+

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 178 Non-Civil Parish or Community voters.

90%
Yes
10%
No
90%
Yes
10%
No

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 178 Non-Civil Parish or Community voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 178 Non-Civil Parish or Community voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Non-Civil Parish or Community voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9NSLXLCanswered…6mos6MO

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.

 @9QP4KY8answered…5mos5MO

Yes but for good quality estates. These need to be regulated and reach a certain standard of home. Not ones we are seeing that are falling apart within years

 @9QNVVV7answered…5mos5MO

There is plenty of vacant council owned flats or homes, particularly Westminster. Why aren’t they being used?

 @9QMSKWYanswered…5mos5MO

Yes, by liberalising planning rules such that the private sector hugely increases building of all types of housing.

 @9QKV3WBanswered…5mos5MO

The government should restrict people owning multiple properties. There should be more secure government owned social housing.

 @9QK5TTBanswered…5mos5MO

Yes, but not on green belt land. Abandoned and dilapidated buildings should be demolished and the land re-used

 @9QHV95Zanswered…5mos5MO

Yes, but with an infrastructure that can sustain new homes being built I.e new schools, GP surgeries etc.

 @9QH2MWHanswered…5mos5MO

as long as the homes were of good quality, not over populated and amenities were built alongside these to accommodate a growing population and reduce traffic