General Election FAQ

Yes - As a way of improving participation and efficiency it's the obvious thing to do. I believe allowing Hybrid meetings is the first step as there are still things that need a physical signature. It makes it much more possible for Cllrs (who are volunteers) from all walks of life to take part.

It needs a fix. The obvious answer is to require a builder to begin work once they have detailed planning permission within say 12 months, or maybe 24 months in exceptional circumstances. If they can't or won't, then the local authority could step in and take over the development. If they can't, then it goes to a rapid bid process (max 6 months) and in turn if there are no bids then the planning permission is removed.

There is much more than can be done around building which focuses on having suitable developments brought forward when a council sets land aside in their local plan. Given this process is developer-led at the moment then some form of outlined planning permission must be gained within a decade of the land being allocated.

I would not be by myself. As with other MPs there is a constituency office with staff. This would be made up of paid staff from allowances as well as interns looking to understand how legislation is created and how MPs work.

I’ve come to believe that what the country needs more than anything is long-term vision and stability. These are things that come about when the rules stay the same for a long period of time and when parliament is focused on multi-term outcomes, not just the next election. The hundreds of years by which we’ve had first passed the post seem to have proven that the one thing that’s not delivered is stability. Therefore, I have come to believe in PR as the way forward to solving the U K’s fundamental problems.

Yes, I believe there is a whole rack of laws that could do with some reform. It would be about making existing legislation fit for the current century.

Freedom of speech is an obvious example, being responsible for what you say is not enshrined when we look at social media. So I would want to help modernise and reform the existing laws of the land rather than creating even more. One-in-one-out should be the minimum to aim for.

I often use the terms steam or SMATE. Steam stands for “save the environment and money”, whilst SMATE stands for “saving money and the environment”. Either way there is the reality that money is involved.

I also believe that we must focus on influencing outside of the UK to have any real effect. It's why I introduced a label concept that would allow the UK to set a standard by which anything sold here clearly displays its environmental impact. This label was about giving people the choice and encouraging producers to change through buyer’s pressure.

I stand for practicable change "at pace" that tackles what we can do rather than what we can’t. I do believe in areas such as green energy that we can produce solutions that could then be sold worldwide. An Industrial Revolution version 2 if you will.

I see ways we can individually make a difference but through standards that we can influence others.

Many grants that a Parish council might access have two main issues. There is not enough time to create a bid by the Parish to access the grant. The grant must be spent too quickly to allow for the best value to be obtained. As MP I will be happy to try and help address this situation and so ensure the Parish can get access to the grants but also to ensure the nation gets the best value from it. This is about our civil servant's unstanding of the timeframes associated with the conditions they apply to grants applied for by District councils.

This is similar to the question posed by East Isley which was about Hybrid meetings. The removal of laws stopping hybrid meetings would directly aid and support diversity and accessibility at the parish level. I would be very keen to have this change made by parliment.

Probably the number one complaint when there is any kind of significant housing built is infrastructure. It’s never enough and it’s not quick enough. Although it is a tough area to deal with some fundamental changes could be made.

First, moving infrastructure delivery to the early part of the development rather than waiting until the end. How that is funded needs resolving but impacting existing infrastructure for years before the new is delivered is not acceptable.

Second, Ensuring that the NPPF reflects local infrastructure needs so that an existing local plan or neighbourhood plan carries equal weight and so ensures community-led development becomes practical.

Third, Where large developments are proposed (Say > 250 homes). The associated impact on GP surgeries, schools, roads, sewage, drainage etc are not allowed to be compromised. Communities need teath in the process to ensure the community remains intact.

Three things I will fight for.

1. Remove the water company's exceptions to Riprion weights
2. Ensure they invest and move towards new technologies that increase capacity using less energy and remove PFAS from the treated water.
3. Look at a major program to match the current population to our water and sewage networks. We still rely in large areas on Victorian infrastructure designed for a population of less than half what it is today. This will be my 2nd priority after showing ways to fix our energy security with local, clean cheap energy.

This is where local community input via Parish Councils can have a real effect. 

Giving sufficient weight to the local community in planning terms means blanket bans on needed infrastructure could be better weighed against local needs.

Understanding what is needed in our villages to keep them vibrant can then be more easily balanced against the preservation of our AONB.

I have already committed to holding regular surgeries around the constituency. I believe that this is what an MP must do to represent the whole constituency. 

One of the advantages of not being a member of a party is all the time it saves. That will instead be spent talking to local councillors who can keep the local issues at the forefront of the MPs mind.

Based on a belief in democracy i.e. that if the majority wants something then unless there is a legal reason why it can't be done it should.

I absolutely believe that local people know what is best for their village etc. So if the majority of that location are saying we have a problem can you support us? Essentially I would. However, speed limits are a devolved power to district councils so it would be a matter of writing a letter of support to the relevant council.

I should be clear that all these types of decisions should be based on a majority wanting it and the data supporting the identified issue.

The MP can support residents when they have identified issues where in this case West Berkshire Council highways officer say there should be signage. The MP can write letters and look to ensure correct funding is in place for councils to carry out this work.

When it rains it shows us all the issues, we face with existing infrastructure that has become overloaded from when it was designed and built. It also brings into perspective how important infrastructure is when planning of any type is being considered. It is something I would be keen to lobby on in Parliament because this is where it needs to be resolved. The costly but needed investment has to come from a central resource.

We can do something about sewage as I've outlined here. However, with the predicted growth of the UK population, ensuring planning has teeth to ensure infrastructure is delivered with housing is a must.

For me, it’s not just a matter of providing what we think we need for a specific development, but rather how we deliver that plus a sizable extra margin to take account of future needs. If we did more future proofing then the roads won’t need to be dug up so often.

I’ve been a resident of this Berkshire area for more than 25 years. My journey began in Pingewood, Reading, within the RG30 postcode, after returning from my work in Germany. Over time, I’ve moved through Thatcham, and now I reside on the border between Newbury and Thatcham (RG14). As someone deeply connected to this locality, having both lived here and built my businesses, I have a keen understanding of the diverse elements that constitute the currently divided urban and rural constituency.

One of the great things about being an Independent MP is being there for constituents as a first priority. Too often MPs shy away from planning or other issues because of the party they belong to. Whether it is as obvious as donations from builders to campaigns or more subtle donations that influence the priorities of parties. It is really bad when the party is the ruling party.

I want to bring my  5 years of district planning experience to my role as MP with a focus on community-led development.

The second part of being a good constituency MP will be having surgeries in the community, not asking the community to just one location. This an a strong belief that the MP should be talking to the Parish, Town and district councillors should ensure when something local of importance comes up it gets noticed and addressed.

The parish council expressed there concern on this subject. I was left with the impression that MPs should ensure relevant planning can be enforced where the DEPZ is relevant. It seems far to often that planning goes ahead where it should not.

This one is straightforward. The beauty of being independent is that you can choose to support matters of concern to the constituency. If we have a hung parliament (a possible outcome from the next general election) then those who don't have a party motive can work with whoever is working in the best interests of his constituency or the nation.

This is an opportunity to break away from the politics we wee in Westminster and bring some business acumen to politics.

There is a lot more about this on my being independent page https://adrianabbs.uk/being-independent

The parish council expressed their concern on this subject. It has similarities to other areas such as Membury where industrial is built in the countryside and all the associated commercial traffic that is associated with it.  This comes down to having relevant local planning that fits the needs of the landscape. Community-led development with teeth supplied to local planners would go a long way to resolving or mitigating some of the extremes.

The parish council was clear about issues with the relationship with West Berkshire Council (WBC). Somthing  and MP could lobby for if they were focused on local issues.

I would want to use the experience built over the past 4-5 years of being on Western Area Planning for West Berkshire Council, as well as a short period as Chairman to bring the weight of an MP to local planning issues. To often for me they shy away from commenting.

I would be different because of this and the fact that I have seen first-hand what poor planning can do to a community.

Simply yes. This is why I am putting the answers given at various meetings in writing so everything is clear and recorded.

Not every answer will be popular but it will be based on the principles of openness, fairness and transparency.

I was asked the question "If you had not been replaced as the Lib Dem candidate, would you have been standing in front of us tonight as a Lib Dem?" during the meeting. 

My answer is most likely. I became a Lib Dem originally because they were the closest fit to my own beliefs as a centralist. FYI I do not like the extremes of politics and at a local level being a Lib Dem delivers councillors who work hard in and for their communities.

The reason I say "most likely" is that lately, some Lib Dem policy is becoming more extreme. That's the 5 to10% that did not align with my own beliefs. 

Now, as an Independent, party politics has been brought into focus. Something that our new constituency does not need. So I am actually relieved to have returned to being an Independent . This should allow me to put the constituency above anything else. Here you can see the 7 things that being independent can do for the constituency.

Unfortunately, West Ilsley Parish Council responded to my note about this survey with the following, I have followed up with them reconfirming that this is information to be collated for whoever is the next MP me or anyone else.

"Dear Adrian,

West Ilsley Parish Council asks that you not attend the meeting on 20th February because it does not feel it is appropriate for a parish council meeting.

Kind regards,"

This was received from their clerk to the council whose details are available if needed on their website..

I've mentioned this elsewhere in the FAQ and written articles on the issue. It comes down to shifting the variable costs associated with providing care to Westminster so that Local councils are not forced to cut other services when fulfilling this requirement. Central governments are the only ones with enough flexibility in funding to accommodate the unknowns of social care throughout the year. We also need to focus on taking advantage of bulk buying etc, which again central government should be better placed to do. Local teams employed by the local councils can deliver the needed services.

After sending a request to all councillors who represent the Norcot ward I received 1 reply from Cllr Jo Lovelock - See below

"Hello Adrian

I have already given my support to Liv Bailey who is both local and was an excellent candidate in 2017.

Best wishes

Jo Lovelock"

I did follow up with her explaining this was to go to whoever wins the next election, but I think this unfortunately shows party politics in action. Not good for the new constituency.

Yes - As a way of improving participation and efficiency it's the obvious thing to do. I believe allowing Hybrid meetings is the first step as there are still things that need a physical signature. It makes it much more possible for Cllrs (who are volunteers) from all walks of life to take part.

It needs a fix. The obvious answer is to require a builder to begin work once they have detailed planning permission within say 12 months, or maybe 24 months in exceptional circumstances. If they can't or won't, then the local authority could step in and take over the development. If they can't, then it goes to a rapid bid process (max 6 months) and in turn if there are no bids then the planning permission is removed.

There is much more than can be done around building which focuses on having suitable developments brought forward when a council sets land aside in their local plan. Given this process is developer-led at the moment then some form of outlined planning permission must be gained within a decade of the land being allocated.

I would not be by myself. As with other MPs there is a constituency office with staff. This would be made up of paid staff from allowances as well as interns looking to understand how legislation is created and how MPs work.

I’ve come to believe that what the country needs more than anything is long-term vision and stability. These are things that come about when the rules stay the same for a long period of time and when parliament is focused on multi-term outcomes, not just the next election. The hundreds of years by which we’ve had first passed the post seem to have proven that the one thing that’s not delivered is stability. Therefore, I have come to believe in PR as the way forward to solving the U K’s fundamental problems.

Yes, I believe there is a whole rack of laws that could do with some reform. It would be about making existing legislation fit for the current century.

Freedom of speech is an obvious example, being responsible for what you say is not enshrined when we look at social media. So I would want to help modernise and reform the existing laws of the land rather than creating even more. One-in-one-out should be the minimum to aim for.

I often use the terms steam or SMATE. Steam stands for “save the environment and money”, whilst SMATE stands for “saving money and the environment”. Either way there is the reality that money is involved.

I also believe that we must focus on influencing outside of the UK to have any real effect. It's why I introduced a label concept that would allow the UK to set a standard by which anything sold here clearly displays its environmental impact. This label was about giving people the choice and encouraging producers to change through buyer’s pressure.

I stand for practicable change "at pace" that tackles what we can do rather than what we can’t. I do believe in areas such as green energy that we can produce solutions that could then be sold worldwide. An Industrial Revolution version 2 if you will.

I see ways we can individually make a difference but through standards that we can influence others.

Many grants that a Parish council might access have two main issues. There is not enough time to create a bid by the Parish to access the grant. The grant must be spent too quickly to allow for the best value to be obtained. As MP I will be happy to try and help address this situation and so ensure the Parish can get access to the grants but also to ensure the nation gets the best value from it. This is about our civil servant's unstanding of the timeframes associated with the conditions they apply to grants applied for by District councils.

This is similar to the question posed by East Isley which was about Hybrid meetings. The removal of laws stopping hybrid meetings would directly aid and support diversity and accessibility at the parish level. I would be very keen to have this change made by parliment.

Probably the number one complaint when there is any kind of significant housing built is infrastructure. It’s never enough and it’s not quick enough. Although it is a tough area to deal with some fundamental changes could be made.

First, moving infrastructure delivery to the early part of the development rather than waiting until the end. How that is funded needs resolving but impacting existing infrastructure for years before the new is delivered is not acceptable.

Second, Ensuring that the NPPF reflects local infrastructure needs so that an existing local plan or neighbourhood plan carries equal weight and so ensures community-led development becomes practical.

Third, Where large developments are proposed (Say > 250 homes). The associated impact on GP surgeries, schools, roads, sewage, drainage etc are not allowed to be compromised. Communities need teath in the process to ensure the community remains intact.

Three things I will fight for.

1. Remove the water company's exceptions to Riprion weights
2. Ensure they invest and move towards new technologies that increase capacity using less energy and remove PFAS from the treated water.
3. Look at a major program to match the current population to our water and sewage networks. We still rely in large areas on Victorian infrastructure designed for a population of less than half what it is today. This will be my 2nd priority after showing ways to fix our energy security with local, clean cheap energy.

This is where local community input via Parish Councils can have a real effect. 

Giving sufficient weight to the local community in planning terms means blanket bans on needed infrastructure could be better weighed against local needs.

Understanding what is needed in our villages to keep them vibrant can then be more easily balanced against the preservation of our AONB.

I have already committed to holding regular surgeries around the constituency. I believe that this is what an MP must do to represent the whole constituency. 

One of the advantages of not being a member of a party is all the time it saves. That will instead be spent talking to local councillors who can keep the local issues at the forefront of the MPs mind.

Based on a belief in democracy i.e. that if the majority wants something then unless there is a legal reason why it can't be done it should.

I absolutely believe that local people know what is best for their village etc. So if the majority of that location are saying we have a problem can you support us? Essentially I would. However, speed limits are a devolved power to district councils so it would be a matter of writing a letter of support to the relevant council.

I should be clear that all these types of decisions should be based on a majority wanting it and the data supporting the identified issue.

The MP can support residents when they have identified issues where in this case West Berkshire Council highways officer say there should be signage. The MP can write letters and look to ensure correct funding is in place for councils to carry out this work.

When it rains it shows us all the issues, we face with existing infrastructure that has become overloaded from when it was designed and built. It also brings into perspective how important infrastructure is when planning of any type is being considered. It is something I would be keen to lobby on in Parliament because this is where it needs to be resolved. The costly but needed investment has to come from a central resource.

We can do something about sewage as I've outlined here. However, with the predicted growth of the UK population, ensuring planning has teeth to ensure infrastructure is delivered with housing is a must.

For me, it’s not just a matter of providing what we think we need for a specific development, but rather how we deliver that plus a sizable extra margin to take account of future needs. If we did more future proofing then the roads won’t need to be dug up so often.

I’ve been a resident of this Berkshire area for more than 25 years. My journey began in Pingewood, Reading, within the RG30 postcode, after returning from my work in Germany. Over time, I’ve moved through Thatcham, and now I reside on the border between Newbury and Thatcham (RG14). As someone deeply connected to this locality, having both lived here and built my businesses, I have a keen understanding of the diverse elements that constitute the currently divided urban and rural constituency.

One of the great things about being an Independent MP is being there for constituents as a first priority. Too often MPs shy away from planning or other issues because of the party they belong to. Whether it is as obvious as donations from builders to campaigns or more subtle donations that influence the priorities of parties. It is really bad when the party is the ruling party.

I want to bring my  5 years of district planning experience to my role as MP with a focus on community-led development.

The second part of being a good constituency MP will be having surgeries in the community, not asking the community to just one location. This an a strong belief that the MP should be talking to the Parish, Town and district councillors should ensure when something local of importance comes up it gets noticed and addressed.

The parish council expressed there concern on this subject. I was left with the impression that MPs should ensure relevant planning can be enforced where the DEPZ is relevant. It seems far to often that planning goes ahead where it should not.

This one is straightforward. The beauty of being independent is that you can choose to support matters of concern to the constituency. If we have a hung parliament (a possible outcome from the next general election) then those who don't have a party motive can work with whoever is working in the best interests of his constituency or the nation.

This is an opportunity to break away from the politics we wee in Westminster and bring some business acumen to politics.

There is a lot more about this on my being independent page https://adrianabbs.uk/being-independent

The parish council expressed their concern on this subject. It has similarities to other areas such as Membury where industrial is built in the countryside and all the associated commercial traffic that is associated with it.  This comes down to having relevant local planning that fits the needs of the landscape. Community-led development with teeth supplied to local planners would go a long way to resolving or mitigating some of the extremes.

The parish council was clear about issues with the relationship with West Berkshire Council (WBC). Somthing  and MP could lobby for if they were focused on local issues.

I would want to use the experience built over the past 4-5 years of being on Western Area Planning for West Berkshire Council, as well as a short period as Chairman to bring the weight of an MP to local planning issues. To often for me they shy away from commenting.

I would be different because of this and the fact that I have seen first-hand what poor planning can do to a community.

Simply yes. This is why I am putting the answers given at various meetings in writing so everything is clear and recorded.

Not every answer will be popular but it will be based on the principles of openness, fairness and transparency.

I was asked the question "If you had not been replaced as the Lib Dem candidate, would you have been standing in front of us tonight as a Lib Dem?" during the meeting. 

My answer is most likely. I became a Lib Dem originally because they were the closest fit to my own beliefs as a centralist. FYI I do not like the extremes of politics and at a local level being a Lib Dem delivers councillors who work hard in and for their communities.

The reason I say "most likely" is that lately, some Lib Dem policy is becoming more extreme. That's the 5 to10% that did not align with my own beliefs. 

Now, as an Independent, party politics has been brought into focus. Something that our new constituency does not need. So I am actually relieved to have returned to being an Independent . This should allow me to put the constituency above anything else. Here you can see the 7 things that being independent can do for the constituency.

Unfortunately, West Ilsley Parish Council responded to my note about this survey with the following, I have followed up with them reconfirming that this is information to be collated for whoever is the next MP me or anyone else.

"Dear Adrian,

West Ilsley Parish Council asks that you not attend the meeting on 20th February because it does not feel it is appropriate for a parish council meeting.

Kind regards,"

This was received from their clerk to the council whose details are available if needed on their website..

I've mentioned this elsewhere in the FAQ and written articles on the issue. It comes down to shifting the variable costs associated with providing care to Westminster so that Local councils are not forced to cut other services when fulfilling this requirement. Central governments are the only ones with enough flexibility in funding to accommodate the unknowns of social care throughout the year. We also need to focus on taking advantage of bulk buying etc, which again central government should be better placed to do. Local teams employed by the local councils can deliver the needed services.

After sending a request to all councillors who represent the Norcot ward I received 1 reply from Cllr Jo Lovelock - See below

"Hello Adrian

I have already given my support to Liv Bailey who is both local and was an excellent candidate in 2017.

Best wishes

Jo Lovelock"

I did follow up with her explaining this was to go to whoever wins the next election, but I think this unfortunately shows party politics in action. Not good for the new constituency.

Yes - As a way of improving participation and efficiency it's the obvious thing to do. I believe allowing Hybrid meetings is the first step as there are still things that need a physical signature. It makes it much more possible for Cllrs (who are volunteers) from all walks of life to take part.

It needs a fix. The obvious answer is to require a builder to begin work once they have detailed planning permission within say 12 months, or maybe 24 months in exceptional circumstances. If they can't or won't, then the local authority could step in and take over the development. If they can't, then it goes to a rapid bid process (max 6 months) and in turn if there are no bids then the planning permission is removed.

There is much more than can be done around building which focuses on having suitable developments brought forward when a council sets land aside in their local plan. Given this process is developer-led at the moment then some form of outlined planning permission must be gained within a decade of the land being allocated.

I would not be by myself. As with other MPs there is a constituency office with staff. This would be made up of paid staff from allowances as well as interns looking to understand how legislation is created and how MPs work.

I’ve come to believe that what the country needs more than anything is long-term vision and stability. These are things that come about when the rules stay the same for a long period of time and when parliament is focused on multi-term outcomes, not just the next election. The hundreds of years by which we’ve had first passed the post seem to have proven that the one thing that’s not delivered is stability. Therefore, I have come to believe in PR as the way forward to solving the U K’s fundamental problems.

Yes, I believe there is a whole rack of laws that could do with some reform. It would be about making existing legislation fit for the current century.

Freedom of speech is an obvious example, being responsible for what you say is not enshrined when we look at social media. So I would want to help modernise and reform the existing laws of the land rather than creating even more. One-in-one-out should be the minimum to aim for.

I often use the terms steam or SMATE. Steam stands for “save the environment and money”, whilst SMATE stands for “saving money and the environment”. Either way there is the reality that money is involved.

I also believe that we must focus on influencing outside of the UK to have any real effect. It's why I introduced a label concept that would allow the UK to set a standard by which anything sold here clearly displays its environmental impact. This label was about giving people the choice and encouraging producers to change through buyer’s pressure.

I stand for practicable change "at pace" that tackles what we can do rather than what we can’t. I do believe in areas such as green energy that we can produce solutions that could then be sold worldwide. An Industrial Revolution version 2 if you will.

I see ways we can individually make a difference but through standards that we can influence others.

Many grants that a Parish council might access have two main issues. There is not enough time to create a bid by the Parish to access the grant. The grant must be spent too quickly to allow for the best value to be obtained. As MP I will be happy to try and help address this situation and so ensure the Parish can get access to the grants but also to ensure the nation gets the best value from it. This is about our civil servant's unstanding of the timeframes associated with the conditions they apply to grants applied for by District councils.

This is similar to the question posed by East Isley which was about Hybrid meetings. The removal of laws stopping hybrid meetings would directly aid and support diversity and accessibility at the parish level. I would be very keen to have this change made by parliment.

Probably the number one complaint when there is any kind of significant housing built is infrastructure. It’s never enough and it’s not quick enough. Although it is a tough area to deal with some fundamental changes could be made.

First, moving infrastructure delivery to the early part of the development rather than waiting until the end. How that is funded needs resolving but impacting existing infrastructure for years before the new is delivered is not acceptable.

Second, Ensuring that the NPPF reflects local infrastructure needs so that an existing local plan or neighbourhood plan carries equal weight and so ensures community-led development becomes practical.

Third, Where large developments are proposed (Say > 250 homes). The associated impact on GP surgeries, schools, roads, sewage, drainage etc are not allowed to be compromised. Communities need teath in the process to ensure the community remains intact.

Three things I will fight for.

1. Remove the water company's exceptions to Riprion weights
2. Ensure they invest and move towards new technologies that increase capacity using less energy and remove PFAS from the treated water.
3. Look at a major program to match the current population to our water and sewage networks. We still rely in large areas on Victorian infrastructure designed for a population of less than half what it is today. This will be my 2nd priority after showing ways to fix our energy security with local, clean cheap energy.

This is where local community input via Parish Councils can have a real effect. 

Giving sufficient weight to the local community in planning terms means blanket bans on needed infrastructure could be better weighed against local needs.

Understanding what is needed in our villages to keep them vibrant can then be more easily balanced against the preservation of our AONB.

I have already committed to holding regular surgeries around the constituency. I believe that this is what an MP must do to represent the whole constituency. 

One of the advantages of not being a member of a party is all the time it saves. That will instead be spent talking to local councillors who can keep the local issues at the forefront of the MPs mind.

Based on a belief in democracy i.e. that if the majority wants something then unless there is a legal reason why it can't be done it should.

I absolutely believe that local people know what is best for their village etc. So if the majority of that location are saying we have a problem can you support us? Essentially I would. However, speed limits are a devolved power to district councils so it would be a matter of writing a letter of support to the relevant council.

I should be clear that all these types of decisions should be based on a majority wanting it and the data supporting the identified issue.

The MP can support residents when they have identified issues where in this case West Berkshire Council highways officer say there should be signage. The MP can write letters and look to ensure correct funding is in place for councils to carry out this work.

When it rains it shows us all the issues, we face with existing infrastructure that has become overloaded from when it was designed and built. It also brings into perspective how important infrastructure is when planning of any type is being considered. It is something I would be keen to lobby on in Parliament because this is where it needs to be resolved. The costly but needed investment has to come from a central resource.

We can do something about sewage as I've outlined here. However, with the predicted growth of the UK population, ensuring planning has teeth to ensure infrastructure is delivered with housing is a must.

For me, it’s not just a matter of providing what we think we need for a specific development, but rather how we deliver that plus a sizable extra margin to take account of future needs. If we did more future proofing then the roads won’t need to be dug up so often.

I’ve been a resident of this Berkshire area for more than 25 years. My journey began in Pingewood, Reading, within the RG30 postcode, after returning from my work in Germany. Over time, I’ve moved through Thatcham, and now I reside on the border between Newbury and Thatcham (RG14). As someone deeply connected to this locality, having both lived here and built my businesses, I have a keen understanding of the diverse elements that constitute the currently divided urban and rural constituency.

One of the great things about being an Independent MP is being there for constituents as a first priority. Too often MPs shy away from planning or other issues because of the party they belong to. Whether it is as obvious as donations from builders to campaigns or more subtle donations that influence the priorities of parties. It is really bad when the party is the ruling party.

I want to bring my  5 years of district planning experience to my role as MP with a focus on community-led development.

The second part of being a good constituency MP will be having surgeries in the community, not asking the community to just one location. This an a strong belief that the MP should be talking to the Parish, Town and district councillors should ensure when something local of importance comes up it gets noticed and addressed.

The parish council expressed there concern on this subject. I was left with the impression that MPs should ensure relevant planning can be enforced where the DEPZ is relevant. It seems far to often that planning goes ahead where it should not.

This one is straightforward. The beauty of being independent is that you can choose to support matters of concern to the constituency. If we have a hung parliament (a possible outcome from the next general election) then those who don't have a party motive can work with whoever is working in the best interests of his constituency or the nation.

This is an opportunity to break away from the politics we wee in Westminster and bring some business acumen to politics.

There is a lot more about this on my being independent page https://adrianabbs.uk/being-independent

The parish council expressed their concern on this subject. It has similarities to other areas such as Membury where industrial is built in the countryside and all the associated commercial traffic that is associated with it.  This comes down to having relevant local planning that fits the needs of the landscape. Community-led development with teeth supplied to local planners would go a long way to resolving or mitigating some of the extremes.

The parish council was clear about issues with the relationship with West Berkshire Council (WBC). Somthing  and MP could lobby for if they were focused on local issues.

I would want to use the experience built over the past 4-5 years of being on Western Area Planning for West Berkshire Council, as well as a short period as Chairman to bring the weight of an MP to local planning issues. To often for me they shy away from commenting.

I would be different because of this and the fact that I have seen first-hand what poor planning can do to a community.

Simply yes. This is why I am putting the answers given at various meetings in writing so everything is clear and recorded.

Not every answer will be popular but it will be based on the principles of openness, fairness and transparency.

I was asked the question "If you had not been replaced as the Lib Dem candidate, would you have been standing in front of us tonight as a Lib Dem?" during the meeting. 

My answer is most likely. I became a Lib Dem originally because they were the closest fit to my own beliefs as a centralist. FYI I do not like the extremes of politics and at a local level being a Lib Dem delivers councillors who work hard in and for their communities.

The reason I say "most likely" is that lately, some Lib Dem policy is becoming more extreme. That's the 5 to10% that did not align with my own beliefs. 

Now, as an Independent, party politics has been brought into focus. Something that our new constituency does not need. So I am actually relieved to have returned to being an Independent . This should allow me to put the constituency above anything else. Here you can see the 7 things that being independent can do for the constituency.

Unfortunately, West Ilsley Parish Council responded to my note about this survey with the following, I have followed up with them reconfirming that this is information to be collated for whoever is the next MP me or anyone else.

"Dear Adrian,

West Ilsley Parish Council asks that you not attend the meeting on 20th February because it does not feel it is appropriate for a parish council meeting.

Kind regards,"

This was received from their clerk to the council whose details are available if needed on their website..

I've mentioned this elsewhere in the FAQ and written articles on the issue. It comes down to shifting the variable costs associated with providing care to Westminster so that Local councils are not forced to cut other services when fulfilling this requirement. Central governments are the only ones with enough flexibility in funding to accommodate the unknowns of social care throughout the year. We also need to focus on taking advantage of bulk buying etc, which again central government should be better placed to do. Local teams employed by the local councils can deliver the needed services.

After sending a request to all councillors who represent the Norcot ward I received 1 reply from Cllr Jo Lovelock - See below

"Hello Adrian

I have already given my support to Liv Bailey who is both local and was an excellent candidate in 2017.

Best wishes

Jo Lovelock"

I did follow up with her explaining this was to go to whoever wins the next election, but I think this unfortunately shows party politics in action. Not good for the new constituency.

Yes - As a way of improving participation and efficiency it's the obvious thing to do. I believe allowing Hybrid meetings is the first step as there are still things that need a physical signature. It makes it much more possible for Cllrs (who are volunteers) from all walks of life to take part.

It needs a fix. The obvious answer is to require a builder to begin work once they have detailed planning permission within say 12 months, or maybe 24 months in exceptional circumstances. If they can't or won't, then the local authority could step in and take over the development. If they can't, then it goes to a rapid bid process (max 6 months) and in turn if there are no bids then the planning permission is removed.

There is much more than can be done around building which focuses on having suitable developments brought forward when a council sets land aside in their local plan. Given this process is developer-led at the moment then some form of outlined planning permission must be gained within a decade of the land being allocated.

I would not be by myself. As with other MPs there is a constituency office with staff. This would be made up of paid staff from allowances as well as interns looking to understand how legislation is created and how MPs work.

I’ve come to believe that what the country needs more than anything is long-term vision and stability. These are things that come about when the rules stay the same for a long period of time and when parliament is focused on multi-term outcomes, not just the next election. The hundreds of years by which we’ve had first passed the post seem to have proven that the one thing that’s not delivered is stability. Therefore, I have come to believe in PR as the way forward to solving the U K’s fundamental problems.

Yes, I believe there is a whole rack of laws that could do with some reform. It would be about making existing legislation fit for the current century.

Freedom of speech is an obvious example, being responsible for what you say is not enshrined when we look at social media. So I would want to help modernise and reform the existing laws of the land rather than creating even more. One-in-one-out should be the minimum to aim for.

I often use the terms steam or SMATE. Steam stands for “save the environment and money”, whilst SMATE stands for “saving money and the environment”. Either way there is the reality that money is involved.

I also believe that we must focus on influencing outside of the UK to have any real effect. It's why I introduced a label concept that would allow the UK to set a standard by which anything sold here clearly displays its environmental impact. This label was about giving people the choice and encouraging producers to change through buyer’s pressure.

I stand for practicable change "at pace" that tackles what we can do rather than what we can’t. I do believe in areas such as green energy that we can produce solutions that could then be sold worldwide. An Industrial Revolution version 2 if you will.

I see ways we can individually make a difference but through standards that we can influence others.

Many grants that a Parish council might access have two main issues. There is not enough time to create a bid by the Parish to access the grant. The grant must be spent too quickly to allow for the best value to be obtained. As MP I will be happy to try and help address this situation and so ensure the Parish can get access to the grants but also to ensure the nation gets the best value from it. This is about our civil servant's unstanding of the timeframes associated with the conditions they apply to grants applied for by District councils.

This is similar to the question posed by East Isley which was about Hybrid meetings. The removal of laws stopping hybrid meetings would directly aid and support diversity and accessibility at the parish level. I would be very keen to have this change made by parliment.

Probably the number one complaint when there is any kind of significant housing built is infrastructure. It’s never enough and it’s not quick enough. Although it is a tough area to deal with some fundamental changes could be made.

First, moving infrastructure delivery to the early part of the development rather than waiting until the end. How that is funded needs resolving but impacting existing infrastructure for years before the new is delivered is not acceptable.

Second, Ensuring that the NPPF reflects local infrastructure needs so that an existing local plan or neighbourhood plan carries equal weight and so ensures community-led development becomes practical.

Third, Where large developments are proposed (Say > 250 homes). The associated impact on GP surgeries, schools, roads, sewage, drainage etc are not allowed to be compromised. Communities need teath in the process to ensure the community remains intact.

Three things I will fight for.

1. Remove the water company's exceptions to Riprion weights
2. Ensure they invest and move towards new technologies that increase capacity using less energy and remove PFAS from the treated water.
3. Look at a major program to match the current population to our water and sewage networks. We still rely in large areas on Victorian infrastructure designed for a population of less than half what it is today. This will be my 2nd priority after showing ways to fix our energy security with local, clean cheap energy.

This is where local community input via Parish Councils can have a real effect. 

Giving sufficient weight to the local community in planning terms means blanket bans on needed infrastructure could be better weighed against local needs.

Understanding what is needed in our villages to keep them vibrant can then be more easily balanced against the preservation of our AONB.

I have already committed to holding regular surgeries around the constituency. I believe that this is what an MP must do to represent the whole constituency. 

One of the advantages of not being a member of a party is all the time it saves. That will instead be spent talking to local councillors who can keep the local issues at the forefront of the MPs mind.

Based on a belief in democracy i.e. that if the majority wants something then unless there is a legal reason why it can't be done it should.

I absolutely believe that local people know what is best for their village etc. So if the majority of that location are saying we have a problem can you support us? Essentially I would. However, speed limits are a devolved power to district councils so it would be a matter of writing a letter of support to the relevant council.

I should be clear that all these types of decisions should be based on a majority wanting it and the data supporting the identified issue.

The MP can support residents when they have identified issues where in this case West Berkshire Council highways officer say there should be signage. The MP can write letters and look to ensure correct funding is in place for councils to carry out this work.

When it rains it shows us all the issues, we face with existing infrastructure that has become overloaded from when it was designed and built. It also brings into perspective how important infrastructure is when planning of any type is being considered. It is something I would be keen to lobby on in Parliament because this is where it needs to be resolved. The costly but needed investment has to come from a central resource.

We can do something about sewage as I've outlined here. However, with the predicted growth of the UK population, ensuring planning has teeth to ensure infrastructure is delivered with housing is a must.

For me, it’s not just a matter of providing what we think we need for a specific development, but rather how we deliver that plus a sizable extra margin to take account of future needs. If we did more future proofing then the roads won’t need to be dug up so often.

I’ve been a resident of this Berkshire area for more than 25 years. My journey began in Pingewood, Reading, within the RG30 postcode, after returning from my work in Germany. Over time, I’ve moved through Thatcham, and now I reside on the border between Newbury and Thatcham (RG14). As someone deeply connected to this locality, having both lived here and built my businesses, I have a keen understanding of the diverse elements that constitute the currently divided urban and rural constituency.

One of the great things about being an Independent MP is being there for constituents as a first priority. Too often MPs shy away from planning or other issues because of the party they belong to. Whether it is as obvious as donations from builders to campaigns or more subtle donations that influence the priorities of parties. It is really bad when the party is the ruling party.

I want to bring my  5 years of district planning experience to my role as MP with a focus on community-led development.

The second part of being a good constituency MP will be having surgeries in the community, not asking the community to just one location. This an a strong belief that the MP should be talking to the Parish, Town and district councillors should ensure when something local of importance comes up it gets noticed and addressed.

The parish council expressed there concern on this subject. I was left with the impression that MPs should ensure relevant planning can be enforced where the DEPZ is relevant. It seems far to often that planning goes ahead where it should not.

This one is straightforward. The beauty of being independent is that you can choose to support matters of concern to the constituency. If we have a hung parliament (a possible outcome from the next general election) then those who don't have a party motive can work with whoever is working in the best interests of his constituency or the nation.

This is an opportunity to break away from the politics we wee in Westminster and bring some business acumen to politics.

There is a lot more about this on my being independent page https://adrianabbs.uk/being-independent

The parish council expressed their concern on this subject. It has similarities to other areas such as Membury where industrial is built in the countryside and all the associated commercial traffic that is associated with it.  This comes down to having relevant local planning that fits the needs of the landscape. Community-led development with teeth supplied to local planners would go a long way to resolving or mitigating some of the extremes.

The parish council was clear about issues with the relationship with West Berkshire Council (WBC). Somthing  and MP could lobby for if they were focused on local issues.

I would want to use the experience built over the past 4-5 years of being on Western Area Planning for West Berkshire Council, as well as a short period as Chairman to bring the weight of an MP to local planning issues. To often for me they shy away from commenting.

I would be different because of this and the fact that I have seen first-hand what poor planning can do to a community.

Simply yes. This is why I am putting the answers given at various meetings in writing so everything is clear and recorded.

Not every answer will be popular but it will be based on the principles of openness, fairness and transparency.

I was asked the question "If you had not been replaced as the Lib Dem candidate, would you have been standing in front of us tonight as a Lib Dem?" during the meeting. 

My answer is most likely. I became a Lib Dem originally because they were the closest fit to my own beliefs as a centralist. FYI I do not like the extremes of politics and at a local level being a Lib Dem delivers councillors who work hard in and for their communities.

The reason I say "most likely" is that lately, some Lib Dem policy is becoming more extreme. That's the 5 to10% that did not align with my own beliefs. 

Now, as an Independent, party politics has been brought into focus. Something that our new constituency does not need. So I am actually relieved to have returned to being an Independent . This should allow me to put the constituency above anything else. Here you can see the 7 things that being independent can do for the constituency.

Unfortunately, West Ilsley Parish Council responded to my note about this survey with the following, I have followed up with them reconfirming that this is information to be collated for whoever is the next MP me or anyone else.

"Dear Adrian,

West Ilsley Parish Council asks that you not attend the meeting on 20th February because it does not feel it is appropriate for a parish council meeting.

Kind regards,"

This was received from their clerk to the council whose details are available if needed on their website..

I've mentioned this elsewhere in the FAQ and written articles on the issue. It comes down to shifting the variable costs associated with providing care to Westminster so that Local councils are not forced to cut other services when fulfilling this requirement. Central governments are the only ones with enough flexibility in funding to accommodate the unknowns of social care throughout the year. We also need to focus on taking advantage of bulk buying etc, which again central government should be better placed to do. Local teams employed by the local councils can deliver the needed services.

After sending a request to all councillors who represent the Norcot ward I received 1 reply from Cllr Jo Lovelock - See below

"Hello Adrian

I have already given my support to Liv Bailey who is both local and was an excellent candidate in 2017.

Best wishes

Jo Lovelock"

I did follow up with her explaining this was to go to whoever wins the next election, but I think this unfortunately shows party politics in action. Not good for the new constituency.