92%
Yes
8%
No
92%
Yes
8%
No

Historical Results

See how support for each position on “Affordable Housing” has changed over time for 32.6k UK voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

See how importance of “Affordable Housing” has changed over time for 32.6k UK voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from UK users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.

 @9NWTHVTanswered…4 days4D

Yes. There should be a nationalised government run programme of house building, where the state covers the cost of training youngsters in house building skills, and those trainees then work for national house building programmes for 5 years to pay back the costs before being allowed to go and work on their own.

 @9NV6SWJanswered…5 days5D

No but new housing being made for people should be properly made instead of thrown together causing further issues and reducing families having a 'home' due to more work and money needing to go into the corrections of faulty, thin properties.

 @9NTVFS6answered…5 days5D

Yes but without negating quality. They should be fit for people to live in without raising further financial issues down the line due to companies skimping on quality

 @9NT74NQ answered…5 days5D

Rather than incentivise, the government should put out tenders to build social housing stock owned and controlled by local councils

 @9NT33TSanswered…6 days6D

Incentives should be to redevelop existing empty properties for affordable housing instead of building more homes

 @9NSLXLCanswered…6 days6D

Yes but they should prioritise brownfield sites and ensure that existing villages and towns are not over populated: i.e. boost the criteria and requirements for ensuring roads, infrastructure, schools, doctors, dentists etc. can cope with the additional populations. Otherwise, the houses sell but everyone’s quality of life decreases.

Other Popular Questions

Explore other topics that are important to UK voters.