo Lovelock (Noroct) – 78
Cllr John Ennis (Southcote) – 57
Cllr Gul Khan (Battle) – 47
Cllr Deborah Edwards (Southcote) – 27
Cllr Pete Ruhemann (Southcote) – 23
Cllr Paul Gittings (Minster) – 18
Cllr Deborah Watson (Minster) – 14
Cllr Mohammed Ayub (Abbey) – 12
Cllr Chris Maskell (Battle) – 11
Cllr Graeme Hoskin (Norcot) – 9
Cllr Mary Singleton-White (Whitley) – 8
Cllr Shirley Merriott (Park) – 6
Cllr Richard Stainthorp (Katesgrove) – 6
Cllr John Hartley (Park) – 5
Cllr Jim Hanley (Whitley) – 5
Cllr Peter Jones (Norcot) – 3
Conservative
Cllr Mark Ralph (Peppard) – 68
Cllr Tom Steele (Kentwood) – 67
Cllr Isobel Ballsdon (Thames) – 62
Cllr Tom Stanway (Caversham) – 58
Cllr Jamie Chowhary (Peppard) – 55
Cllr Andrew Cumpsty (Caversham) – 39
Cllr Jenny Rynn (Kentwood) – 37
Cllr Richard Willis (Peppard) – 28
Cllr Emma Warman (Kentwood) – 27
Cllr Wazir Hussain (Park) – 22
Cllr Dave Luckett (Caversham) – 18
Cllr Jeanette Skeats (Thames) – 15
Cllr David Stevens (Thames) – 14
Cllr Tim Harris (Church) – 12
Cllr Mike Townend (Church) – 12
Cllr Fred Pugh (Mapledurham) – 10
Cllr Azam Janjua (Church) – 7
Cllr Terry Byrne (Minster) – 4
Lib Dem
Cllr Daisy Benson (Redlands) – 174
Cllr Gareth Epps (Katesgrove) – 107
Cllr Glenn Goodall (Redlands) – 104
Cllr Kirsten Bayes (Redlands) – 88
Cllr Warren Swaine (Katesgrove) – 57
Cllr Ricky Duveen (Tilehurst) – 26
Cllr Peter Beard (Tilehurst) – 18
Cllr Chris Harris (Tilehurst) – 8
Independent
Cllr Tony Jones (Battle) – 11
As I said in the last article, each Group has some Councillors who use the Acolaid system a lot and some that use it very little. I would re-iterate that these figures should not be seen as the sole indicator of how much work a Councillor does.
I was reminded this week that the Acolaid system is being replaced by a new system within the Council and I very much hope that it will continue to offer comparable stats and perhaps more information that I can publish. I would like to be able to offer quarterly updates.
12 Comments »
Leave a Reply
About Richard…
Richard is a Conservative Councillor on Reading Borough Council representing Peppard ward since 2007, having been re-elected in May 2011. He previously represented Thames ward from 2001 to 2004. He is currently the Conservative Shadow Cabinet Member for Transport on Reading Borough Council. 
-
Recent Comments
Steve Foley on New YouGov Poll – Labour… youngleftie on New YouGov Poll – Labour… Dan on A Flag for Northern Irela… Dan on Give Northern Ireland an Offic… Dan on Give Northern Ireland an Offic…
Very good! You’ve filled in the missing month and made a commitment – thank you very much.
Still, your explanation that ‘some use it a lot, some don’t’ does demean your efforts – how can members of the public tell what relevance the figures have in adding to our understanding when you publish these stats while publicising their meaninglessness? Are you trying to enlighten or conceal?
Your explanation can clearly infer opposite conclusions depending on whether an individual is at the top or the bottom of the list. Veteran councillor and Mayor Peter Beard, for example, is towards the bottom while one or two of the more anonymous councillors are higher up – which offers better ‘value for money’?
You also don’t account for the differences between wards, as it seems obvious that more reports should, can and yet only occasionally are made for the more deprived areas in town.
Are you being deliberately half-hearted?
Oranjepan – I am being deliberately open and informative by taking the trouble to request, write up and publish the information. Sometimes I think that as far as you are concerned people are damned if they do and damned if they don’t!
I would have thought that you would have welcomed additional information and left it at that. I have spoken to one or two of the “lower scoring” Cllrs who have cited how they, as more experienced Cllrs, know which officers to contact directly and therefore pick up the phone rather than going through Members’ Services and logging the enquiry on Acolaid. I tend to do this with transport issues as I am transport spokesman and have more regular contact with transport officers. However, I know that certain people in other parties will make mischief and claim that I am not taking up casework if I don’t use Acolaid to record my efforts, so I tend to put most non-transport enquiries through Acolaid now.
However, lodging an Acolaid enquiry does not necessarily mean a Cllr has achieved a thing. I could walk my ward for an hour and find 50+ items to lodge but it would not necessarily mean that anything gets done – just that officers would be forced to reply to me.
So the Lib Dem and Green claim that they work “hardest” in certain wards is dubious to say the least. It MAY be true but Acolaid alone does not prove that.
If the figures are irrelevant why publish them at all?
My point is that these stats are not absolutely irrelevant, but neither are they the whole story.
In these circumstances I want to know more in order to be able to make a better judgement for myself about who is and who isn’t doing a good job. I am wholly unsatisfied with answers which take the form “trust me, I’m a politician” as this raises more questions than it answers.
The only circumstance in which you are ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ is when you provide incomplete answers, so by your own admission you have damned yourself.
Oranjepan – you are as slippery as an eel!
You have echoed my point that Acolaid stats are not irrelevant but neither are they the whole story. That is EXACTLY what I have been saying but it is NOT what your Lib Dem colleagues and a Green candidate have been saying in their claims. I am not saying “trust me I am a politician” that would be absurd, but I AM being open as to who I am and where I am coming from, which allows people to form their own judgement about what i write; something that you consistently refuse to do. And yet you try to pose as some sort of independent arbiter of other people’s motives.
You are a Lib Dem activist and therefore not at all impartial. Whether you are satisfied with my answers or my postings is neither here nor there. You clearly have another agenda which is probably straight from the Lib Dem campaign handbook!!
Oranjepan you really come across as a pompous twit, anything that comes from Richard you seem to take an instant dislike to. If he was to tell you the North Pole was cold, you’d find a way of arguing that.
From Richard’s reporting you can tell that some people use this Accolaid system, some more experienced Cllrs go direct to officers, some are probably working in wards that have people who find it easier to fix things for themselves, and some probably are lazier than others. To say the Lib Dems are the hardest working party is laughable at best.
That’s amusing!
I’m interested in raising standards. Pointing out they are high is also to say they aren’t high enough: the moment you start being satisfied is the moment complacency sets in.
I agree that I was agreeing with you that Acolaid figures are not the whole story, Richard, however I was also making an additional point which you avoided and I was asking why you avoided it.
You say your openness “allows people to form their own judgement”, however I’m arguing that you are not being open unless you include a full set of disclaiming caveats alongside any statistics you provide.
I do try to provide such a list and therefore any sympathies I may or may not have are of no consequence, whereas your failure to do so opens up questions of what you’re assuming but not explaining.
Oranjepan you are a complete hypocrite. Your sympathies are just as relevant as Richard’s. He seems to have the patience of a saint to respond to your constant petty attacks without telling you to f*** off…. Why dont you just post on your own blog rather than getting yourself all worked up with Richard’s motives. Could it be because you know that posting on here gets you lots of links to your blog?
Orangepan, by now most people know what you are like: Shame you are using your good brains in such destructive way. It does you no justice. If yu are a Lib Dem, use their website to voice your opinion ( and keep the destructive streak if you wish) but to nit pik everything Richard says, you remind me of my teenage son who is doing that to his younger brother, just to take his teenager frustration out on him..Grow up or shut up Orangepan!
My comments are designed to offer constructive criticism and encouragement to improve. I welcome all responses which are intended in a similar, reciprocal vein.
J, The space afforded by the web is designed for nitpicking, so to complain that it is not being used effectively enough is exactly on the mark. This isn’t a Nuremburg rally.
And Doodlebug, I can measure the volume of links generated from commenting on other people’s blog’s and I should say if that was the purpose it is a complete waste of effort.
Orangepan, there is nothing constructive or positive about your nitpicking. It is just a war of words and gets nowhere but annoy the majority of people on the blog! If you want my personal view: I think you are on the same wavelength as Richard but cannot bear to say so..
J, nit-picking is a vital part of any grooming regime for a great ape. It’s impossible to make headway in the political jungle without finding the occasional bug stuck in your hair!
One day, the great ape will squash that bug..