I think this is all part of why there is considerable thought the Tories will not necessarily be too distraught at a “period in opposition” - such is the scale of the cuts due in the next parliament, and the anticipation (which they are trying to dampen considerably at the moment) that Labour will turn back on the taps ….
However, two things seem to be uncontroversial regardless of the sample size …. Four eyes are simply more likely to spot a problem than two, and thus reduced staffing can only make some form of safety issue “more likely” …. And that in a declining Victorian asset, none of the maintenance matters will improve by another 5 years of being battered by the elements and on some extremely heavily utilised lines, and therefore the costs stored for the future will grow considerably, and that logically, the possibility of some form of issue with infrastructure that was due to be replaced (ie had been identified as End of Life) and will now be delayed, can only increase, and is thus “more likely”
I’m sure, tabloid headline writers aside, that most good thinking RMT members dread the moment that they read of some incident affecting others in the railway family, or indeed the public, and it is hard to conclude on the simple logical basis above, that the majority of responders to the poll in stating the general view that something being maintained or renewed is generally going to function better than something which is not, are anything other than completely correct.