Who should really own our house?

[Littlething]

I will appreciate some advice and fresh perspective on my situation please. Sorry if it is a bit long.
Me and my partner of 15 years (two dc, 11 and 8) are about to exchange on a house that we are buying with the money I inherited from my late parents. There will be a small mortgage, paid out of rental income on my flat in London. We moved to where we are now 2 years ago from London for his job. We were renting here while we were looking for a house to buy paying rent out of the income on my London flat. I have stopped working after my youngest was born, my dp has a good job (architect), that covers our bills. My parents gifted me the flat in London, so we lived rent/mortgage free and they gave us cash for holidays, new car etc, we would not be able to afford it otherwise. We spend rather carefully, shopping in H&M and Lidl but we like to entertain, go to the theatre and children have lots of hobbies. My partner has a flat in London that he bought before we met, he pays mortgage on it and rents it out, so mortgage is covered.
The house we are buying here is small and will need extension and loft conversion, it will be paid for with what’s left out of the money my parents left me. For context, we decided to buy a small house (in a not very ideal location) because it is all we can afford without selling mine or his flats and he is strongly against selling since “it is our pension”.
I agreed to put both our names on the title. I want to make it clear that he is a kind and loving person, he is my best friend and the children adore him. I do not want to upset him by spelling out that it is my money that we are spending on the purchase and renovation. However when I said the other day that I expect to have an upper hand when it comes to decisions to do with renovating (and maybe selling when the children are off to Uni) he got very upset. He feels that he will “pour all his energy, time and skills into the house and will be left with nothing”. He also said he feels his contribution to our finances is major because all his salary is spent every months, he provides for us and this needs to be recognised. AIBU to expect him to see it from my perspective?
Many thanks for reading and sharing what you think.

Well I've said it several times over the course of the thread....

I can see why you wouldn’t want to split it 50/50 if you contribute significantly more, but think you really need to include his income ( especially what’s spent on bills) on working out what’s fair

HRFT but from the responses I've seen this is where the MN hypocrisy shines out - if this was a reverse and DP wanted to buy a house solely in his name, we'd all be screaming for OP to get her name on the deeds for "protection". DP is making a significant contribution to the household so should be entitled to a reasonable share of the property and a say in how it's renovated, decorated and used. DP sounds cautious and sensible in keeping both rental properties as pension, as it's likely that OP doesn't have full pension provision due to not working, whereas DP probably does. A solicitor can ringfence the initial inheritance contribution, but I think any increase in value should be seen as joint as DP will be contributing and is a member of the family - him working is presumably facilitating OP to study and enjoy time with DC and also doing charity work.

A huge number of posters have already spoken in support of the partner.

Besides, unless you mean that individual posters post the opposite point on different threads it is hardly hypocrisy anyway, it's a forum of individuals not a hive mind.