The answer is yes. For example in August there was an average of 117 visitors per day with a peak of 262 visitors.

About 5% of visitors come via Google (very few from other search engines, AOL and Yahoo are next but less than .25%). Most people are searching for something local with popular choices being the names of the three councillors - Stuart Bruce, Judith Blake or Geoff Driver. Another is Middleton councillor. Some people also search on neighbourhoods such as Manor Farm, Westwood or Belle Isle. Another is ALMO or Leeds South Homes.

Another 10% come via referrals from other websites (all the links are in the favourites bar so I'm not repeating them - too much typing!). Those providing the most traffic are Lib Dem Watch, Guacomoleville, Tom Watson MP, Harry's Place and my own traditional website Middleton Park. This last one is interesting as it is the address that has been most publicised locally on leaflets etc. The other four are obviously 'politicos' and fellow bloggers.

These figures aren't 100% accurate as there are some discrepancies between the figures 20six provides and those from Sitemeter.

The most important thing for me is that I am certain that local people read this blog and find it useful and/or interesting. The number is still small but it is growing and I'm now starting to get local people using the comment facility, although there are still more who email me direct with comments instead of putting them on the website. When I asked a few people why, I was surprised that they gave similar answers. They didn't know how or they didn't know they could. I will return to this as I want to encourage more local comments and debate.

James Crabtree, director of Voxpolitics, writes in today's Guardian Online about plans to blog the Labour Party conference. I'm one of the original group to sign up to the idea and will be blogging for the whole conference as I did last year and here (October 03 entries are at the bottom of the screen).

Tom Watson asks his readers if we should we ban hunting with dogs. Personally I don't like or support hunting, but I'm opposed to an outright ban and don't think we should be distracted yet again by such a pointless issue. I've voted no for a number of reasons:

1) It is the wrong question. I would support a ban on most forms of hunting with dogs, but not fox hunting.

2) The wording of any proposed bill is vital. I support a 'third way' to regulate and control, which is essential but isn't an outright ban.

3) It is a distraction. There are far more important things to concentrate on - education, employment, health, housing, regeneration, Palestine, international development - in fact almost anything!

4) Any vote must be based on intelligent understanding of the facts. There is an ignorant, knee-jerk reaction amongst too many members of the Labour Party who think this is a class war issue. That's b******t. I can understand people who want to ban it on cruelty grounds, although looking at the scientific evidence I believe the jury is hung on this.

But the ones that make me angry are those that raise the hoary old chestnut of toffs on horses with redcoats. That is sheer laziness and simply reveals the depth of their ignorance on hunting. They choose to ignore the farmers and labourers at a fell hunt in Cumbria, or the miners (ex-miners!) at hunts in Durham. Hunting is not, and never has been, just for toffs.

Sat through another full council yesterday but was unable to blog from the chamber as I've recently changed my email hosts and had forgotten to change the settings on my PDA.

Not sure what to make of it all really. The new ruling Tory/Lib Dem/Green coalition is a puzzle. I can understand why they are working together but what I can't fathom is why some of the very principled and able Tory/Lib Dem/Green councillors put up with the antics of their leaders, who don't do justice to their members.

The most important debate of the day for me was the white paper on the proposal to force the council's lowest paid workers onto monthly salaries. Now I don't have a problem with that. It is absolutely the right thing to do, even if not all the workers are keen on the idea.

But what is totally unacceptable is that Cllr Mark Harris is behaving like an ignorant boor and forcing through the change without any understanding of the hardship it will cause to the mainly low-paid women who deliver our frontline services. The original proposal was to provide £50 compensation to help these workers make the transition from weekly to monthly pay. It's not a lot considering the changes they will have to make to their life in order to budget differently. But it is enough to see them though the short period when they'll be without cash. But Malicious Mark didn't understand that it was compensation and thought it was a "gift" which he maliciously withdrew.

As one of the country's largest employers Leeds City Council should be leading by example. Instead most of the private sector put it to shame.

Malicious Mark puts me in mind of The Office's David Brent who quipped "There may be no I in team, but there's a ME if you look hard enough".

There can only be two explanations. Either Harris is too ignorant to understand (which I doubt) or simply that he really doesn't care about our most vulnerable workers and is happy to be a bully.

I was going to comment on Cllr John Proctor's answer to the question about the Middleton Park cottages. However, since becoming an executive board member Cllr Proctor appears to think he's become a paid comedian and although very entertaining in his speeches usually forgets to deliver anything but the jokes.

So sorry folk, the only message the Tory/Lib Dem/Green coalition had for people in Middleton was to make fun of a serious situation.

Good news. In this morning's post I received a letter and glossy brochure from the Tobacco Manufacturers' Association. They are afraid that a ban on public smoking is now imminent. Skimming through their bumpf they do make one good point - that we shouldn't have a local area-by-area policy. However, where we differ is that they favour "self-regulation" ie doing nowt! While I favour a total ban.

I hope that the Labour manifesto for the next election will include a pledge for a total ban on smoking in public places. Personally, I wouldn't restrict it to closed areas because it is just as harmful and unpleasent to be sitting in the sunshine, in a park or beer garden, and having smoke drift across and pollute the fresh air.

Three recent occurrences have made me think about the risks of political blogs.

First of all in last week's full council John Proctor, the Tory who is now in charge of leisure services in Leeds, read out a bit of my blog about the plight of the cottages in Middleton Park. Interestingly he admitted it had been given to him by one of his new Liberal Democrat colleagues, which gives you an idea how much the Liberals have sold out those that voted for them. No worries for me, as all I have done on the blog is support local people and highlight the failings of the new Tory/Lib Dem/Green coalition.

Secondly, blogging MP Tom Watson's promotion to whip has led to speculation that he will have to suspend his blog. Well Tom appears to think it will be OK.

Thirdly, the wonderfully titled Guacamoleville has revealed that Jody Dunn, the imported Lib Dem candidate in the Hartlepool by-election, has rather put her foot in it with one of her most recent blog entries. She insults local people by revealing that she thinks people in Hartlepool are either "drunk, flanked by an angry dog or undressed". Perhaps Jody needs to go back to charm school?

Not surprisingly Jody's opponents are using leaflets to make sure that local people find out what she really thinks about them.