Congratulations to Alok Sharma. I may disagree fundamentally with many of his party's policies but he fought a good clean campaign and I genuinely wish him all the best as the MP for Reading West... well, at least until the next election!
On the other hand, Labour were quite disreputable. Naz Sarkar when picked up on his lying leaflets actually admitted that he didn't like it either and that it was Pete Ruhemann's doing - something that despite all the evidence pointing to him as the author he has denied in public and in print. Maybe the local Labour party would like to tell us which one of Naz or Pete Ruhemann is not telling the truth. They both cannot be right.
The local election results are interesting in that it seems to back up my thoughts that the Tories highwater mark was in 2007. There was much bluster from the Tories in 2008 about taking over the town but their failure to defend their gains of Minster and Park that they made in 2006, 2007 meant that in actuality they were going backwards even then. There were also a lot of bullish pre-election taunting from Tory commentators (and Tony Page) about taking Tilehurst from the Lib Dems. It's what happens when you start believing your own hype. Local Lib Dems continued their steady progress since 2006 by ending up at the end of the election with more seats than when they started.
The mathematics of the election always meant that Reading would remain in no overall control.
I'm analysing the results so I will post a more detailed update later.
[Update] Just had an enormous giggle at a blog post predicting a Labour meltdown in Reading. Labour lost Katesgrove and Park... but gained Minster from the Tories and effectively gained Battle from Independent, so Labour held steady. Lib Dems and Greens moved forward and only one party went backwards. Any prizes for guessing which?