Are you yet to decide who gets your vote in the General Election on May 7?

To help those still making their minds up, we asked all 10 candidates standing in Brentford & Isleworth and Feltham & Heston to answer eight questions on major local and national issues, some of which were suggested by getwestlondon readers.

They were free to write what they wanted, as long as they kept within the limit of 150 words per answer.

Below are the full, unedited answers from the following candidates, allowing you to easily easily compare their stance on many of the big topics.

The candidates are:

Brentford & Isleworth

  • Joe Bourke - Liberal Democrats
  • Ruth Cadbury - Labour Party
  • Daniel Goldsmith - Green Party
  • Richard Hendron - UK Independence Party (UKIP)
  • Mary Macleod - The Conservative Party

Feltham & Heston

  • Roger Crouch - Liberal Democrats
  • Peter Dul - UK Independence Party (UKIP)
  • Tony Firkins - Green Party
  • Seema Malhotra - Labour and Co-operative Party
  • Simon Nayyar - The Conservative Party

Where should a new runway be built? Heathrow or Gatwick? Why?

Joe Bourke, Liberal Democrat candidate for Brentford and Isleworth

Joe Bourke: Liberal Democrats are opposed to airport expansion in London or the South East. A third runway at Heathrow when we are failing to meet EU air quality standards would only increase the high levels of dangerous airborne particles in west London and further harm local resident’s health. People living near to Heathrow are plagued by incessant noise from passing aircraft. This has a serious impact on their health with many suffering increased stress levels, and disturbed sleep. Existing services at Heathrow must be protected, but not further expanded in any way that has a detrimental environmental impact. The Davies Commission will report after the election, but I believe the recommendations will come down to a choice between expansion at Heathrow or Gatwick. The interim publication suggested Gatwick would be a better choice for expansion if 'point to point' travel is the way the future of air travel is expected to go.

Ruth Cadbury: Heathrow is a major driver for our local economy and employs many thousands of residents. However further expansion means hundreds of thousands of additional homes will be directly under the new flight paths and pollution and traffic congestion will get yet worse. Evidence shows that exposure to continuous aircraft noise affects our physical and mental health and our children’s cognitive learning. I have campaigned against Heathrow expansion and succeeded in getting the Government to retain the vital periods of peace and the night flight restrictions. Twenty times more people are affected by expansion at Heathrow than at Gatwick. Heathrow needs to be better not bigger. It can retain its position as Britain’s main international airport without expanding. If an additional runway is needed in the South East, it should be at Gatwick where it can be delivered faster, cheaper, and at no cost to the public purse.

Roger Crouch: The choice is not a simple one between Heathrow and Gatwick. Liberal Democrats are united in their opposition to any airport expansion in London, the South East and to a Thames Estuary airport. The Conservatives are hopelessly divided on this issue. An aviation strategy is required for the entirety of the UK. We need a balanced approach between economic and environmental factors. Too many residents have had to tolerate the noise, air pollution and traffic congestion created by Heathrow. The low flying aircraft has led to schools in Hounslow to build igloo like structures in their playgrounds to muffle the noise. As a country we should be moving to a zero-carbon economy; airport expansion does not fit comfortably with that aspiration. I would, however, fight for a better not bigger Heathrow: as an important source of jobs, a vital part of the local economy and as a hub airport.

Peter Dul: The Airport Commission reports this year. I’d not oppose Heathrow expansion if recommended. Heathrow Hub’s cost-effective plan to extend the existing northern runway moves the noise footprint 2.5 miles west in the early morning & limits night quota flights between 4.30am and 6am. An integrated road/rail interchange provides direct road access from the M25 & M4 (thus traffic from the north and west avoids the busiest motorway section) and gives Heathrow direct rail access from the west for the first time reducing road use. No significant new communities would be brought into Heathrow’s noise footprint. Far less land is required than a new runway. Compensation for compulsory purchase should be full value +10% + removal costs. Gatwick’s location with only one motorway/one rail link requires greater investment in surface access. Heathrow has 120 of the UK’s top 300 company HQs within 15 miles.

Tony Firkins: We should not build a new runway at either Heathrow or Gatwick. An extra runway will cause extra noise, pollution and traffic congestion. For the UK as a whole we need to decrease carbon emissions from air transport rather than increasing them so we address climate change. We propose to ban night flying. The current tax regime artificially inflates demand for aviation. Tax-free fuel alone is worth £10bn every year. The industry also pays no VAT. If aviation were to pay its fair share of tax, demand would be less. There is no evidence that expanding Heathrow will reduce local unemployment. Extra jobs would lead to inward migration and need a further 70,000 new housing units, according to the Airports Commission. We will encourage the use of video conferencing to reduce both business and family travel.

Daniel Goldsmith: We should not build a new runway at either Heathrow or Gatwick. An extra runway will cause extra noise, pollution and traffic congestion. Growth in aviation will make it more difficult to control our carbon emissions in the future. British business does not suffer from lack of UK airport capacity at Heathrow because there is spare runway capacity at other British airports. Only 14% of flights from the UK are business trips abroad. The current tax regime artificially inflates demand for aviation. Tax-free fuel alone is worth £10bn every year. The industry also pays no VAT. If aviation were to pay its fair share of tax, demand would be less. There is no evidence that expanding Heathrow will reduce local unemployment. Extra jobs would lead to inward migration and need a further 70,000 new housing units, according to the Airports Commission. We will encourage the use of video conferencing, and rail to reduce the number of flights.

Richard Hendron: Heathrow. So many people are reliant on the airport for job security. Further, what Heathrow is offering as a package looks like an opportunity not to be missed – with the potential of thousands of pounds plied into apprenticeships in the borough, the creation of more jobs for residents and improved infrastructure. These are all much needed things. There are downsides of any expansion at LHR, but we must weigh them against the benefits. We should start to work with BAA in order to minimize those negatives and ensure that Hounslow gets the best possible deal, a deal that safeguards jobs, improves infrastructure and minimizes disruption to residents.

Mary Macleod: Whilst I welcome the prosperity and jobs that come from Heathrow, and want the airport to continue to thrive, I do not believe it is in the interests of local residents or the UK economy to build a 3rd or 4th runway now or in the future. There are better ways to deliver the benefits that increased aviation capacity can bring – without increasing the already-high burden that local residents currently bear. I support expansion at Gatwick instead for a number of reasons, but here’s just two. It will cost less – in fact it will need no money at all from the taxpayer, whereas Heathrow would need more than £6bn of your money. It’s also better for the environment and quieter – a new runway at Gatwick would affect 24,000 people compared to more than 600,000 people for the Heathrow option.

Seema Malhotra: I have always been a supporter of Heathrow – over 114,000 local jobs are dependent on the airport. I supported the set up of the Davies Commission – a process the Labour Party had called for. Having supported the process, it is right to wait for the Davies Commission to report. Local business organisations have backed expansion. But Heathrow also needs to be a good neighbour, which is why I have long campaigned for improved safeguards over noise, air quality and night flights. And once the Davies Commission reports, the Government should act quickly.

Simon Nayyar: I’m the only Parliamentary Candidate standing in Feltham & Heston unambiguously supporting Heathrow expansion. Since so many local jobs and local prosperity rely on Heathrow being a success, to my mind the question really ought to be “why not Heathrow?” Airport expansion would create 41,000 more local jobs and 10,000 apprenticeships. That would eliminate youth unemployment, provide thousands more jobs in this seat and kick-start the local economy. As many readers will know, I’ve just won from Heathrow Airport a big concession to benefit local families in Heston: if Heathrow’s given the green light to grow, the airport will provide, at a cost of £7.5m, full noise insulation for a further five Heston primary schools. This will radically improve the learning environment and experience for initially 3,400 local school children, and many more in the years to come. That was achieved by me, your Conservative Parliamentary Candidate.

What would you do to provide more affordable homes in west London?

Joe Bourke: Over the past four decades, successive Conservative and Labour governments have left us with a housing crisis that has forced rents higher, increased social housing waiting lists, and left millions with no hope of getting on the property ladder. The coalition is the first Government for more than thirty years to leave office with more social and affordable homes than we started with. This is a small step in the right direction, turning around a downward trend that had lasted thirty years. Our plans for the next parliament include building 275,000 more affordable homes by 2020 and increasing housebuilding to 300,000 homes a year. We need to do more to support tenants in the private rented sector too. We want to introduce a new “flexi-lease” to allow tenants to agree longer tenancies of up to three years and give councils greater freedoms over landlord licensing schemes.

Labour candidate Ruth Cadbury

Ruth Cadbury: The housing crisis has been decades in the making. Every day I meet people affected by this. High rents and house prices, families threatened with homelessness, others worried their children will never be able to have a home of their own. The Tories’ plan for right to buy for housing association tenants will only exacerbate the problem. I’m proud of Labour’s record in Hounslow – we are one of the few councils building affordable homes, 3000 in the last five years. Nationally Labour has a plan to build over 200,000 more homes a year. Local councils will be given greater flexibility to borrow based on their Housing Revenue accounts to invest in affordable homes. Developers will be obliged to follow rules to provide a proportion of affordable homes – a rule which has been loosened by this Government, meaning recently developers have been able to get away with providing fewer affordable homes.

Roger Crouch: The provision of good quality social and affordable housing for key workers and young people is a key priority for me. Demand is currently outstripping supply. Councils have a responsibility to do all in their power to meet the need for new housing of all forms both leasehold and freehold. Labour run Hounslow Council is simply not doing enough to take advantage of the powers they have been given to borrow, the low interest rates and the economic recovery to build more homes. I am calling on Hounslow Council to draw up and implement a five year plan to increase the social housing stock in the area. I would identify empty properties and vacant sites which could be brought into use. All new developments must include an element of affordable housing. I oppose the Conservatives’ Right to Buy policy, which would inflate house prices in an already over inflated market.

Peter Dul: Set up a register of brownfield sites, incentivise their use through grants up to £10,000 per unit for essential remediation work & grants for indemnity insurance for decontamination. Encourage Hounslow Borough to make some plots available for self-build at a price set before decontamination; this plus approximately 30% lower self-build cost will facilitate affordable houses. Bring empty homes back into use by placing a statutory duty on local authorities to charge 150% of Council Tax where properties are empty more than 2 years, except for members of HM Armed Forces. Identify long- term dormant land held by central / local government so it can be released for affordable housing including self-build. Ease change of use enabling conversion of commercial / office space to affordable and social housing. Local housing for local people – foreigners will not have access unless tax /NI has been paid for five years.

Tony Firkins: The Green Party will provide 500,000 social rented homes across the country built to high sustainability standards. To fund this we will increase the social housing budget and remove borrowing caps from local councils. We will work with Hounslow council to ensure that existing powers are used so that half of all homes in new housing developments are affordable. We will reform the private rented sector to make it fairer on the tenant. We will introduce five-year fixed tenancy agreements with rent controls that caps annual rent increases to the cost of living, and other changes to help tenantsWe will take robust action to bring empty homes back into use. The Land Tax will be due on sites left empty and this will discourage speculation and empty sites. These have been empty for several years now.

Daniel Goldsmith: The Green Party will provide 500,000 social rented homes across the country built to high sustainability standards. To fund this we will increase the social housing budget and remove borrowing caps from local councils. We will work with Hounslow council to ensure that existing powers are used so that half of all homes in new housing developments are affordable. We will reform the private rented sector to make it fairer on the tenant. We will introduce five-year fixed tenancy agreements with rent controls that caps annual rent increases to the cost of living, and other changes to help tenants. We will take robust action to bring empty homes back into use. The Land Tax will be due on sites left empty and this will discourage speculation and empty sites like the parade of houses above the shops south of Brentford high street. These have been empty for several years now.

Richard Hendron: UKIP want a brownfield revolution where developers are given incentives to build on brownfield sites. We need to stop international investors from buying up property thus driving sale and rental prices up. On a significant percentage of new builds, we need to have covenants on the property that stipulate that only local people or those who work locally can purchase. This already happens outside of London on some farming properties and has succeeded in safeguarding property for local people and keeping down prices.

Conservative candidate Mary Macleod

Mary Macleod: I know that people in London have been finding it harder and harder to get on the housing ladder. Under the Labour Government, house-building fell to its lowest peacetime level since the 1920s. Sadly, it’s people like nurses, teachers and police, the people who deliver our most vital public services, who are losing out in the housing race. Conservatives like me want to change that. It’s fantastic to see so much long-awaited development finally taking place in the area. This has been made possible by the improving economy. As MP, I lobbied the Council to demand that affordable housing be mandatory for every new development. In the next Parliament we will go further, building 200,000 new Starter Homes for first-time buyers under 40.

Seema Malhotra: Building more housing is key to making housing more affordable. A third of Londoners saying that they spend more than half their income on housing costs. I am proud that Labour is pledged to increase the rate of house building to 200,000 a year by 2020, the most ambitious target by in decades. The Tories have presided over the lowest record of house building since the 1920s. Locally Hounslow has pledged to build an additional 3,000 affordable homes specifically in our area. We will also help smaller builders by simplifying bureaucracy, and making cheap credit more easily available. We also need to do more to help private renters. That includes 8,607 households just in my constituency of Feltham & Heston. Labour will make three year tenancies the norm to give families greater security.

Simon Nayyar: The chance to own your own home should be available to everyone in Feltham and Heston who works hard, does the right thing and wants to get on in life. So we will help to keep record low mortgage rates low. In a Borough where house prices have soared over the last decade and where it’s getting increasingly tough for first time buyers to get on the property ladder, we’ll build more homes that local people can afford including new Starter homes exclusively for first-time buyers under 40. We will extend the incredibly successful Help to Buy programme, which has already helped 80,000 people buy their homes, to cover another 120,000 homes. We’ll extend the Help to Buy equity loan until 2020. From the autumn, we’ll introduce a new Help to Buy ISA. And we are extending the Right to Buy to tenants of housing associations.

What needs to be done to ease congestion and improve public transport in and and around Hounslow?

Joe Bourke: There is widespread concern with Labour’s local area and housing plans, developed without seemingly considering the implications of an ever greater population density within a transport system already groaning under the strain. We need joined-up thinking to deliver good quality affordable housing in the area – whilst simultaneously working closely with the Greater London Authority and Transport for London in providing for the necessary local services as well as upgrade road and rail transport links. The expansion of Heathrow can only lead to further chronic congestion in the area. There is an urgent need for rapid development of additional housing across the borough. However, coordinated planning for transport upgrades, additional school places and health centre provision is not routinely in place and, in my view, cannot be successfully achieved by the current failed strategy of the Labour council by negotiation of S106 agreements on a piecemeal basis with commercial developers.

Ruth Cadbury: London has seen significant population growth in recent years – but our transport network has not kept pace, and fighting for increased investment in transport would be a priority if I were MP. The Piccadilly line is massively overcrowded – and Boris has inexplicably delayed the upgrade of the line and cancelled plans to provide step-free access at local stations. As MP I would fight this decision and call for it to be bought forward. I also support Hounslow’s initiative to bring southwest rail access linking the Hounslow loop to Heathrow. Cycling and walking are essential elements of “public transport” and I will continue to work with LBH and TfL to make our roads safer for them. There are also notable pinch points in our road network, particularly the A4/M4 junction near Ealing Road, that need tackling.

Liberal Democrat candidate Roger Crouch

Roger Crouch: One of the reasons to oppose Heathrow expansion is that it will increase traffic, according to Transport for London modeling, traffic congestion in the area. Any new developments in Hounslow need to promote walking, cycling, car sharing and access to public transport. Liberal Democrats would ensure these considerations are enshrined in planning laws. As a keen cyclist, I want to ensure that cycling provision is improved across the Borough so that the car is not always the first choice. For example, the creation of safe cycle ways to schools would encourage parents to cycle or walk with their children to school. Commuters using South West Trains get a raw deal with frequent cancellations and shortened trains. Demand is rising and I would, therefore, pressurise the operator to introduce more rolling stock as quickly as possible. Liberal Democrats will ensure rail fares do not exceed inflation.

Peter Dul: Create an integrated road and rail interchange at Heathrow with direct access from the M25 & M4 so that travellers from the south- west and west do not need to go to central London and then travel out to Heathrow. Feltham High Street suffers considerable congestion not just at peak travel times and consideration should be given to opening up the bus lanes for other traffic outside peak travel times ; this should be done on an experiment basis to determine whether traffic flow would be eased outside rush-hour thus reducing pollution levels caused by slow-moving cars/lorries. More frequent trains to London Waterloo and increased Tube services at peak times.

Tony Firkins: The Green Party will improve and subsidise public transport, with an average fare reduction of 10% over the Parliament. We will also fix potholes in existing roads. We will invest in electrification of public transport to address climate change. We will improve walking and cycling facilities so that people need to drive less. Some who drive would cycle if it was safer. We will ensure that pedestrians and cyclists get their fair share of road space and will spend at least £30 per head every year of the Parliament to implement this. Funding will be allocated flexibly to make safe, convenient routes addressing the needs of pedestrians and cyclists while reducing any risk of conflict between them. We will encourage Cycle Superhighway 9 linking Hounslow to central London to open as soon as possible and will extend this with spur routes to Feltham and Heston.

Daniel Goldsmith: The Green Party will improve and subsidise public transport, with an average fare reduction of 10% over the Parliament. We will also fix potholes in existing roads. We will extend free local public transport to young people and students. We will improve walking and cycling facilities so that people need to drive less. Some who drive would cycle if it was safer. We will ensure that pedestrians and cyclists get their fair share of road space and will spend at least £30 per head every year of the Parliament to deliver this. Funding will be allocated flexibly to make safe, convenient routes addressing the needs of pedestrians and cyclists while reducing any risk of conflict between them. We will encourage Cycle Superhighway 9 linking Hounslow to central London to open as soon as possible. We will provide cycle parking throughout Hounslow and invest in secure cycle storage in residential streets.

Richard Hendron: We need proper investment in a comprehensive network of off road cycle lanes that would encourage people out of their cars and onto their bikes. A lot more can be done to improve junctions that would speed up traffic. We also need to review some of the bus lanes and decide on whether removing some of them would make a significant impact on speeding up traffic for everyone, including the buses.

Mary Macleod: We are the fifth fastest growing Borough in London and home to the biggest and best businesses in Britain. We need to make sure we have the best transport links for local people and commuters who come to west London to work. Getting a commitment for Piccadilly line trains to stop at Turnham Green was a fantastic achievement – it will really help local people. My campaign to improve Gunnersbury Station – as well as getting the bridge to Chiswick Park built – is also progressing well. Aside from public transport, one of the best ways to reduce congestion is to invest in cycling. We need to do more because it has real benefits for the economy as well as for the environment. Hounslow cyclists want better cycle lanes and more investment in safe cycling. I’ll do my best to represent their concerns over the next five years.

Seema Malhotra: Getting more people to use other forms of transport when they can is the best way to make life easier for both car drivers and other road users. If more people feel that public transport is a reasonable alternative to a car, more people will use it. It is shocking that only 2% of journeys in Hounslow are by bike. We need to make sure that the roads feel safe for bike users, and that the routes around the Borough are sufficiently connected that people can get to where they need to go. Labour will also improve road safety for cyclists by introducing national standards to reduce deaths and injuries. We also need to make public transport more affordable, which we will do by adding a cap on rail fare increases. The Tories have presided over widespread fare increases since 2010 for both rail and bus transport.

Simon Nayyar: As we all know and all too frequently experience, congestion in and around Hounslow is bad and seems to get progressively worse. Instead of a school run or trip to the shops taking a quick ten minutes, too often it can take thirty. That’s not right, and eats into time we’d rather spend working, studying or spending time with the family. As your MP, I would work with Hounslow Borough Council and Transport for London to reduce local congestion, widen roads where appropriate, review road junction design and traffic light sequencing, overhaul bus timetables so that bus routes and frequency properly reflect local needs right across the constituency, and demand the Council creates many more off-street car parking spaces.

What can be done to address A&E waiting times at hospitals like West Middlesex Hospital and to reduce waiting times for GP appointments?

Joe Bourke: The increase in waiting times is driven by two principal contributing factors – London’s burgeoning population and demographic changes brought about by ever-longer lifespans. The NHS plan to concentrate some services on to fewer sites so they can produce higher quality care. That means they are intending to concentrate accident and emergency departments with the emergency surgery units behind those on to five sites from the current nine sites we have across North-West London at the moment. Development of urgent care centres to treat patients not requiring a specialist consultant and minor injury units to cater for less serious cases can aid in relieving the pressure. So too can out of hours surgeries to cater for patients who may be treated by their local health clinic. Coordination of provision of health centres and GP surgeries with new housing developments and maintain sufficient investment in the NHS is also an essential element.

Ruth Cadbury: Firstly I will fight to prevent the closure of A & E services at Charing Cross which many Chiswick residents rely on – its closure would have massively detrimental effects on West Mid. West Middlesex is an excellent hospital but it is under pressure – it has in recent months struggled to meet waiting time targets. Labour would invest £2.5billion in 1,200 more GPs and 3,400 more nurses in London alone. Unlike the Tories, this is costed – the Tories cannot tell us where the money is coming from so their investment cannot be guaranteed. We will also reinstate the 48 hour guarantee for a GP appointment. We will also improve mental health support, preventative care, and have an integrated social care and NHS system, all of which should ease pressure on A & E services.

Roger Crouch: The staff at the West Middlesex Hospital do an exceptional job dealing with a high volume of admissions. The hospital, however, should not always be the first port of call if someone is feeling ill. I want to see GPs in Hounslow take the lead with more evening and weekend openings, and with more telephone and Skype appointments. GPs should also occasionally base themselves in the A&E department, at community centres and in schools so they are more accessible. We should also celebrate our community pharmacists who play a vital role in being the first point of contact for advice. Too often, recurrent admissions to hospital, particularly amongst the elderly and those with mental health problems, are due to a lack of coordinated working between the NHS and social services. Liberal Democrats want to integrate services with more joined up care.

Peter Dul, UKIP candidate for Feltham and Heston

Peter Dul: We’ll put an extra £3bn a year into frontline patient care in England. And fund 20,000 more nurses , 8,000 more GPs & 3,000 more midwives. We’ll waive university tuition fees for medical students who work 5 years in the U.K. after qualifying & fund the cost of re-training GPs, nurses & midwives who have left the profession and wish to return. Improve working conditions for registrars/consultants (weekend cover, unsocial hours, extended shifts & leave patterns) to improve staff retention rates in A&E Departments. People go to A&E when unable to get a GP appointment; we’ll initiate a pilot programme to put GPs on duty in A& E seven days a week. If this succeeds in freeing up A&E to concentrate on treating the seriously ill we’ll deploy 1,000 out of the 8,000 new GPs we are funding countrywide into A&E.

Tony Firkins: We will ensure that the NHS is properly funded to overcome the current funding crisis and to support our ageing population. We will immediately increase the NHS budget by £12bn per year. This will allow A&E to be better staffed. We will increase the funding for primary care. Many people go to A&E as they cannot get to see their GPs and other community based professionals. The Green Party will address some of the root causes of illness such as air pollution, and stress from long working hours. We will provide free social care for the elderly and for adults who have a proven care need. This will reduce the pressure on GPs and A&E. Nine out of 10 GPs believe cuts to social care have added to over-crowding.

Daniel Goldsmith: The Green Party will address some of the root causes of illness such as air pollution and stress from long working hours. We will ensure that the NHS is properly funded to overcome the current funding crisis and to support our ageing population. We will reverse the disastrous privatisation the Coalition is carrying out. The extra funds provided by the Green Party will ensure that Charing Cross hospital will keep its A&E department so that people in Chiswick don’t need to go to West Middlesex. We will provide free social care for the elderly and for adults who have a proven care need. This will reduce the pressure on GPs and A&E. Nine out of 10 GPs believe cuts to social care have added to over-crowding. We will help people access healthcare quickly by providing accessible, local community health centres that provide a wide range of services, including out-of-hours care.

Richard Hendron: UKIP have pledged 20,000 new nurses and 8000 new doctors. Extra staff would clearly have an impact on reducing waiting times. Further we want visitors to this country to have their own health insurance, which would further have an impact on the demands on the NHS. We also need to stop health tourism. The NHS is a great resource but it should not be an international resource. We need GP surgery’s to be open at the time people can make, ie evenings and weekends and also have GPs in every Hospital in the country which would dramatically reduce the burden on Accident and Emergency staff.

Mary Macleod: Attendance at A&E has increased by 12% in the last ten years which has inevitably put considerable pressure on services. One million more operations each year are being undertaken across the NHS compared to 2010. Despite this, in 2013/14, West Middlesex Hospital treated 97.4% of patients within four hours – well above the 95% target. In Government we protected spending on the NHS and recruited 9,500 more doctors and 6,900 more nurses. Conservatives have promised an additional £8bn for the next five years to meet the NHS’s own action plan – something Labour has refused to do. Around 15% of people attend A&E when they could have been treated elsewhere. I believe we can do more to guide people to the right care, whether that be a pharmacist, GP, minor injuries unit or A&E. Having a truly seven-day-a-week NHS to support this is critical and aim to deliver this by 2020.

Seema Malhotra: The attack on the NHS is probably the most damaging thing the Tories have done in government. Since David Cameron became Prime Minister, 52,284 people have been forced to wait more than four hours at A&E at West Middlesex and Ashford/St Peters. NHS waiting lists are at their highest level for six years. Labour will tackle the crisis the Tories have created by introducing a guarantee that everyone will see their GP within 48 hours if they wish. We will also recruit an extra 8,000 more GPs and 20,000 nurses for our NHS. We will ensure social services and the NHS to join up more, to help people leave hospital more quickly, making more space available for those who need it.

Simon Nayyar: The NHS is vitally important to all of us. That’s why we protected the NHS budget in the last parliament and will spend at least a further £8bn by 2020 over and above inflation. Despite pressure, English A&E departments are consistently the best performing in the UK, helped by the Government’s additional £700m investment in A&E during the winter. One of the greatest sources of frustration to families is their inability sometimes to be able to get to see their GP when they need to. For this reason, the next Conservative government will open GP clinics from 8am to 8pm on weekdays and at weekends to improve GP access. We will also restore named GPs for everyone, something that Labour abolished.

What would you do to help small businesses and encourage visitors to the borough's high streets?

Joe Bourke: Hounslow is now placed in the top 20% in the country in key indicators which are vital for businesses to flourish, including high productivity levels, high numbers of knowledge-driven businesses and a strong business and enterprise culture. In government, Liberal Democrats have lowered corporation Tax and cut National Insurance contributions for small employers. Business rates have been capped and Small Business Rate Relief doubled. The Annual Investment Allowance has been increased. Fuel duty has been frozen since March 2001. The Red Tape Challenge has committed to scrap at least 3,000 regulations, Billions have been invested in growing modern British businesses with our Industrial Strategy, Business Bank and Regional Growth Fund. In the next parliament, we want to continue our support for SME’s, complete the rollout of high-speed broadband and continue to reduce the burden of EU legislation by curbing unnecessary red tape, and exempting small businesses from EU rules.

Ruth Cadbury: Small businesses are the life-blood of our local economy and to our High Streets. That is why, when I was on Hounslow's cabinet, I championed their needs. I initiated the regeneration of Hounslow and Brentford Town Centres, implemented 30 minutes of free parking in parades of independent shops in Brentford and Chiswick and developed work to ensure local people get jobs with local employers. If elected to Parliament I will continue to support the essential regeneration of Hounslow and Brentford, support local business networks and ensure that Labour’s commitments to small businesses are delivered. These are; to freeze and then cut business rates for them and set up the Small Business Administration to be the voice for SMEs at the heart of Government.

Roger Crouch: With its close proximity to Heathrow, motorways and train services to central London, Feltham and Hounslow town centres are ideal locations for a small business to locate and for entrepreneurs to start new businesses. I would encourage local businesses to meet an annual challenge to take on more apprentices. The town centres, however, need revitalization, to make them more attractive places to shop and spend leisure time. Hounslow Council is not doing enough to attract investment to the area and to implement a long term vision for the area. It is imperative that the scandal of Feltham Arenas is resolved as soon as possible so that a revitalized shopping area also has green spaces and sporting facilities for the local community. I want to see more community events, celebrating our diverse backgrounds, held in the borough’s high streets.

Peter Dul: Reduce business rates of property or properties with a total rateable value of £50,000 or less by 20%. Existing schemes of more than 20% will continue. Push Hounslow Borough to offer at least 30 minutes free parking in the town centre/High Street. Cut massive E.U. red tape by withdrawing from the EU. Improve access to trade credit insurance by the government backing a portion of the risk to facilitate wider provision of cover thus enabling businesses to expand; and cut fuel bills by scrapping green levies. Make it easier for businesses of less than 250 employees to tender for public sector contracts. Address the problem of late payment of invoices by big companies by HMRC fining a repeat offender.

Tony Firkins, Green Party candidate for Feltham and Heston

Tony Firkins: We will make it easier for small businesses to employ people and contribute towards paying the living wage by using receipts from a wealth tax to reduce employers’ National Insurance to 8%. We will increase access to finance by investing £2bn in a network of community banks, mutually owned and serving local areas or particular groups. We will reduce the tax on conviviality and help small businesses in the tourism and restaurant businesses by lowering VAT to the reduced rate (5%) for cooked food, entertainment and accommodation. The Green Party will allow local authorities to favour local procurement to help their local economy. We will ensure that legislation requiring that small businesses should be paid on time is properly enforced. We will encourage better public transport and cycle racks to make the borough’s high streets more accessible.

Daniel Goldsmith: We will make it easier for small businesses to employ people and contribute towards paying the living wage by using receipts from a wealth tax to reduce employers’ National Insurance in the longer run to 8%. We will increase access to finance by investing £2bn in a network of community banks, mutually owned and serving local areas or particular groups. We will reduce the tax on conviviality and help small businesses in the tourism and restaurant businesses by lowering VAT to the reduced rate (5%) for cooked food, entertainment and accommodation. The Green Party will allow local authorities to favour local procurement to help their local economy. We will ensure that legislation requiring that small businesses should be paid on time is properly enforced. We will encourage better public transport and cycle racks to make the borough’s high streets more accessible.

Richard Hendron: We need to stop the creation of any more superstores, which act as a drain to the high street sucking the life out of it. We should actively try to reduce the number of these big superstores, replacing them with affordable housing. We also need at least 30 minutes free parking right across the borough. UKIP want a £1bn boost for the high street through a policy of reducing business rates with a ratable value under £50,000 as well as cutting red tape for small business.

Mary Macleod: I’m passionate about helping small businesses. Three years ago I was appointed as the PM’s Small Business Ambassador for London. In this role I managed to persuade the Chancellor to knock £1,000 off the business rates bill for high street shops and a full review of the business rates system. Of course there is more to do. We should start with 30 minute free parking throughout the Borough! I campaigned hard for this and the Council put it in place for some shopping streets. Chiswick High Road was a big exception. I think it would really benefit our local businesses to include it in the scheme. It’s already the No.1 road in the entire country for penalty notices. I will also continue to support Small Business Saturday and town teams that bring together small businesses to share resources, ideas and promote their businesses far and wide.

Seema Malhotra: I have backed Small Business Saturday, campaigning on this and raising the profile of businesses in our area. We will help small businesses by freezing and then cutting business rates. We will tackle late payment which undermines small businesses in particular with a new requirement on larger businesses to set out the extent of late payment they have been responsible for, and the action they have taken to compensate suppliers. We will make credit more widely available through a British Investment Bank. Our new Small Business Administration will co-ordinate work across government to help smaller businesses and cut unnecessary regulation. Hounslow High Street is set to see huge change. I also want to see transformation in Feltham where I called for a new Masterplan, and for a new plan for Cranford.

Conservative candidate Simon Nayyar

Simon Nayyar: Hounslow Council doesn’t do nearly enough to help local people and businesses take pride in their communities. As your MP, I want to see the Council on the side of small businesses and would insist the Council holds regular surgeries to help existing small business owners, and prospective ones, get the support they need to grow local jobs and prosperity. The ongoing saga of the Feltham development plan shows the Council just doesn’t understand how to make Feltham and Heston a “go to” destination with vibrant shopping centres filled with “must have”, high quality national retail chains, restaurants and bars, cinemas and leisure facilities. Feltham and Heston cries out for the kinds of high quality shopping malls, foodservice and hospitality outlets that other London boroughs take for granted and local residents benefit from. As your MP, I’ll take early action to put that right.

Do you support the creation of more free schools to meet local demand for places?

Joe Bourke: Our policy is to give democratically accountable Local Authorities responsibility for local school places planning. We will only fund new mainstream schools in areas where school places are needed, and repeal the rule that new state funded schools must be free schools or academies. We will allow Local Authorities to select the school sponsor, where this is not the Local Authority itself. There is a need for a huge number of new school places. The Conservatives want to spend money on Free Schools in areas where they are not needed. When resources are so tight we believe that new schools should only be built where there is a shortfall of places. Local communities need to be able to plan for new school places. We will ensure that local authorities can identify a need for a new school and propose a solution, and that this will be judged against other proposals.

Ruth Cadbury: Hounslow is blessed with great primary and secondary schools but the borough desperately needs new ones as there is virtually no more room to expand on existing sites. To date, children in Hounslow have all been offered places in a borough school, but sometimes not one of their choice. The Tory Government stopped the Building Schools for the Future programme and replaced it with the Free Schools regime which diverted money from areas of need and the local council is not permitted to deliver new schools. Parents in Brentford and Isleworth have therefore had to wait until free school applications come forward. So I support the current four Free Schools applications and their search for sites, but regret the lack of local accountability. Labour will continue to support all existing and approved new schools but will ensure they are accountable to the local community and, crucially, employ qualified teachers.

Roger Crouch: Due to a variety of reasons, demand for school places in Hounslow is increasing. Sadly, Hounslow parents are often unable to get their children into first or second choice schools. Looking at school placement statistics for neighboring local authorities, Hounslow Council does not compare favourably. It is right, however, that the Council should have responsibility for school place planning. On behalf of residents, I would fight for funding for new schools and school expansion on the basis of need. Liberal Democrats would repeal the rule that says all new state funded schools must be free schools or academies. The Council itself could be the sponsor of any new schools working in partnership with parents or they could work collaboratively with other providers to identify potential school sites. Any faith schools must have an inclusive admissions policy.

PD: UKIP believes in an education system that works for every child regardless of social background or ability. We’ll bring back grammar schools & support a range of vocational, technical and specialist secondary schools and restore Special Educational Needs schools & will ensure underfunding such as happened with secondary moderns in the 1950s is not repeated. Too many teachers are working excessive hours; we’ll decrease the paperwork teachers deal with and enforce the restriction on class sizes to 30 pupils, aiming to reduce this to 25 to further ease teacher work-load & scrap teachers’ performance-related pay. UKIP supports free schools providing they are open to the whole local community, uphold British values and do not discriminate against any section of society.

Tony Firkins: We don’t support more free schools. We believe that these can lead to an excess of school places in some areas, and shortages elsewhere. We would integrate existing academies and free schools into the local authority system. There should be democratic accountability and a key role for local authorities in planning and admissions policy. We would support a comprehensive system of local schools offering mixed-ability teaching. We would restore education current and capital funding to 2010 levels to allow the demand for schools to be addressed.

Daniel Goldsmith: We don’t support more free schools. We believe that these can lead to an excess of school places in some areas, and shortages elsewhere. There should be democratic accountability and a key role for local authorities in planning, admissions policy and equality of access for children with special needs.

Richard Hendron, UKIP candidate for Brentford and Isleworth

Richard Hendron: Demand for school places in the borough is at an all time high, so we do need to provide more schools to properly meet this demand. UKIP believes in bringing back grammar schools to enable the most bright in society to for fill their potential and achieve the top. Only 7% of the population went to private schools, yet private school educated people make up the vast majority of senior private and government sector positions.

Mary Macleod: Yes, absolutely. In the last five years, four new Free Schools have been approved, one is already open and three more will open before September 2017 – all of which I have campaigned strongly for. Where there is demand from parents and communities for a new school, I will be right behind them all the way. Every parent and child should have the chance to apply to a good local school. Labour left us with a school places crisis – and we tackled it with a £5bn investment in our schools. That’s why we now have the most successful schools expansion programme in recent British history and a million more pupils in good or outstanding schools.

Seema Malhotra: We have seen some strong free schools in our area and which I have supported. Labour is committed to keep all existing free schools. But we cannot have a situation where free schools are built in areas of less need, while primary schools elsewhere take the strain. Instead, we will use the money to expand school places in areas that need them. It is estimated that Hounslow will need 3,308 extra school places by 2018. Already too many 5,6,7 year olds are in class sizes of over 30, which we want to see come down. Every child deserves the best education and start in life.

Simon Nayyar: Thanks to the Conservative-led Government, a million more children in Britain are being taught in good or outstanding schools where expectations have been raised and discipline restored. Over 400 free schools are open or being set up around the country by communities who want the very best for their children. In our seat, we have Feltham Reach Academy, a free school which has achieved outstanding Ofsted ratings and is proving immensely popular with parents and prospective parents alike. As your Member of Parliament, I will ensure every parent, right across Feltham and Heston, has the same opportunity to send their children to a local free school to provide them with the best possible qualifications and start in life. Labour have indicated they will cancel free schools which are still being planned, and the future of existing free schools may be at risk.

Should there be a cap on immigration?

Joe Bourke: No. Liberal Democrats believe Britain must be open for business and growth but closed to people who abuse the system. Britain needs more students and more visitors to come to help our economy grow. We will encourage people to visit Britain, learn in Britain and contribute to Britain. We will say yes to doctors, experts, entrepreneurs and investors. But we will say no to criminals, traffickers and those who refuse to play by the rules. By bringing back proper border checks – so we know who’s coming in and leaving the UK – we will identify and deport people who over-stay their visa. We will create visible security and firm control, with real processes to count everyone in and count everyone out. We’ll ensure people can speak English and are willing to work. We’ll ensure that migrants, including from the EU, come to work or study, not to claim benefits.

Ruth Cadbury: No. An arbitrary cap is unfeasible. Immigration has been a net positive to our nation and our community. It is part of who we are and what makes us great. However Labour has a better, fairer plan to control immigration. We will have 1000 more border and enforcement staff. No one will be able to make any benefit claim until they have been here at least two years. We will make sure we still get the top talent our economy needs whilst clamping down on low skilled immigration. We will also tackle the exploitation of migrant workers and make sure firms are not undercutting the minimum wage.

Roger Crouch: No, I do not believe in an arbitrary cap. David Cameron was wrong to pledge to reduce the numbers of net migrants to less than 100,000 a year - a pledge he has broken. Hounslow has benefitted from the contribution of migrants to the local economy and to the creation of a diverse and harmonious community. I am worried that migrants are being demonised in this election. Liberal Democrats believe in a tolerant society. We should welcome talented people from abroad and give sanctuary to refugees fleeing persecution. However, border checks on exit and entry should be robust and those without a valid claim to be in the UK should be returned to their country of origin promptly. Inspections on employers need to increase to ensure employment legislation is adhered to and JSA claimants must have their English language skills assessed.

Peter Dul: In 2014, 767,000 foreign nationals registered for a NI number; uncontrolled immigration puts great pressure on housing, schools, transport & the NHS. UKIP will put a five-year moratorium on unskilled workers, enabling unemployed to find work and those working to see wage growth. Sham marriages will be tackled. Work visas will be issued on Australian-style points based system, ensuring any skill shortages, e.g. in the NHS, can be filled. A Migration Control Commission will deal with visitor visas and entry passes which will enable countries with close ties, such as EU and the Commonwealth to establish reciprocal programmes. Family reunion visas for non-British citizens is a principle which will be available to all. UKIP will comply fully with the UN Convention on refugees, speed up the asylum visa process and honour obligations to bona fide refugees. We can never control immigration inside the EU.

Tony Firkins: No, because an arbitrary cap can lead to individual injustices. We will work to build a fairer and just world, where involuntary migration through war, climate change, and inequality is greatly reduced. Our pledge to increase the overseas aid budget to 1% of GDP will help address some of the causes of migration to the UK. For the moment controls are needed. These controls should respect our mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement, international obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change and respect for the integrity of families. We won’t restrict the movement of foreign students. The current cap is deterring very able students from coming to the UK to study. At present, many foreign students have to leave when they have finished studying and the skills and education that they have acquired don’t contribute to our economy.

Green Party candidate Daniel Goldsmith

Daniel Goldsmith: No, because an arbitrary cap can lead to individual injustices. We will work to build a fairer and just world, where involuntary migration through war, climate change, and inequality is greatly reduced. Our pledge to increase the overseas aid budget to 1% of GDP will help address some of the causes of migration to the UK. For the moment controls are needed. These controls should respect our mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement, international obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change and respect for the integrity of families. We won’t restrict the movement of foreign students. The current cap is deterring very able students from coming to the UK to study. At present, many foreign students have to leave when they have finished studying and the skills and education that they have acquired don’t contribute to our economy.

Richard Hendron: Immigration should be brought back to manageable figures. Until 1997 net migration each year was between 30,000-50,000. It now stands at around 300,000. Uncontrolled and irresponsible immigration policy places huge demands on housing, the NHS, Schools and infrastructure. We must dramatically bring down immigration to a manageable level which I would suggest is between 30,000-50,000 net per year.

Mary Macleod: Britain is a great country and it’s easy to see why people want to come here. We’ve got the fastest growing economy in the western world, record employment and over 750,000 vacancies. Coupled with a tolerant and democratic society, we are a magnet for foreign investment and immigration. Locally, our diverse communities very much enrich the area and I’ve been warmly welcomed at events over the last five years. Their contribution to our economy and society should be praised. However, uncontrolled immigration puts pressure on public services and forces down wages, which is why we’ve already capped economic immigration. We inherited a system that was open to widespread abuse. Since 2010, we have stripped more than 850 bogus colleges of their rights to sponsor foreign students, cracked down on illegal working and sham marriages and reduced the number of appeal routes to stop spurious attempts to remain in the country.

Seema Malhotra: Britain is better and richer for our diversity. The Tories promised that they would cap net migration to the “tens of thousands” and recently had to admit they had failed. Instead of an artificial target we should implement practical measures that actually deal with the problems. Labour has pledged over 1,000 more border staff so that we can strengthen our borders, preventing illegal immigration and making it easier to deport foreign criminals. We have set out a new approach, controlling immigration with fair rules and controlling its impact on local communities. We have also said that people shouldn’t be able to claim benefits for at least two years, and need to contribute first.

Simon Nayyar: Immigration benefits Britain. As a second generation British Indian immigrant, myself, how could I possibly believe otherwise! Nonetheless immigration needs to be controlled and it must be fair – uncontrolled immigration puts pressure on public services, affects social cohesion and can keep wages down. It’s not what the British public want and it’s not a sustainable state of affairs. So we have set a target to bring net migration, under the next Conservative government, back down to the tens of thousands. We haven’t met that target, but the ambition remains the right one and we will deliver it. Compare and contrast this with the Labour years of government when net migration to the UK was twice the size of the population of Birmingham.

How much should the UK spend on defence, and should the Trident nuclear deterrent be replaced at an estimated cost of £100bn over the course of its life span?

Joe Bourke: We believe British foreign policy and international aid should seek to promote peace, advance human rights, democracy and trade throughout the world, and counter the global threat of climate change. This is why we met the UN target of committing 0.7% GNI to overseas aid and enshrined it in law – which we fought for against opposition from many Conservative MPs. It’s why we set up the International Climate Fund to help the worlds poorest adapt to climate change. And it’s why we say no to like-for-like Trident replacement. We will continue to seek lasting solutions to conflicts around the world, and we’ll conduct a Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2015 to ensure our Armed Forces are properly trained and equipped and the UK is in a position to maintain our commitments to our Nato allies and fulfil our responsibilities as a permanent member of the UN security council.

Ruth Cadbury: As a Quaker I am committed to working for peace and justice through nonviolent social change, working actively to bring about or preserve peace and remove the causes of conflict. Many of the crises in the world have their root causes in avoidable conflict so I will use my role wherever possible to bring people together and address through diplomacy and reconciliation. I would therefore support a lower defence spend and support work to enhance the UK’s peace-keeping capability. Putting billions of pounds into Trident at a time of austerity does not make sense. Real security comes from building relationships, not weaponry. If we are serious about the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, we must surely lead by example. Trident is a relic of Cold War, and world conflicts are very different now.

Roger Crouch: I see no reason to replace Trident. The UK’s nuclear weapons should gradually be decommissioned and Britain should remain fully engaged in international nuclear disarmament efforts. If you cannot contemplate using nuclear weapons then I can see no moral reason to possess nuclear weapons. We do, however, live in an uncertain world. The Middle East and North Africa is in turmoil, we have become too familiar with the horrors of terrorism and Russia has adopted an expansionist, nationalistic and aggressive foreign policy. It is, therefore, essential that we maintain our NATO commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defence and national security and continue to work with EU and NATO allies.

Peter Dul: UKIP will retain the Trident nuclear deterrent. There are rogue states with nuclear capability and they will not be stopped by carrier force which is non-functional until at least 2020. UKIP will increase the defence budget to 2% GDP and phase in an additional £4bn by 2020 to return funding to pre-2010 levels. UKIP opposes the creation of an EU army. We’ll build a dedicated military hospital, eight hostels (200 rooms each) to deal with 9,000 ex-service personnel for ex-service sleeping rough, 500 affordable rent homes per year for veterans, guarantee jobs in the police & border services for veterans with 12 years plus service.The cost of Trident is not £100bn. The Defence Minister said in May 2011 that the 2006 cost of £11-14bn, would rise to £25bn at the completion of building –a long way from the £100bn figure bandied about.

Tony Firkins: One of the most important roles of government is to defend our country. We will not reduce conventional defence spending from existing levels. We will pursue a policy of ‘defensive defense’ which threatens no one yet makes it clear that threats and attacks will be resisted. The Trident nuclear deterrent should not be replaced. It is a weapon of mass destruction designed to kill millions of people. We can’t see when it would be used.

Daniel Goldsmith: One of the most important roles of government is to defend our country. We will not reduce conventional defence spending from existing levels. However, the Trident nuclear deterrent should not be replaced. It is a weapon of mass destruction designed to kill millions of people. We can’t see when it would be used. Instead we will make sure that we have adequate conventional, intelligence and counter-terrorism resources.

Richard Hendron: The Defence budget has fallen faster then any other department, at a time when the world is a more volatile place with threats such as ISIS growing by the day. UKIP is the only party that want to meet the NATO requirement of 2% of GDP on Defence. We also want to ensure that those who have served their county are looked after, with priority to mental health services, health care, retraining and housing. We want to provide a fast track for retired service men and women into positions such as the police and boarder force. We must maintain our excellent armed forces and be ready to deal with what ever threat that may be round the corner.

Mary Macleod: The number one priority for any state is the defence of its people, so we need to invest in our armed forces. Having plugged a £38bn black hole in the defence budget left by the last government, we’ve come a long way. We now plan to spend £163 bn on new equipment over the coming decade, keeping our Armed Forces at the absolute cutting-edge. I believe we should follow NATO’s recommendation to spend 2% of GDP on defence. With more than 90,000 servicemen and women deployed last year on more than 300 commitments in 50 countries, we are a truly global military power. We should also replace Trident. It’s vital that we maintain a continuous nuclear deterrent as the ultimate guarantee of our national security. Although no state has the intent or capability to threaten the UK’s integrity, we cannot dismiss the possibility that a direct nuclear threat might re-emerge.

Labour and Co-operative Party candidate Seema Malhotra

Seema Malhotra: We should decide how much to spend on defence according to what we plan to do. The Tories ignored this simple truth, with the result that we are building aircraft carriers without the planes to fly from them. Labour will conduct a Strategic Defence Review within the first year of government to ensure that our capabilities and ambitions match up. We believe that Britain has to maintain a Continuous at Sea Deterrent.

Simon Nayyar: As Putin’s illegal seizure of Crimea and the appalling atrocities of ISIL in Syria and Iraq painfully and tragically demonstrate, we continue to live in extremely uncertain times. In an unstable and uncertain world in which numerous countries are trying to develop nuclear weapons, Britain cannot become defenceless against these threats. For this reason, the Conservatives are committed to replacing Trident and maintaining a credible and sustainable Continuous at Sea independent nuclear deterrent, in order to keep our country safe. The cost of replacing Trident will be a fraction of the £100 billion suggested by political opponents and activists – and it’s a small price to pay for keeping Britain safe.