mackemtony52

You want a Britain where power moves out of Westminster and money moves into public projects — you're solidly behind devolving power to mayors and councils, and you'll back extra defence spending in principle. But you're suspicious of the mechanics: cutting planning red tape, streamlining wind-farm approval, fast-tracking energy infrastructure — all the practical levers of the agenda you claim to want — you've knocked back one after another.

Britain voted for speed almost everywhere you didn't: 80% backed cutting planning pre-application time, 69% backed overhauling rules for renewables and transport — you were in the minority both times. You've gone against the national grain on 11 of your 15 votes, which makes you less a swing voter than a standing objection to how "getting things built" gets sold.

Here you're less isolated — your one-voter local sample sided with you against the planning reforms and against inequality-reduction claims, though it broke for devolution and the Farage probe just as the country did. It's a thin sample, but it reads like a place as wary of Whitehall fixes as you are.

You've never voted on housing, immigration, health, justice or education — the day-to-day battlegrounds of British politics — leaving a left-leaning governance instinct with almost no domestic policy to stand on yet.

Eleven scored votes is early days; every one you cast from here sharpens this into a truer picture; go fill in health or housing and see if the planning scepticism holds or breaks.