Our Manyfesto

My mum is 78. Last time she rang her surgery the next appointment was in 19 days. At her age things change fast. Guarantee same-week GP appointments for everyone over 65. Not triage. Not a form. An actual doctor within 7 days.

Eight empty shops on our high street. Eight.

A town that used to have a butchers, a greengrocers, two bookshops and a Woolworths. Now its charity shops, vape shops, and boards in windows.

The problem is simple. An independent bookshop pays the same rates per square metre as Amazon pays for a warehouse in the middle of nowhere and that is a market distortion so blatant that even the most committed free marketeer should be embarrassed by it. Business rates were designed for an era when commerce happened in buildings on streets and the tax base needs to reflect the fact that a huge chunk of it now happens in sheds off motorway junctions. Give all independent high street businesses with fewer than 10 employees a complete business rates holiday for three years. Let them breathe. If the high street dies its not coming back.

Link the state pension to average earnings. Every year. No formulas nobody understands, no political games about whether this years increase is affordable. Pensioners deserve to know what theyre getting.

Nearly 800 libraries have closed in England since 2010.

The ones left are open three days a week with volunteers doing work that trained librarians used to do. We tell kids to read more and close the places where they get free books. For people without broadband at home libraries are essential. For kids without books at home they are a lifeline. For lonely older people they are sometimes the only warm place to go where someone will actually talk to them. Fund them centrally. Open them 7 days a week. Staff them properly. And stop pretending a kindle and an internet connection is the same thing because it isnt and everyone who has ever watched a child discover a book in a library knows it isnt.

My mum is 78. She does not have a smartphone. She does not have an app. Her bank has one branch left in the county. The DWP expect her to use the online portal. The council expect her to email. HMRC expect her to log in with a code sent to a mobile phone she does not own.

She is not stupid. She is not lazy. She just wasnt given a computer with her pension.

Every public service must have a staffed phone line that a human being actually answers. Not a menu. Not a chatbot. Not a "press 1 for this, press 2 for that, press 9 to go back to the start". A real person, available during working hours, who can resolve your issue without asking you to "visit our website".

This isnt nostalgia. Its basic access to services we all pay for.

My neighbour Frank is 81. Last month he had chest pains at 8am. He rang his GP at 8:00 on the dot, 8:01, 8:02, 8:03. By 8:20 he got through and was told there were no appointments left. The receptionist, who was very sorry, suggested he go to A&E if he was worried.

Frank got the bus to A&E. By himself. In march. With chest pains.

He waited nine and a half hours and saw a junior doctor who told him it was probably indigestion and sent him home at 6pm. He took another bus. He got back to his flat at half past seven and had a cup of tea and went to bed.

This is not A&E working as designed. A&E is meant to be for emergencies. Franks problem was that he couldnt get a GP appointment. That is a primary care failure, not an emergency care success.

What we need is this. Anyone over 75 gets a guaranteed same-day phone consultation with a GP, and if clinically necessary, a same-day in-person appointment. Not triaged to A&E. Not "try again tomorrow". A same-day route into primary care. If the local GP surgery cant deliver that, the funding goes to a community hub that can.

It is cheaper than A&E. It is better for patients. It is what the system used to do about fifteen years ago. Sometimes the answer really is to go back to how it was and stop pretending we have improved things by renaming them.

Our local chemists are often the first port of call for people with minor issues, but they're increasingly squeezed. They can't afford to stock everything, and many people end up clogging up GP appointments for things the pharmacist could easily sort. It's a waste of everyone's time and money.

I propose we give local pharmacies a set annual grant, tied to the services they offer. This would include things like blood pressure checks, basic diabetes monitoring, vaccinations, and treating common infections like UTIs or skin complaints. They'd be able to prescribe a limited range of medicines, cutting out the need for a doctor's visit.

This wouldn't cost the earth. The grants would come from savings made by reducing GP workload and A&E attendances. It's about using the resources we already have more effectively, right in the heart of our communities. Think of the convenience for people being able to walk down the road, speak to someone qualified, and get help before a small problem turns into a serious one.

This should be rolled out with clear national standards, proper training, and regular audits so patients know the service is safe and consistent. Pharmacies are already trusted, local, and accessible. We should use that strength instead of leaving them to struggle.

It is cheaper to prevent pressure on the NHS than to keep firefighting it. Fund pharmacies properly, and patients, GPs, and hospitals all benefit.

Seeing the results from Scotland makes you wonder about the effectiveness of our electoral system. It seems parties can win seats with a relatively small percentage of the vote, which doesn't always reflect broad public support. This can lead to governments that aren't truly representative of the entire nation.

My proposal is that any party must achieve a minimum vote share, say 5% nationally, to be eligible for any seats in Parliament. This would ensure that only parties with a significant level of support get representation, making Parliament a more accurate reflection of the electorate.

This wouldn't necessarily require new taxes. It could be funded by reducing the administrative costs associated with processing results for smaller parties that don't meet the threshold. It’s about making the system more efficient and meaningful.

We need a flat rate system for social care contributions, paid for by a small, dedicated levy on all income above a certain threshold, say £20,000 a year. It’s time we stopped forcing families to endure endless assessments and degrading means tests just to get basic help for elderly relatives.

My mother, Evelyn, has worked hard all her life, paid her taxes, and saved responsibly. Yet, the current system feels like a punishment for that very foresight. It’s completely unfair that those who haven’t planned or saved get the same level of support, often at the expense of those who have, after their assets are stripped away. This isn't about handouts; it's about dignity and a clear, predictable system.

This levy would fund a national care service, similar to the NHS, where everyone contributes a bit, and everyone who needs care gets it without the current bureaucratic nightmare.

I was at the doctor's surgery with my mum the other day and saw an elderly woman, clearly in a lot of pain, being told she'd have to wait months for a care assessment. It wasn't right, and it's not the first time I've seen something like that. My mum's arthritis is getting worse and I'm worried about what will happen if I'm not around to care for her.

I've been thinking a lot about the social care system and how it's failing people like my mum and that woman at the doctor's. It seems like the system is stacked against people who have worked hard and saved for their retirement, but still need a bit of help. I've heard of people having to sell their homes to pay for care, which just doesn't seem fair. We need to find a way to make social care more affordable and accessible for everyone.

I think one way to do this would be to introduce a cap on care costs, so people know exactly how much they'll have to pay and can plan for it.

I can see the point about looking after your own patch first. It’s common sense, really, much like making sure the roof isn’t leaking before you start worrying about the neighbour’s garden. Our own communities are where we see the real impact of policy, or lack of it. My mother, Evelyn, who’s had a rough time with her arthritis, often says the same thing about local services. If you can’t get a timely prescription or a decent bus route, then talk of ‘global standing’ feels a bit hollow.

We need to ensure that our own citizens, particularly pensioners and those who’ve worked hard all their lives, have security. This means looking at the state pension, ensuring it’s sustainable and fair, and that the social care system doesn't penalise responsibility. Families like mine, who have tried to plan and save, shouldn't be put in a worse position than those who haven't.

We should adopt a system of proportional representation for all UK general elections, using a party-list system with a reasonable threshold. This would mean that the number of seats a party wins in Parliament would more closely reflect the actual votes they receive across the country. It’s simply not right that millions of votes effectively count for nothing in our current first-past-the-post system, while a party can win a huge majority with less than 40% of the vote.

Think about it. My mother, Evelyn, has seen her local MP change hands a few times, but she always feels her vote is a bit of a lottery. She’d rather know that her support for a particular party translates directly into a fair representation in Westminster. This current system just breeds disillusionment and encourages tactical voting, which isn’t a real choice at all.

Barnaby and I were out on our walk yesterday morning, same as always, and saw young Tom down at the village pub looking absolutely furious. His gas boiler packed in on Monday, and he's been quoted nearly £15,000 for a heat pump and all the insulation they say he needs. He's worked his socks off to get that place going, and now he's facing a bill that'd make your eyes water, just to keep his customers warm. It’s madness.

We’re supposed to be looking after people, aren’t we? And that includes making sure they can afford to heat their homes and run their businesses. This obsession with renewables is all well and good in theory, but it’s not working in practice for ordinary folk. Prices are through the roof, and the reliability is a joke. We need a policy that prioritises sensible, affordable energy, not just whatever’s fashionable with the eco-lobby.

I think the goverment should scrap care home fees for people who have been caring for their relatives at home, it's the least they can do after all we've been through. My mum has severe arthritis and I've been looking after her for years, it's been a struggle but we've managed so far, but I know that won't always be the case.

I've seen what happens when people can't cope anymore and have to put their loved ones in care homes, the fees are extortinate and it's not like they have a choice, it's a terrible situation to be in. I've had to use some of my mum's savings to pay for extra help and it's definately taken a toll on our finances, but at least we're still together.

If the goverment scrapped these fees it would be a huge weight off our shoulders, we could finally get some peace of mind knowing that we're not going to loose everything we've worked for.

It really makes you wonder, doesn't it, why someone who’s worked hard all their life, paid their taxes, and put a bit aside for a rainy day, ends up having their entire life savings stripped away just because they need a bit of help in their later years. My mother, Evelyn, bless her, she always said you should save for a rainy day, but the current system practically punishes you for it. It just doesn't sit right with me.

Right now, the rules mean that if you need social care, your assets, your house, your savings, they’re all fair game until you’re down to practically nothing. It’s no incentive for personal responsibility, is it? Why bother putting money away for retirement or to pass on to your children, when the government’s going to take it all anyway?

What really gets my goat is seeing hardworking people who’ve paid into the system for years struggling to get by, while we seem to have an open door for anyone who fancies a go. It’s not fair on the people who’ve done everything right, saved their pennies, and planned for their futures, only to see it all undermined by a system that seems to reward those who don't play by the rules. My mother, Evelyn, she’s worked her fingers to the bone her whole life, and now with her arthritis, the cost of care is astronomical. It’s families like ours who are being squeezed from all sides.

We need a system that prioritizes skilled workers who are genuinely needed and can contribute immediately. I’m talking about people who can fill specific labour shortages, not just anyone who can fill a spare room.