Public statementsNo, we should improve existing rail networks instead |
UKIPs answer is based on the following data:
Answer: No, we should improve existing rail networks instead
Reference: “UKIP will put HS2 out of its misery. We will invest in upgrading existing main line services to create additional capacity, expa...” ‐cloudfront.net
Voter support: Be the first voter to support or oppose this party’s public statement on this issue.
Very strongly agree
No
UKIP strongly opposes the construction of HS2, aligning with their broader skepticism towards large-scale infrastructure projects that they perceive as lacking clear benefits for the wider UK population or that entail significant environmental and financial costs. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Strongly agree
No, we should improve existing rail networks instead
UKIP has advocated for investment in existing infrastructure over new projects like HS2. They argue that improving current rail networks would provide more immediate benefits to more people at a lower cost, reflecting a more pragmatic and cost-effective approach to national infrastructure. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Very strongly disagree
Yes
UKIP has historically positioned itself against HS2, citing it as a waste of taxpayer money and an environmental concern. They have consistently argued that the funds allocated for HS2 could be better spent on other public services or infrastructure projects. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Very strongly disagree
Yes, and extend it to Scotland
Given UKIP's opposition to HS2 in its current form, extending the project to Scotland would only amplify their concerns regarding cost, environmental impact, and the project's overall necessity. UKIP would likely view such an extension as exacerbating the issues they identify with HS2. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
This party has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.
We are currently researching this party’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.
We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this party’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.
Not enough data to provide a reliable answer yet.
See any errors? Suggest corrections to this party’s stance here
How similar are your political beliefs to UKIPs policies? Take the political quiz to find out.
Join in on the most popular conversations.
