bananaman

You vote for a Britain that grows on its own terms, not one drawn up in a spatial development strategy or handed down from a regional mayor. Housing is where your convictions are firmest — no to joint council plans, no to 20-30 year growth frameworks set above local plans, no to more devolution to regional leaders. It's less anti-growth than anti-remote-control: keep the decisions where the consequences land.

You're broadly in step with the country — siding with the national majority on eight of your ten votes — but you break hard where Britain gets keen on top-down planning. The nation voted 71% yes on expanding the Northumberland line and 47% yes on joint spatial strategies; you were a firm no on both, unpersuaded that bigger frameworks mean better outcomes.

Your one real deviation is telling: you backed the Hillsborough Law, a Public Office Accountability Bill, joining 75% of the country in demanding institutions answer for their failures. It sits oddly next to your no on banning extremist parties — you don't trust the state to police ideology, but you do want it held to account when it fails people. Not inconsistency so much as a clear line: constrain power, don't hand it more.

Ten votes cast, but whole fields untouched — immigration, health, the economy, education, energy. On a profile this decided about planning and devolution, the absence of a view on immigration or the economy is the loudest gap of all.

Early days — seven scored votes is a sketch, not a portrait. Vote on immigration or the economy next and this profile will start telling you things about yourself you haven't said out loud yet; it sharpens every week you're on here.