Mendip Ward BaNES – in need of Reform…
Conversations in Mendip Ward and surrounding areas…
-
RUHB has been under extreme pressure again this week. Please consider other local services where possible and support our NHS to be there when we need it.
-
Persimmon Homes Severn Valley are proposing to build 200 homes on three fields on the western edge of Keynsham, close to Charlton Road.
Link:
200 homes being proposed on the western edge of Keynsham
-
BaNES admit “doubling investment” into footpaths to encourage “active travel”. Let’s hope all other demands are met within existing budgets and council tax will not need to rise to meet social care or education needs!
Whilst this footpath in Chew Magna looks beautiful, BaNES acknowledge that damage to the footpath has been caused by vehicle overrun but then removed the bollards? Not sure they’ve thought that through…
Link:
-
Anyone who followed my recent campaign to become the Reform County Councillor for Mendip Ward, Banes will know, thanks to the left’s media campaign against me, that I had an unexpected and difficult departure from Policing after 30yrs. A role I had dedicated my life to. The reason behind this that is often missed, is that whilst defending the civil rights of another, I became the victim of a person who was frustrated and made a fist at me. The Police felt that my reporting this was dishonest despite the fist being clearly visible on the cctv footage. The inference being that as a constable I wasn’t allowed to be, or at least shouldn’t have claimed to be a victim and that I was therefore dishonest. Again that fist was clearly visible in the cctv exactly as I recalled and recounted. I was one of the first to discover that a defence is no longer allowed and can simply be dismissed as dishonest.
This is relevant because I’m no longer alone. Even the mainstream media are beginning to point this out.
The Police seem to be no longer interested in Policing impartially. There are now an endless stream of examples of the Police ignoring traditional crime (theft from motor vehicle or shoplifting), whilst involving themselves in non-crime (cat calling and facebook posts). This is without even considering how one religious community can go unchallenged whilst another can’t. Victims voices are being ignored every day by the system. If you’re to the right of politics it certainly feels like you’re being ignored / targeted even more than most.
If there’s good reason for these differential treatments the Police are manifestly failing to get their explanation across to the public in a language that they understand.
The mixed messaging needs to stop and Policing needs to return to Peel’s principles asap. If it doesn’t happen soon we’ll be living in a very different world…
Link:
-
A rare moment indeed. I agree with my Lib Dem MP Wera Hobhouse 100%. Facial Recognition and other new surveillance technologies need reigning in and controlling asap.
Freedom of movement in every way must be maintained. We need less blanket surveillance not more. But don’t think this is only facial recognition. There is also gait recognition and cameras that look inside your private spaces without your consent, and those that monitor your vehicle’s every move, and those that already monitor your bank accounts, and digital currency will bring all of these technologies together to control us all in ways we can’t yet envisage. We should all be very worried regardless of political perspective.Perhaps this is finally an issue that can unite those from all perspectives and bring our nation together…?
Links:
-
I have no doubt that crime will continue to rise. Difficult economic times are ahead. Our communities are beginning to feel the squeeze and use of the black market and the value of stolen goods will increase. We need a different approach soon, and an urgent return to Peel’s principles.
But it’s also worth noting that Temple Cloud remains a very safe and crime free area. For the time being at least…
Links:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1733378600055415/permalink/24393066213659998/?
-
BaNES a have a target of 1400+ houses per year for the next 20 years, whilst claiming Bath itself can’t take anymore development without losing UNESCO status. So more houses are coming to our rural areas! Farrington/Paulton have the SVEZ designated and all the road speed limits downgraded already so building along those corridors is extremely likely.
To be blunt the area voted for this and will get more of it if Lib Dems get another chance in two years time…Planning Application Reference: 25/03044/OUT
Links:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CVH8soWPZ/?mibextid=WC7FNe
-
The defence to challenge and confrontation over wastage has become to deflect and label things “toxic” or “bullying”. This has got to change!
Link:
-
Bath, Arun, East Hampshire and The Cotswolds are pushing back against house building targets since Labour came to power in 2024.
Bath’s letter to Rayner echoed that of the Cotswolds, reading: “The city of Bath is a twice-inscribed UNESCO World Heritage site which covers both the city and its green setting. Development beyond our current plans for an additional 5,000-6,000 homes up to 2029-30 puts this status at risk.”
However, BaNES Council do not appear to be fighting to protect its wider area outside the City of Bath who will doubtless carry the weight of house building requirements.
Links:
-
Claims of criminality have been levelled at Bath & North East Somerset Council over work carried out at 9 and 10 Wellington Buildings, Upper Weston. Both council-owned and Grade II listed.
Link:
-
This is how BaNES are spending our money to control our movements.
Link:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/reformuk.bath/permalink/1316679569913172/?
-
“development for private profit must be matched by tangible investment in our communities”
This can only increase upward pressure on house prices and rents…
Links:
-
The parking restrictions in South Road, Midsomer Norton have been in effect for a while now.
Between 0800-1800hrs BaNES allow 2hrs free parking. A car park that we pay council tax to operate and maintain but I digress.
Despite being free for 2 hours a “free” ticket must be obtained and displayed. To not do so could result in a £70 fine.
I am against the gathering of our data and restrictions on our personal freedoms in this way.
-
-
In the name of net zero and active travel speed limits across the ward, and on the arterial routes between the ward and Bristol and Bath, have been significantly reduced in another BaNES/Lib Dem attack on personal travel and freedom of movement.
Link:
https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/consultation-a368-speed-limit-changes?utm_source=chatgpt.com
-
Paulton Road Closures 28.07.25 for 5 days 0700-1900
-
BaNES seek increased financial contributions from developers, which could provide home to school transport, GP surgeries, Early Years provision and Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provision.
BaNES a state that “development for private profit must be matched by tangible investment in our communities”.
I fail to see how this will not push up development costs and therefore house prices and rents…
Links:
-
More development coming our way…
Link:
https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/high-littleton-and-hallatrow-neighbourhood-plan?
-
These are my personal views and recollections so please feel free to set me straight, comment etc.
I attended the Liveable Neighbourhood Plan meeting yesterday evening, as a member of the public, and challenged BaNES staff over their Liveable Neighbourhoods plan. The meeting was well attended and the local community well represented. It was difficult to get a straight answer from the BaNES representatives but I think we got there in the end. To their credit, the team did face significant challenge from myself and others and did a stirling job at handling it. However, Cllr Simon McCombe had nothing to say about the Liveable Neighbourhood plan at all.
I must confess that my personal view remains that we should not be tinkering with footpaths and speed limit changes whilst we have significant unmet social care and education needs, and a road surface that is poor at best. We must spend tax payer money (our money) more wisely and cut wastage. I have no doubt that having spent this money BaNES will be coming for Council tax increases.
The BaNES team started off by explaining that they had “WECA money” and we’d “like to spend it”; and clarified that if it is not spent by 2027 “the funding goes”. They added that they “really do value the comments” and wanted to “spend the money in the right way”. Not spending the money at all did not appear to be an option.
The BaNES team acknowledged that residents were, “intimidated and scared to walk up the A37”. But when asked about addressing the real problem in the village, being the bottleneck, or lack of available width on the main A37 carriageway close to Cameley Road for LGVs and pedestrians, they eventually conceded that it would “require a significant pot of money to address the core issues” and that it was “not achievable within the budget”. Therefore it is clear that BaNES have no intention of addressing the actual problem with the A37 and we proceeded on that basis.
BaNES explained that this was the final point of the consultation. That once the online consultation closes, they will publish a report including some of the responses from residents, but not all, and that there would then be consultations with Council Cabinet and WECA before the final decision was made as to what works would be completed.
It was explained that the Liveable Neighbourhood plan had arisen from an application submitted by Cllr David Wood, as one of 48 applications across the area. The BaNES team were not able to clarify what was actually requested by Cllr David Wood or indeed how the current plan reflected what was requested.
It was also explained that the Liveable Neighbourhood plan had taken on board the comments of earlier consultation work including comments from school children (approximately) 3 years ago. However, again they were not able to clarify what these comments were and how they were reflected in the current plan.
BaNES team did confirm that the comments were “FOI-able anyway” so maybe that’s something to look at as this progresses.
We discussed the addition of a crossing closer to the Drs Surgery. Eventually the BaNES team conceded that this had been looked at before and they understood that it was not an option saying that BaNES “did consider it, but there was not enough carriageway space and the bus stop would have to be relocated”.
When pressed the BaNES team confirmed that any ideas not included in the current plan could be considered, but “not on this tranche of funding”.
BaNES made clear that this was the final plan and that the only items for consultation were the 5 listed within the plan, and that this meeting was “the final point of the consultation”.
There was no discussion around the extending of the 30mph limit along Temple Inn lane to Marsh Lane.
There was some discussion around the placement of the zebra crossing within Temple Inn lane close to the junction with the A37. residents felt that this was too close to the junction and would introduce danger to pedestrians and vehicles. Others felt that in order to use the crossing pedestrians would still have to use the A37 footpaths that were not being addressed by this plan.
There was some discussion around the street lighting on the footpath between St Barnabus and Brandown Close. This was generally felt to be a good idea. It was felt that ongoing costs would be negligible from LED lighting and that deflectors would be used to avoid light shining directly into homes.
It was not discussed, but it also occurs to me that the crossing’s position would allow cyclists, most likely children, to cycle along the well lit path and not stop for the crossing, placing themselves at danger, but having crossed the carriageway could then continue at speed onto the footpath at the rear of the pub, creating more risk. This additional factor may need to be considered.
There was some discussion that the Brandown Developers had agreed to Install lighting here as part of the original planning permission and that they should be made to install the lighting rather than this occurring from taxpayer funding. It was suggested that future planning be withheld until they had completed their obligations in Brandown.
There was a lot of discussion about the footpath between the Village Hall and Gillets Hill Lane. It was felt that this didn’t address the problem of crossing the A37. Residents felt that the initial part of the footpath in Gillets Hill Lane would not be suitable for the elderly or infirm or indeed cyclists as it was very steep, and that “climbing Gillets Hill Lane was impractical”. BaNES were not able to confirm how that section would be constructed. It was also not clear who would be responsible for maintaining the greenery and overgrowth to keep the path clear. BaNES were only able to offer that the “Highway Authority was expected to maintain the structure of a right of way”. There was also discussion in relation to the ownership of the land and that this section of the footpath would pass through private land and that to deviate from the current right of way would require the land owners consent. It was not clear if consent had been obtained.
There was a great deal of discussion around the proposed extension of the 30mph limit to Temple Bridge. There were mixture of views with some feeling that extending the limit would reduce the ‘feel’ of entering a village and encourage speeding. However others felt that entering the village slower was a benefit. One resident explained that there had been a speed survey some years ago and that average speeds were lower than expected and so it was in part a ‘perception of speed’ issue. BaNES did not answer questions relating to the anticipated effect of the changes on the existing plans for the Major Road Network and Strategic Road Network, but did recognise the roads status as part of the MRN and the development occurring south of the village.
The Temple Bridge bus stop was not within the scope of this meeting.
The discussion moved on before I could raise concerns that reducing speed limits often opens up adjoining land for housing development as safety concerns are reduced and this is also compatible with the aims of the Major Road Network. It was not discussed at this meeting but it is public knowledge that BaNES is required to build 29,320 (1466 p.a.) new dwellings over the next 20 years and so Temple Cloud will almost definitely be seeing further housing development. I would suggest land between Temple Cloud and Temple Bridge will become ideal.
BaNES concluded the meeting by trying to explain that they understood residents perspectives as when there was a ‘consultation, and the residents said no, we go ahead anyway”. BaNES explained that this was because residents comments from the consultation were only one part of the process and that the decision maker would need to also consider “Manifesto commitments” and BaNES “Policy Framework”. I was left feeling that manifesto commitments and policy framework would be valued more than residents wishes.
BaNES confirmed the ultimate decision maker in this matter to be Cllr Joel Hirst and that we could direct any comments to him also.
Cllr Joel Hirst
Cabinet Minister for Sustainable Transport Strategy
Councillor for Odd Down Ward
Email: Joel_Hirst@bathnes.gov.uk
Everyone thanked the BaNES Team for coming and for answering questions in the face of stiff challenge, and the meeting concluded.
Again, these are my personal views and comments based on my recollection of the meeting. If anyone who attended wished to comment or have something corrected, please get in touch!
Whilst many will agree with my views, undoubted many won’t. We need everyone views. Apathy isn’t and shouldn’t be a mandate, but BaNES consider anyone who doesn’t comment to be a supporter. Please log on and have your say about this issue and the ones coming up, even if it’s just to say you don’t know enough to take a view. Your perspective is really important!
Comments for BaNES:
- (Plan pt 1) Extending the speed limit along Temple Inn Lane to Marsh Lane will be welcomed by some residents. However, I feel this will have little effect unless it is accompanied by enforcement or traffic calming such as speed bumps. It will also make the land either side of the road more attractive for development due to the reduced speed limit. This is likely to require a TRO costing £000’s of tax payers money that could be better spent on road resurfacing, social care, or education needs.
- (Plan pt 2) A new zebra crossing on Temple Inn Lane adjacent to the Brandown footpath will increase the risk to cyclists, pedestrians and vehicle drivers. It will create a scenario whereby cyclists could emerge at speed, pass over the crossing without stopping and ride over the pavement behind the pub or around the corner at the front of the pub. It will in effect encourage dangerous cycling, most likely to affect our teenage residents.
- (Plan pt 2) The zebra crossing on Temple Inn Lane will not address the problem of poor footpath provision on the A37. For pedestrians and cyclists to use the crossing they will still have needed to traverse the A37 in some way.
- (Plan pt 2) The zebra crossing could cost between £18000-£28000 that could be spent on road resurfacing, social care, or education needs.
- (Plan pt 3) Lighting on the Brandown footpath is largely a good idea, with care taken not to shine light into residents homes. However, this will increase the potential speed of cyclists in poor lighting and place them at risk as they leave the path and approach the crossing (see above).
- (Plan pt 3) The Brandown Developers should be held to their previous agreement to fund this project, and the tax payer savings used for road resurfacing, social care, or education needs.
- (Plan pt 4) The footpath from Gillets Hill Lane is a great idea in principle that will struggle to meet its objectives if it seeks to increase active travel. It will provide some with a more direct route to reach the Drs, school and church. However, the design and construction will be crucial in its success. The steep initial section needs to be navigable in all weathers, by the elderly and cyclists with bicycles. The plan does not make clear how this will be achieved.
- (Plan pt 4) Ongoing inflation linked funding will be required to maintain the greenery around the initial footpath section. At peak times this may require fortnightly attention. The greenery will need to be kept at bay so that a clear view can be maintained in order to prevent crime as well as prevent trips and falls.
- (Plan pt 4) The initial footpath section may require lighting to encourage use and maintain visibility in all weathers. This will be more of a concern, than the Brandown path section which is being lit.
- (Plan pt 4) The route of the upper section of path is not defined within the plan. If it is to deviate from the current ROW, and thus become longer, what will encourage the new route to be used? As an all weather surface, how will that be maintained through agricultural land? My fear is that the old ROW route will continue to be used in most weathers, as it is the most direct, rendering the new path a waste of taxpayer funds.
- (Plan pt 5) Extending the 30mph along the A37 to temple Bridge. Speed limit signs at village entries present a psychological barrier. If accompanied by the appearance of dwellings, drivers know why they are being instructed to slow, and for the most part comply. Where signage is too remote from the dwellings it builds frustration and non-compliance. Moving the signage further out will I fear have this effect in this location. There could actually be a benefit to moving it closer to the village and into its original position.
- (Plan pt 5) The average speed through TC is not as high as perceived. Unfortunately, reducing limits does not affect those willing to excessively speed and there will always be the outliers.
- (Plan pt 5) Reducing the speed limit here will make the land either side of the road more attractive for development due to the reduced speed limit. This is likely to require a TRO costing £000’s of tax payers money that could be better spent on road resurfacing, social care, or education needs.
- (Plan pt 5) The effect of moving this speed limit on the aims of the MRN and SRN appear to have not been researched.
- The overall effect of this Liveable Neighbourhood plan appears to be to open up land for development along Temple Inn Lane and between Temple Cloud and Temple Bridge, in an attempt to help BaNES meet new house building targets of 1350 houses per year for 20 years (27000 dwellings). A target which is likely to rise not fall. The footpath changes relating to Gillets Hill lane would appear to make the agricultural land along its length more attractive to developers.
Link:
-
Phil Harding, Head of Saltford Environmental Group has suggested that Bath relinquish its World Heritage status to ease the housing burden on nearby Saltford. He feels that Bath’s World Heritage status has made it harder to build new housing in the city at the expense of its neighbours.
No. Just no. Bath has nonissue building flats for students. So it should have no problem building flats for those already on the housing list…
Links:
-
Soaring costs and lack of democracy again demonstrated by the Lib Dem led BaNES Council.
Links:
-
Our local MP Wera Hobhouse feels that tourists place “pressure” on the City of Bath, rather than acknowledging that Bath exists as it does, and is wealthy solely because of tourism.
BaNES have voted for a Tourist Tax without saying how they will identify a tourist vs a local resident, how much it will be or how it will be collected. i fail to see how you can vote for something without understanding what it is that you are voting for…
Links:
-
Lets be clear here. The Lib Dems are requesting council support for a scheme that they are not disclosing/explaining…
-
BaNES still ignore the residents actual complaints, and use them to justify these measures. The road needs widening at the pinch point or LGVs and Buses prohibiting from the village. Instead all measures are aimed at either side of the pinch point and commercial development continues south of the village which will mean more large vehicles passing thru.
Local Lib Dem Councillor and a BaNES representative will be attending the Parish Council meeting on the 22nd July which will undoubtedly be very lively!
Links:
-
At 16 I couldn’t ride a moped in a straight line without falling off. I’d be happier if they returned voting age to 21.
Links:
-
It appears that the pendulum is reaching maximum displacement and common sense prevails. All of our public services should take note and remain impartial. Where attendance is necessary, smart dress and decorum are crucial in being seen as impartial. Just as it once was…
Links:
https://www.gbnews.com/news/linzi-smith-northumbria-police-gender-critical-pride
https://freespeechunion.org/a-major-legal-victory-for-free-speech-and-impartial-policing/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/16/police-wrong-join-pride-march-judge-rules/
-
Be in no doubt, BaNES want a Tourist and Airbnb tax (short term lets). Meanwhile they’ll be making it more difficult and more expensive for tourists to enter the City and park…
-
Cycle lanes More cycle lane madness. BaNES wasting money on cycle lanes that don’t go anywhere again!
Link:
-
Don’t worry. We have a few years for the Lib Dems to carry on with their vote losing policies and turn our little bit Reform blue too.
-
Bath MP Wera Hobhouse visited Bath Ambulance Service on Friday 11.07.25 and the RUH A&E queues were absent. Can we book her in to visit more often please…
-
BaNES have agreed to introduce a TRO that removes even more of the available parking from streets across Bath, affecting car users, commuters and residents alike.
This equates to the loss of around 125 on street parking spaces.
The Lib Dem led Council takes yet another step to remove our freedoms to use personal transport whilst we pay ever increasing amounts for the privilege to drive (and stop) on ever fewer roads.
Links:
-
Crumbling road surfaces tolerated because “net zero”; whilst pothole sized tarmac patches are added to pavements.
This will undoubtedly lead to accidents/collisions which motorists can be blamed for justifying ever more restrictions on cars.
Link:
-
Solar and wind are not the answer. We are eating up our natural habitats to gather energy from weak and unreliable sources.
BaNES seem happy to destroy more agricultural and green belt land in pursuit of renewables.
Have you ever thought about what happens to old and worn out solar panels? It’s worth looking up…
Links:
-
Thank you…
-
This is North Somerset rather than BaNES but I’m lost for words. We put up with pot holes because of net zero. Do any of our councils actually do what we pay them to do..?
North Somerset Council is another Lib Dem led council despite the Conservatives having won more seats! The Lib Dems formed a coalition with almost everyone else to ensure they achieved a majority.
Links…
https://n-somerset.gov.uk/council-democracy/councillors-committees/council-make-group-leaders
-
BaNES Lib Dems are anti personal transport, constantly raising the cost and inconvenience of using a private car in and around Mendip Ward.
Emissions based parking charges, between £1.20-£1.80 are now used across the County and sadly becoming the norm. This could mean that poorer drivers with older cars will pay more than those who can afford newer cars.
Link:
-
Reform UK took second place in the recent Mendip Ward by-election, but there’s no prizes for second place in politics.
That isn’t going to stop us from working as the official local opposition to get a better deal for residents from BaNES.
This blog is going to be one of the ways we stay in touch with residents of Mendip Ward and surrounding areas, so that you can see whats going on, whats likely to affect us here, and how we might work together to tackle it.
Reform isn’t for everyone. But if you take a moment to see through some of the bigger issues, you’ll realise we have more in common than you first thought, and whilst we may not agree on the route to take, we will often agree on the destination.
We promised during the election to represent everyone regardless of who you voted for and we’re going to work hard to show you, over the next two years, that we meant it.
But as with all things we can’t do it alone. So if you’re able to donate time or money, or feel able to join the party as a member, we will make really good use of your support as we work in opposition to support our community.
Links:
If we can raise funds locally, they’ll be used locally…
-
Residents are concerned about the safety of the bus stop in Temple Bridge, so I’ve raised it with BaNES and the new councillor Simon McCombe.
Link:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1733378600055415/permalink/24088492350784054/
There’s a bus stop here somewhere… Update 8.7.25…
Councillor Simon Mccombe, Liv Dems has agreed to meet residents to discuss further.
-
Quote taken from BaNES consultation… The liveable Neighbourhood plan for Temple Cloud is yet more evidence of anti-car policies by BaNES Lib Dem Council.
The key takeaways are further reducing speed limits and placing a pedestrian crossing close to a junction, so as to increase the risk of accidents for which the motorist will doubtless be blamed.
Please take the opportunity to have your say…
Link to consultation:
-
The Labour Government propose moving migrants out of Hotels and into HMOs (Houses in Multiple Occupation) paid for by the tax payer through Council Tax.
The fear is that Council Tax will rise to fund this scheme taking more money from working people; whilst simultaneously reducing the available private rent housing stock and pushing rents up further.
Mendip and BaNES have been largely immune from these issues so far. Are you ready to pay more Council Tax and higher rent?
Links:
https://landlordknowledge.co.uk/landlords-offered-five-year-full-rent-deals-to-house-asylum-seekers/
-
Reform UK are growing fast and came 2nd overall in the recent Mendip Ward by-election. But there’s always room for good quality candidates. Could that be you…?
-
BaNES Council are set to waste more public money flying the flags of minority groups and foreign nations, and there’s a brief opportunity to comment on the planning.
The Union Flag, and our National Flags are the only flags that need be flown on public buildings. They are inclusive and represent every citizen and our allies. They provide a focal point for us all to come together; united.
Nothing stops us treating each other with respect, so please keep any responses polite please.
-
The BaNES Council Lib Dem majority have been discussing a tax on tourism, hotel stays and landlords providing short term lets.
Cllr Kevin Guy, Leader of Bath & North East Somerset Council stated in his newsletter, “Yesterday, I convened a discussion with fellow council leaders, Cllr Susan Brown, Leader of Oxford City Council and Cllr Cameron Holloway, Leader of Cambridge City Council together with our Cabinet Member for Resources Cllr Mark Elliott (pictured). Both Cllr Brown and Cllr Cameron are from heritage-rich, destination cities like ours. These places welcome millions of visitors each year and, as a result, face significant pressures on infrastructure, public services and the public realm. Together, we’re calling on central government to recognise both the value we bring to the national visitor economy and the local costs we shoulder in doing so.
One idea gaining traction is the introduction of a tourism or visitor levy – a modest charge on overnight stays, similar to what many of us have experienced abroad. The revenue raised would be reinvested locally to support the infrastructure and services that make these visits possible. If such a levy were introduced, it would be vital to ensure it applies fairly across all types of accommodation, including short-term lets.”
This is likely to put downward pressure on tourism and upward pressure on rents and housing costs, and again shows that the Lib Dems are a party of increasing taxation.
https://mailchi.mp/bathnes/econnect_july_3_2025?e=05adecb40d
-
Thursday 3rd July 2025 saw a by-election take place within Mendip Ward, with the Liberal Democrat’s retaining their seat and maintaining their 40 seat majority on BaNES County Council.
Of a total 2313 possible votes only 868 were cast. 1445 voters (approximately 63%) chose not to cast their vote at all.
Reform = 191
Conservatives = 84
Labour = 40
Greens = 57
Lib Dem’s = 496
The Lib Dem win equates to the support of only 21.5% of the electorate, or roughly 1 in 5 voters.
Despite the win they have very little overall support. 78.5% or 4 in 5 voters have not given the Lib Dems their support.
The Lib Dems will argue that winning gives them a mandate to introduce the Liveable Neighbourhoods plan and several changes to the A37 arterial route as well further housing and development that will threaten the green belt.
Does this present an argument for compulsory voting…?
https://newsroom.bathnes.gov.uk/news/cabinet-consider-increased-housing-figure-targets
https://www.westofengland-ca.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/BANES-Liveable-Neighbourhood-FBC.pdf
Mendip Ward BaNES - in need of Reform… 