Heh. I can't vote in that poll - what does 'safe' mean?
If nothing goes wrong, operation is quite safe. But we are accepting a risk of things going seriously wrong - like now in Japan. Is that risk worth taking? IMO that's a political discussion, and nothing anyone can just answer. It should be discussed much more openly, and away from the interests of big power companies wanting to make money.
There are a lot of problems with nuclear power apart from the 'safety' issue. It starts with mining of uranium which isn't without problems - it is also not really available in Britain, essentially making the UK totally dependent on other countries. Then there's the waste problem - no country has a good concept for a long-term ('final') storage repository, and nobody knows how to keep the stuff safe long-term. You can also question if it's wise to have our entire energy produced by just a few massive power plants, or if it wouldn't be better to have more smaller plants, because failure of one wouldn't have such a large impact. There's a risk of terrorist attacks. And there's the debate over nuclear weapons, which are linked to the nuclear industry. You could also be concerned over all our energy being produced by a few large, private companies.
For what it's worth, I think it's time to move to newer technology, renewable energy. We could sustain all our energy needs with just wind power produced in Britain. It would create far more jobs, jobs in rural areas and could be produced locally. It doesn't have to be instantly, and of course not only wind power, but a 'mixed energy concept', with a mid-term phase out of nuclear power. And no new nuclear power plants.