On 27 May 2025 the Queen’s University Belfast Conservative and Unionist Society had the great honour of hosting the right honourable Alex Burghart, MP for Brentwood and Ongar, and Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, for a wide ranging and insightful In-Conversation event.  This event was kindly sponsored by the Senator George J. Mitchell institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice and the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics at Queen’s University Belfast.  The session revealed a fascinating divergence and agreement with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP.

The event opened with an introduction by the Society chairman, Taylor Cully, followed by a speech by Mr Burghart, in which he highlighted the range of security and economic challenges facing the UK and Northern Ireland specifically, covering both the challenge of rising conflict with the war in Ukraine and Gaza, and the economic hazards posed by the Trump administration in its fondness for tariffs, which stand against the principles of free trade Mr Burghart passionately made the case for.  If there was one clear message, it was that the evolving geopolitical landscape and rising policy challenges require fresh thinking and a proactive, energetic and dynamic pragmatism, especially for the students at Queen’s entering the uncertain world ahead.

Kemi Badenoch, Leader of the Conservative Party, has recognised that Brexit was poorly planned, so it begs asking whether Northern Ireland was effectively neglected in the process, with a general lack of engagement given the controversy over no deal, the sea border and the DUP collapsing government as a result.  Mr Burghart accepted that there clearly was not enough engagement, and absolutely room for improvement with this regard, but made the case that the complexity of untangling engagement from the EU necessitated complex transition where Northern Ireland was undoubtedly a thorny issue.  

Following on, and examining the role of the Windsor Framework, in direct response to the decision by the Secretary of State to deny the attempt to trigger the Stormont Break, Mr Burghart echoed unionist concerns that this was the wrong decision.  He argued this reflected a lack of proper engagement with Stormont, yet more broadly was proudly championing the Windsor Framework as a compromise balancing various interests and protecting Northern Ireland within the UK.

Following the statement by the First Minister of Northern Ireland on 3rd March in Stormont, criticizing the 5,000 air defence missiles ordered from Thales for £1.6 Billion in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, Mr Burghart resoundingly disagreed, making a passionate case for the need to invest in military capabilities when the rules-based order is under threat.

The question of the Independent Commissioner to be appointed by the Irish and British Government to engage with paramilitaries has aroused serious controversy, and come under harsh criticism from the Justice minister, Naomi Long MLA.

Mr Burghart argued this was a vital role with the full support of him personally, but that it had to be done without simply paying them off, that there could be no reward for criminal activity, and that victims have to be considered first and foremost.  Crucially though, where there is a genuine will to disengage and disarm, it is right and proper to pursue that path.

Reflecting on the turmoil which has seen 10 out of the past 25 years of devolved government collapsed, and especially on the proposals by the Alliance Party for Stormont reform to prevent one party collapsing the executive, Mr Burghart provided a fascinating response.  He began by acknowledging that within democratic systems globally, it is clearly an anomaly in Northern Ireland that one party could collapse government, however recognised that this was absolutely essential to maintain the power sharing within the Good Friday Agreement, and that cross-community consent and engagement are pivotal for a successful Northern Ireland.   On removing the ability of one party to collapse the executive, he suggested it might have merit but stressed that such reform was undoubtedly a question for local parties, and it was up to their endorsement, support and engagement to push it through.

Reflecting on a year of the restored executive, and the clear dynamic presented by the First and Deputy First Minister, and the Programme for Government outlining their priorities, Mr Burghart expressed great pride and respect in the accomplishments of the executive to come together, and that the Programme for Government reflected excellent progress outlining the key policy areas which need tackling, whilst recognising that those evolving challenges mean there is always more to be done.

On the question of ‘the most generous settlement’ championed by Northern Ireland championed by Hilary Benn in a speech at Ulster University on 4 February 2025, calling on the Northern Ireland Executive to make difficult decisions, which was widely criticized, especially by Sinn Fein, Mr Burghart argued that the £1.5 Billion at the time was ‘undoubtedly’ a generous settlement, and acknowledged the sentiment that to govern is to choose, and ultimately it was for Stormont to decide local priorities, though naturally more funding was always helpful.

Public sector reform has been a thorn few governments have gasped globally, and is no less a problem here in Northern Ireland.  On the 4 March 2025 Hilary Benn committed £129 million with a further £106 million as part of a £235 million package earmarked specifically for public sector reform, Mr Burghart argued that whilst in the long term, this may not cover the breadth of challenges across every department, it was without question absolutely the right step, commending his counterpart for this policy drive.

Casement Park has become a totemic issue, with controversy around the delays and rising cost from the initial £76 million estimate to the current £260 million estimate.  Despite funding from the Northern Ireland Executive, the GAA and the Irish Government, there is still a £140 million shortfall.  This, alongside the cancelled attempt to host the Euro 2028 football tournament, leads to the natural questions of where it all went wrong and how to correct course.  Mr Burghart argued this was in some sense typical of infrastructure problems in the UK, with complex factors contributing to the state of the project.  The collapse of the Northern Ireland Executive between January 2017 and 2020, and again from February 2022 to January 2024, was undoubtedly major, besides the impact of Covid and difficulty in the construction sector, on top of the removal of the Euros bid leading to lower immediate prioritisation, removed the impetus and urgency of the project, letting it slip as a priority.  Ultimately, he argued it was essential that funding was found, and that stronger ministerial and administrative oversight was needed to see it through.  The £50 million announced since by the Chancellor is perhaps the start of that process.

The Conservative Party leadership last year saw an impressive performance from the Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP, who ended up finishing second.  His flagship policy leaving of the ECHR on the grounds of stopping illegal immigration, which Kemi has continuously refused either to commit to or to rule out, having since launched a policy review.  The policy suggestion has raised various eyebrows especially in Northern Ireland for the obvious potential to unravel the Good Friday agreement.

 On the question of such a move, Mr Burghart acknowledged the clear and present risk, and foundation that the ECHR provides for the Good Friday Agreement.  Mr Burghart argued that even taking that into account, the international rules-based system and migration patterns have evidently evolved over 70 years, so it should not be ruled out. Critically, even if it became party policy, a thorough, rigorous and meticulous legislative process has the potential to examine and tackle all concerns directly relating to the GFA.

The announcement of Trump’s tariff regime was a major shock moment for the global economy, but especially for Northern Ireland in light of its complex trading arrangements.  The floated proposals included a 200% tariff on Irish whisky, which could have a hugely detrimental impact on the sector.  On the impact of tariffs on Northern Ireland, Mr Burghart stressed the need for engagement with the Trump administration, both from the NI Executive and UK government as absolutely critical in mitigating the inevitable fallout, and in proactively making the case for free trade and the benefits it brings to the United States.

On the matter of Sinn Fein, Alliance and the SDLP boycotting the St Patrick’s Day celebrations in Washington earlier this year, Mr Burghart called out the decision as short sighted and ultimately counterproductive in terms or representing Northern Irish interests abroad.

In terms of the security challenges abroad, the past decade has seen upheaval and evolving threats from range of areas.  On the question of Starmer and Macron’s suggestion of a ‘Coalition of the Willing’, and the potential deployment in Ukraine of British soldiers as part of a peacekeeping force, Mr Burghart dismissed the idea, arguing that the proposal was impractical and ultimately ineffectual, with even tens of thousands of western forces as an unlikely deterrent given the more than a million Ukrainians under arms, well beside the political and pragmatic difficulties.

The Conservative opposition has supported the move to 2.5% of GDP on defence, having brought it to 2.3% by the end of their tenure, with the recent uplift from Labour from a £5 billion cut in overseas aid spending.  The opposition has also pushed for 3%, and the labour government has since set a 2035 target.  Yet in a time of difficult budgetary pressure in every department, the question arises as to funding the rest.  On this point, Mr Burghart argued that a part of funding defence was welfare cuts from the ballooning bill, this had to be part of a broader operation of cutting inefficiency across government, and that pushing for a smaller, leaner state with better value for government spending was the key to meeting the 3% target of Defence spending as a share of GDP.

On the subject of public finances, the budget last year raised £40 billion in taxes, yet the bulk of this was formed from the national insurance employer contribution rise, amounting to £25 billion.  Whilst Northern Ireland was allocated £1.5 billion, the history and context means it’s third sector encompassing the voluntary and communal sector is disproportionately large, and it this sector which is least able to absorb the rise in National Insurance Contributions (NICs) for employers, leading to huge outcry from local voices.  Mr Burghart when questioned confirmed that earlier that very day he had been meeting with representatives of the third sector in Belfast, and that it was a major concern for him to see the impact of the NICs in NI especially, but equally across the UK.  He made clear he considered this was a clear misstep from the Chancellor which the government was unwilling to acknowledge.

Naturally, the future of the Union was not a subject which could be neglected in this discussion.  The most recent Irish Times/ARINS North and South Survey 2024 survey showed an increase of support for unity from 27% to 34%, and fall in support of union from 50% to 48%, which is reflected in improved nationalist electoral performance.  On the question of concern over this trend, Mr Burghart stressed that whilst it was clearly problematic, and the Unionist cause had major concerns which it was vital to tackle to win the debate, he was not unduly concerned by shallow polling numbers, making the case that when pressed on the details of Irish Unity, such as questions of flag, anthem or transition, much of the support for unity faded away.

For the last Conservative government, besides Brexit, there was perhaps no greater controversy in Northern Ireland than the Legacy Bill, which sought to protect former British soldiers who served in the troubles from prosecution.  The bill created outrage, with one former victim’s commissioner of Northern Ireland Judith Thompson, calling it “an outrageous piece of legislation”, and the Labour government having since shelved it.  Mr Burghart accepted that such legislation was undoubtedly controversial, but argued it was justified as an attempt to end a series of one-sided prosecutions, which had seen several former British soldiers come under investigation and prosecution, with no such prosecutions for former IRA fighters.  He equally made the point the current Labour government had a muddled incoherent position on this, seeking to keep some provisions whilst abandoning others.

The climbdown on the £5 billion proposed cuts to Personal Independence Payments (PIP) in the first week of July 2025 will undoubtedly be a watershed moment in the history of this present government, with over 120 backbenchers threatening rebellion and huge concessions.  In that sense, our last question was almost prescient, given the £12 billion proposed broad welfare cuts from the last Tory manifesto, and the impact on Northern Ireland of £150 million from Labour’s proposed PIP cuts with 37,000 affected individuals.  On the question of supporting this, Mr Burghart was resolute in the case that this was the wrong choice, targeting those who needed it most, raising insignificant funds in the welfare context, and not dealing with far greater pressures like the long-term sickness bill.  In this case, it seems the Labour party agreed.

 In the round, this event provided a rich and insightful discussion on a wide range of issues affecting Northern Ireland and the broader UK political landscape.  Alex Burghart MP engaged with pressing topics such the economic implications of tariffs, and the intricacies of Northern Ireland’s post-Brexit reality.  His views on the Windsor Framework, the future of Stormont, public sector reform, and the Northern Ireland Legacy Bill revealed a pragmatic approach, seeking balance between national security, economic stability, and the complexities of the peace process.

Mr Burghart also tackled tough questions on issues like military investment, public finances, and the future of the Union, demonstrating a clear commitment to defending the Union while acknowledging the growing challenges from Nationalist sentiments.  His arguments on the Legacy Bill, in particular, highlighted the ongoing tensions surrounding justice for those involved in The Troubles, emphasizing the need for a fair and balanced approach to the past. The event closed with a final word of conclusion by the Society Chair, Taylor Cully.

As the conversation progressed, it became clear that Mr Burghart’s perspective on these critical issues was shaped by a commitment to practical solutions and an understanding of Northern Ireland's unique political and social landscape.  Ultimately, the event was a valuable opportunity for students at Queen’s to engage with the challenges that lie ahead for Northern Ireland and the UK as a whole.

This event was hosted by the QUB Student Conservative and Unionist Society, in partnership with the Senator George J. Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice and the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics, QUB, which both provided invaluable contribution and assistance with organising the event.

Biography

Eitan Godsi is currently an MA Student in Violence, Terrorism and Security, having previously achieved an undergraduate in Politics and International Relations from the University of Aberdeen. His research interests include International Security and Contemporary Security Challenges, NATO, Proxy warfare, as well as domestic political approaches to conventional warfare and counter insurgency.