copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2023-01-06): On 3 February 2022, the DUP’s Paul Givan resigned his position as First Minister in protest over the implementation of the Protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland. With the DUP not nominating a replacement, the Sinn Féin deputy First Minister, Michelle O’Neill, was also forced to resign, in accordance with the rules. [...] First, there may have been no progress toward resolving issues around the Northern Ireland protocol that triggered Givan’s resignation. [...] Taken together, the recent DUP protest resignation over the Protocol and the possibility of a nationalist First Minister make it unlikely that an Executive will be formed in the immediate aftermath of the election.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2022-05-10): One of the many peculiarities of the Protocol is the provision (Article 18) for a ‘democratic consent vote’ to be held in the Northern Ireland Assembly. This is a vote on the continued application of Articles 5-10 of the Protocol, which avoid a hard land border but effectively mean the ‘Irish Sea border’. This vote is to be held in the first instance at the end of 2024. It means that the elections in Northern Ireland on 5 May 2022 have determined the makeup of the Assembly that will cast this vote. Because of the significance of the 2024 vote, we have asked questions on it across all four polls. There has been consistency across all four polls in people’s views as to how they would like members of the Northern Ireland Assembly (MLAs) to vote in 2024. Half want their MLAs to support the full application of the Protocol in 2024, but 4 in 10 want the opposite (see Figure 3). Only 8% have no preference or no interest, which shows quite how significant the Protocol has become in domestic politics in Northern Ireland.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2024-01-15): The other articles of the protocol which include guarantees to rights and equality, a commitment to the common travel area and to maintain north–south co-operation will remain in force regardless of any consent vote. [...] The provisions of the Northern Ireland protocol automatically entered into force at 11pm on 31 December 2020, at the end of the Brexit transition period. After four years, the UK must provide Northern Ireland with the opportunity to decide whether or not those provisions remain in place. [...] If the vote passes by a simple majority, consent will need to be sought again four years later. The UK government will also be required to commission an independent review into the functioning of the Northern Ireland protocol and the implications of its implementation or termination. The review must report within four years.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2021-06-13): But it includes a potential future pathway to a united Ireland through a referendum, also called a border poll. The text which in UK law says the Northern Ireland secretary "shall exercise the power [to call a referendum] if at any time it appears likely… that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom". [...] Unionist parties are strongly opposed to the Northern Ireland Protocol - the post-Brexit trading arrangement which in effect has created a trade border with the rest of the UK.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2024-07-16): Under the terms of Article 18, the Northern Ireland Assembly has the power (after 31 December 2024) to decide whether to terminate or continue the protocol arrangements. "The Withdrawal Agreement doesn't state how Northern Ireland should give consent [to continue] – it is for the UK to determine how that decision is made" but the UK Government has already declared that the decision will be made by a simple majority of Assembly members.[10] In the event that consent is not given, the arrangements would cease to apply two years thereafter. The Joint Committee would make alternative proposals to the UK and EU to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. If consent is given, then the question may be put again after a further four years.[10] At the 2022 Northern Ireland Assembly election, parties favouring continuance of the protocol won 53 of the 90 seats.[11] Nevertheless, Northern Ireland's Unionist parties objected strongly to the protocol: protesting against it, the Democratic Unionist Party obstructed its operation and, until early February 2024, prevented the Northern Ireland Assembly from assembling.[12]
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2022-05-02): Uncertainty remains, however, as to what form the new Assembly will take after the DUP collapsed the Stormont Executive in February in protest over the Northern Ireland protocol, which has effectively created a post-Brexit border in the Irish Sea. [...] Ten members of the Assembly also form its Executive – taking decisions on "significant and controversial" issues and on legislation proposed by ministers. [...] However, if an agreement is reached – or the polls get it wrong and DUP win the election – it appears highly unlikely there will be a sitting Assembly after polling day as DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson has made it clear he his party will not go back into the Executive while outstanding issues around the protocol remain unresolved.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2022-03-23): The Assembly cannot simply vote and "the Protocol goes". By December 2024, the Assembly will vote on whether to continue with or withdraw consent for Articles 5–10 of the Protocol (but not the whole Protocol). [...] "There are basically three ways in which I can see the protocol being abolished. One is that the prime minister has a change of heart on the issue… Two, the legal challenge that has been launched succeeds, and I sincerely hope that it will. But if it doesn’t, then the third way in the law is to have 45 Unionists elected to Stormont. and if 45 members of the Assembly vote to revoke the protocol, then the protocol goes. And that’s where coming into the next Assembly election, I think that it’s important that unionists are working together and cooperating in order to achieve that number." [...] Can 45 MLAs vote to revoke the Protocol, and in doing so "it goes"?
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2020-03-20): Parliamentary elections were held on July 5. [...] Reopening of the economy and containment measures.1 [...] Background and Recent Developments
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2012-11-29): General Assembly Plenary 44th & 45th Meetings (PM & Night) [...] He further expressed the hope that with today’s decision both sides would do whatever was needed to return to the negotiating table. Whatever the significance of today’s vote, "we must now turn to what happens tomorrow", he said. It was regrettable that today’s solution had to be achieved by a vote at the United Nations rather than at the negotiating table, but that was the reality of the current state of affairs. [...] For information media • not an official record
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2016-04-01): Superficially, the Protocol resembles the example drawn from the Northern Ireland Assembly, where those affected by a measure were given a capacity to expand the voting unit when they believed their interests were affected by a proposal. However, in this instance the bodies empowered to trigger entrenchment, the national parliaments, are outside of the law-making process and remain outside of that process; the entrenching rule does not enable them to veto the proposal. Instead, the measure activates a variety of entrenchment through form; to continue with the legislation the Commission must publically reconcile its proposal with the principle of subsidiarity.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2024-10-07): The contested enforcement of the Northern Ireland Protocol [...] This new controversy would further heighten doubts about the applicability of the Protocol and lead Northern Irish unionists to call for its withdrawal once again, without proposing any other solution. [...] [19] It is important to point out that the Prime Minister was making a concession to the Irish nationalists. This concerns the principle of consent which was originally intended to allow the Unionist Democratic Party (DUP) to veto the renewal of the arrangements for the constitutional future of Northern Ireland. According to the new provision, at the end of four years after the end of the transitional period, i.e. at the end of 2024, the Northern Ireland Assembly could decide, by a simple majority vote, not to extend the application of the Protocol. This principle reasserts the right to self-determination of the people of Northern Ireland.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2019-10-11): (ii) or a weighted majority (60%) of members present and voting, including at least 40% of each of the nationalist and unionist designations present and voting. [...] (b) decisions by simple majority of members voting, except when decision on a cross-community basis is required; [...] 33. The Westminster Parliament (whose power to make legislation for Northern Ireland would remain unaffected) will:
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2012-02-27): In respect of articles 13 and 22: [...] With the following reservations: [...] United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2019-02-15): United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland16 [...] 11 April 2017 6 February 2019 [...] United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 10 April 2017
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2020-01-31): The Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland shall apply as from the end of the transition period, with the exception of the following provisions of that Protocol, which shall apply as from the entry into force of this Agreement: [...] PROTOCOL ON IRELAND/NORTHERN IRELAND [...] RECALLING that this Protocol is to be implemented in accordance with the respective constitutional orders of the Kingdom of Spain and of the United Kingdom,
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2024-09-02): If MLAs vote to maintain the application of the Protocol, then depending on how they vote they would have a further vote either four or eight years later (see Figure 2). If the vote in favour of continuing to apply the Protocol is a simple majority of MLAs, then the next vote will be four years later (so 2028 assuming no extension to the transition period). If, however, there is ‘cross-community support’ within that majority, the next vote will be eight years later (e.g. 2032). [...] The second additional stage applies if MLAs have voted for the continued application of Articles 5-10 but only by a simple majority and not with cross-community support. In such a case, the UK government will commission an independent review into the functioning of the Protocol and specifically ‘the implications of any decision to continue or terminate alignment on social, economic and political life in Northern Ireland’. The review is to involve ‘close consultation’ with political parties in Northern Ireland, businesses, civil society groups, representative organisations (including of the agricultural sector) and trade unions. It will conclude within two years of the MLA’s democratic consent vote and make recommendations ‘including with regard to any new arrangements it believes could command cross-community support’. Who will undertake the review is not specified.
Claim: If 45 members of the Northern Ireland Assembly vote to revoke the Northern Ireland Protocol, then the Protocol goes. (Christopher Stalford, 2021-05-17)
Evidence (2007-04-30): Jump to In This Section [...] FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND [...] (Protocol amending the 1970 agreement concluded December 6, 1999 (provisionally applied).)
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2023-10-07): Official data for the past two quarters shows that over 45,000 applicants are on Northern Ireland’s social housing waiting list. Annual figures for 2002-03 say that 26,248 people were waiting at that time. Stats for the last two decades indicate a general trend of growing waiting lists.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2020-11-17): Housing charity Shelter warned there was a "chronic shortage of social housing" and that "any new dawn for social renters must come with major investment in new homes too". [...] The prime minister says the proposals will ensure "social housing tenants are treated with the respect they deserve", but critics argue there is too little for the 93,000 households in England currently stuck in temporary accommodation, or the estimated 3.8 million people in need of social housing. [...] But she warned: "With over a million households already on the social housing waiting list, and many more families potentially facing homelessness as the recession bites, any new regulatory system is being set up to fail unless we build many more social homes."
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2022-11-18): One of the most common reasons people apply for social housing is because they or their immediate family members have a disability and they are unable to work. They need an affordable alternative to private rental housing that’s suitable for their disability-related needs. Our research on the experiences and circumstances of people on the social housing waiting list has found many people with serious disabilities are not guaranteed access to social housing. The following three case studies, drawn from our interviews, illustrate how the long wait for social housing makes their extremely difficult situations worse. [...] Read more: 'Getting onto the wait list is a battle in itself': insiders on what it takes to get social housing
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2023-08-17): The chronic shortage of social housing in London means that in multiple boroughs, there are over 10,000 people waiting for suitable accommodation. The boroughs with the largest waiting lists for social housing in 2022 were Lambeth (33,640 households), Newham (33,246) and Brent (25,218). From 1997 to 2022, the largest growth in the number of households on the social housing waiting list occurred in Newham in 2016, where the list of 17,453 households grew to 25,729 in 2017. Some boroughs witnessed significant drops in the numbers of households on the waiting list in particular years. For example, from 2015 to 2016, Camden’s waiting list decreased from 24,644 to 2,930. However, this has not always been due to the allocation of more social housing, but the tightening of criteria needed to qualify, which vary by borough and so do not perfectly correlate with the number of people in need of a home.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2024-01-13): Data released in November, for last year's June to September quarter, revealed 43,074 Queenslanders were on the waitlist for social housing – a rise of 1,600 since the quarter prior. [...] "We know there's around 100,000 households that are eligible in Queensland for social housing and who are in need of social housing," Ms McVeigh said. [...] "The most disturbing statistic that's come out with this increase in the number on the social housing waitlist, is that it's an increase in families … Queenslanders have had enough and now it's families that are suffering," Mr Mander said.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2024-02-19): Social housing lettings are when social housing properties - homes owned by social landlords - are rented by households at cheaper rents than in the private sector. Social landlords can be a local authority (often known as "council housing") or a private registered provider (which includes housing associations). They must be registered with the Regulator of Social Housing. In most areas, social housing is allocated by the local authority. Each local authority runs a "waiting list" as there are more people applying for social housing than properties available. 17% of households in England live in social housing[footnote 1]. [...] The 267,000 households with a new social housing letting in 2021/22 equated to approximately 487,000 people – roughly 1 in 116 people in England[footnote 1]. This is an increase of 52,000 (12%) from the previous year (2020/21). [...] 59% of households who were new to the social housing sector in 2021/22 were on the waiting list for less than a year in that local authority area before they got their letting. 12% of households were on the waiting list for 5 years or more before getting a social letting in that area.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2023-01-26): 1.2 million households in England are currently stuck on waiting lists for a social home, a rise of 5% in the last two years. [...] "The social housing deficit is at the heart of the housing emergency. The fundamental lack of genuinely affordable homeshas pushed millions of people into insecure, expensive and often discriminatory private renting. It is why we have over a million households waiting for a decent social home, andthousands ofhomeless childrenare growing upin temporary accommodation. [...] In 2022 there were1,206,376 households on social housing waiting lists in England.This is an increase of 5% since 2020 where there were 1,145,132 households on social housing waiting lists. Data is available at: DLUHC, Live tables on rents, lettings and tenancies, Table 600
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2018-03-09): The size of the social housing sector has been decreasing over time. The proportion of the population living in social housing in Great Britain halved between the early 1980s and early 2010s, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The IFS puts this down to two key developments: the introduction of Right to Buy in 1980, which gave tenants the ability to buy their council houses at below market rates, and a general drop in the amount of social housing being built. [...] Social housing usually refers to homes rented at sub-market levels by councils and housing associations. "Social rent" levels are around 50% of market levels. The government also includes "affordable rent" homes in its definition of social housing, these are up to 80% of market levels.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2022-07-12): At least 30,000 people in England have been on a social housing waiting list for 10 years or more, The Big Issue can reveal. [...] Long waits for social housing are largely due to the chronic under-supply of social homes. [...] A spokesperson for the Department of Levelling up, Housing and Communities said: "Since 2012 the number of households on social housing waiting lists has fallen by over 660,000.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2024-02-10): The housing crisis has pushed thousands onto social housing waiting lists. How could a key government policy help? [...] There are an estimated 175,000 households on social housing waiting lists across the country. [...] Loading...Chief executive Wendy Hayhurst says it will take at least two decades to get social housing on track.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2024-10-07): Social housing itself, however, is only one component of the broader housing welfare state, which consists of budget-neutral tenancy and mortgage regulation and of budget-heavier rent allowances, fiscal exemptions, and homeownership subsidies. By combining the social housing database with the most comprehensive existing data describing these other housing welfare dimensions, we show that social housing correlates positively with rental regulation and housing allowances, but negatively with homeownership subsidies and liberal mortgage regulation. Housing regimes are divided over whether they support tenancy or mortgaged homeownership and have shifted towards the latter over time. [...] Social housing has been a latecomer among Western countries’ social policy reforms and never really occupied as permanent a place as countries’ social security systems. Its introduction and expansion phases correlate with those of the general welfare state, with the aftermath of the two world wars being decisive moments of growth. Similar to the welfare state, the 1970s were a watershed: at the peak of the reconstruction boom, private construction started to take over and social housing entered a stagnation or, more frequently, retrenchment phase. Today total housing production, social housing construction, and social housing stock levels have on average reached historically low values both in countries and their major cities. The post-socialist countries joined the club of privatized housing provision after 1990. Contrary to the much-observed inertia of social security, social housing has been a case where significant cut-backs have occurred in various countries.
Claim: Two decades ago, around 26,000 people were waiting for social housing. Now that figure is over 45,000 (Belfast Telegraph, 2023-10-07)
Evidence (2020-09-15): Resident engagement and Social Housing Regulation Act