The Belfast/Good Friday Agreement: 25 years on

On 4 July 2023, the Cambridge Future of the Island of Ireland series concluded its 2022/23 programme with a half-day symposium at St Catharine’s College, reflecting on the 25th anniversary of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. The series is co-convened by Dr Niamh Gallagher (Associate Professor in British and Irish History and Fellow of St Catharine’s) and Dr Barry Colfer (Research Fellow in Politics, St Edmund’s College) and invites leading figures from academia, the cultural sector, politics, and civil society, to discuss the future of the island of Ireland at this critical juncture.  

The symposium was composed of three expert panels — comprising grassroots representatives, party politicians, and academics — consider the past, present, and future of the Agreement. Amid the ongoing hiatus at Stormont at the time, the symposium offered a forum that was somewhat removed from the political intensity in the region for groups not regularly conversant with each other to meet and discuss the successes, limitations, and potential ways forward for the Agreement. The conversation was highly fruitful, and revealed that, despite prevailing narratives that Northern Ireland remains in a state of constant disagreement, our speakers found a wealth of common ground.

Sections

• Introduction
• Grassroots Perspectives
• Party Politicians
• Academics on Northern Ireland
• Q&A
• Panellist Information

Introduction – Dr Niamh Gallagher

Dr Gallagher began the symposium by reflecting on her own experience at the Queen’s University Belfast 25th anniversary event, in April 2023 at which the atmosphere was ‘overwhelmingly positive’. For Dr Gallagher, this was entirely apt, as the Agreement itself was a ‘feat of diplomacy’ and has achieved a significant amount in 25 years. To name just a few examples, this includes: the massive reduction in paramilitary activity, the dismantling of most of the British security apparatus in Northern Ireland, the establishment of a regional power-sharing executive, the enshrining of core principles in the Agreement such as cross-community consent, human rights, access to unbiased policing and justice, as well as a commitment to cultural and linguistic diversity. 

She stressed, however, the need for researchers and educators to be critical of their topic and noted that at the QUB conference, the atmosphere was clearly tilted to one side, noting that the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement is far from perfect. There is ongoing parliamentary dysfunction and cross-community mechanisms are used frequently for politically partisan purposes. The Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland annexed to the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) agreed between the European Union (EU) and the UK following the UK’s withdrawal from the bloc (hereinafter the Northern Ireland Protocol) exposed different perceptions relating to the meaning of parts of the Agreement. Legacy issues remain deeply painful for families who continue to seek justice. There is ongoing paramilitary activity and associated criminality, as well as a wealth of economic, social, and cultural problems, such as low levels of educational outcomes amongst certain groups and chronic economic under-development in several localities.

The pros and cons of the Agreement highlighted by Dr Gallagher set the parameters for what followed. Each panel was asked to consider a range of issues relating to the past, present, and future of the Agreement. Speakers spoke for up to seven minutes followed by moderated discussion.

Panel 1: Grassroots Perspectives

The first panel, chaired by Dr Barry Colfer, welcomed representatives from grassroots communities, namely: Mickey Cooper, Brian Dougherty, Emma Murphy, and Mark Langhammer. Their full profiles can be found at the bottom of this page.

A key theme of the panel’s discussion was how the economic climate interacts with the success of the Agreement. For Mark Langhammer, the heyday of the Agreement was its first decade when Northern Ireland received significant financial investment and funding, but this was hampered first by the financial crash in 2008 and then by the election of the Conservative-led coalition Government in the UK in 2010 and the austerity policies which followed which had a ‘crippling’ effect on the activities of the Northern Ireland Executive. Whilst Stormont and allied trade unions have managed to block certain Westminster legislation, and while ministers have worked hard to protect public services, many remain ‘fatally unstable’. For  Mark, a key result of the latest Stormont collapse has been the ‘degradation’ of many Protestant working class areas in Northern Ireland. 

How the economic landscape affects young people received particular attention in the panel discussion. Both Mickey Cooper and Brian Dougherty spoke about their work with young people in Derry/Londonderry and how this helps counter the problems of economic underdevelopment and instability which inevitably help stoke social tension within and between communities. Mickey stressed how the lack of economic opportunity leads to disenfranchisement and can play into the hands of dissident groups promoting non-political means to bring about a united Ireland. His work focuses on creating economic opportunities for young people to help dissuade them from looking to such groups, whilst providing a forum for them to tell their community’s story with pride.  Whilst in both cases the projects are culturally-focused - Mickey runs a tourism company and is working on a museum project and Brian runs a bands forum -, it is clear they can play a significant role in economic empowerment by developing employment opportunities, as well as by fostering positive relationships and by helping young people to develop new skills. Brian spoke of the groups of ‘disillusioned, marginalised Protestants’ who he has witnessed transform into those who now ‘consider civic engagement the way forward’. 

Emma Murphy, the youngest speaker across the panels, spoke of a sense of apathy towards the Agreement and wider orthodox politics from her generation who were born after 1998. Notably, such ‘apathy’ is the very thing that Mickey and Brian spoke about trying to combat. Many of the students Emma represents feel a greater sense of concern about the cost-of-living crisis and want to see more urgency in seeing Stormont tackling problems that feel more pertinent to the lives of young people. Questions of borders and problems generated before they were born often feel less relevant to this cohort, Emma explained. For some students, there is actually no real interest in the politics of the region.  Emma argues that the continuing dysfunction at Stormont creates obstacles to young people getting involved in politics, which in turn has a knock-on consequence of young people being increasingly left out of conversations relating to reforming the Agreement. Mickey pointed out that a lack of interest could be seen as a positive, as it shows people having moved on from the conflict, but that this can also create a different problem of disconnection and alienation. Many students are now seeking opportunities abroad in the absence of ones at home, which could clearly stoke further economic decline. 

Throughout the conversation our speakers evaluated the successes and limitations of the Agreement. For Brian, the Agreement has created a stable foundation on which to build his cultural projects, particularly through the principle of ‘parity of esteem’ between cultures that the Agreement promotes, as well as through the decline of violence. Mark underlined that his children have been able to lead normal lives and that this achievement alone should not be understated. Weaknesses were identified, however. Mark argued that the core problem with the Agreement and its resulting political structures is the centrality it places on Stormont and Stormont’s ability to block other institutions such as the North-South Ministerial Council from affecting change. He would prefer to see greater devolution, but not to one single entity. In his vision, local councils would be given further-reaching powers, particularly in terms of political and economic development. 

Both Mark and Brian spoke about a sense of regression or decline with the Agreement over the past decade. Mark argued that this was partly directly linked to the 2008 financial crash and the UK Conservative-led Government’s austerity policies which had a ‘crippling’ effect on Stormont and has in turn damaged the reconciliation process. For example, Brian spoke about the stark contrast in Derry/Londonderry between 2013, when it hosted the Fleadh, an all-Ireland music festival, and the mood in recent years. Whereas his bands forum performed in 2013 and had a very positive experience, they have said they would not perform again if the Fleadh returned. Representatives in the local community have raised several factors to try to explain the rise in tensions, including the emergence of what is seen by some as a growth in anti—British sentiment since 2016, the impact of COVID-19 and lockdowns on community infrastructure, the widening gap between grassroots unionism and political unionism, and increased polarisation in local politics around events such as the death of Queen Elizabeth II and subsequent coronation of Charles III. Brian also challenged the perception that the Agreement has struggled due to unionists refusing to engage with the process. In his experience, many unionists within civil society have been particularly keen to engage, and that they want more opportunities to do so.

Looking to the future, Mickey feels that a border poll is quickly approaching and more meaningful debate on the topic was needed, but said he understood how it engendered defensiveness from the unionist community and wants debate to be accommodating to unionist apprehensions. Brian pushed back on this somewhat, arguing that the debate on Irish unity had been ongoing for years, but that polls keep showing only a minority of people in Northern Ireland even  want a border poll in the near future and that these figures have remained stable in both the pre- and post- Brexit eras. Emma considered the lack of progress on both the constitutional question and on more day-to-day issues frustrating and thinks that progress on either would lead to more fruitful discussion about the other. Mark raised some of the ideas that were floated in 1998 but were ultimately shelved as possible avenues for reform, such as the participation of people in Northern Ireland in the Irish presidential elections or speaking privileges for Northern Ireland’s MPs in the Houses of the Oireachtas (the Irish Parliament). Mark also stressed that support from external governments and actors, whether that be in the USA, the EU, Ireland, or Britain, to put pressure on the Stormont parties to commit to power-sharing,  was essential.

Panel 2: Party Politicians 

For our second panel, chaired by Professor Richard Bourke, we were joined by representatives from four of the major Northern Ireland parties: Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin), Claire Hanna (SDLP), Doug Beattie (UUP), and Kate Nicholl (Alliance). Unfortunately, the DUP did not accept the invitation to participate. Find their full profiles at the bottom of the page.

Conor Murphy, Doug Beattie, and Kate Nicholl stressed the major success of the Agreement in bringing about an end to large-scale violence in Northern Ireland. Conor highlighted the achievement of the Agreement in creating a new space and opportunities to address major causes of the conflict, such as social inequality, as well as in opening up the possibility of constitutional change in Northern Ireland through political means. For Doug, simply put, a major success was the granting to Northern Ireland politicians the right to make decisions that directly affect the people of Northern Ireland.

The panel also discussed limitations of the Agreement, including legacy issues and the failure by some to engage in reconciliation in a meaningful way. For Claire, the absence of violence is no longer enough of an achievement. Young people in particular want Northern Ireland to aspire for more in terms of reconciliation and progress. Claire expressed disapproval of the symbols and other cultural displays that continue to feed narratives that only the ‘other side’ did awful things, rather than on any acceptance that there were atrocities perpetrated by people from different sides . Kate – in keeping with Alliance policy – criticised the cross-community vote requirements built into the Agreement and sees it as ‘insulting’ to voters who don’t align with a community-designation.  

Each of the panellists were critical of the UK and Irish Governments for treating the Agreement as a finished product rather than as a continuous process that requires ongoing nurturing. Conor considered the lack of attention and knowledge displayed by the Conservative Government’s approach to Northern Ireland and devolution as a whole which is ‘hands-off’ in nature. This has proven disastrous for a process of conflict-resolution which demands attention from both the UK and Irish governments. Kate criticised actors who wanted to celebrate the milestones of the Agreement but failed to show up and support Stormont when needed. Doug expressed the view that subsequent agreements and frameworks including the St Andrew’s Agreement and the new Windsor Framework were mere ‘sticking plasters’ that ignored the real problems Northern Ireland was facing, such as the repeated failure of mandatory coalition. 
The panel also discussed ongoing the dysfunction at Stormont. Doug argued passionately about the need for parties to use Stormont to address problems, such as any desired changes to the Windsor Framework. He stated that is it is essential that Sinn Féin are permitted to take their position at the head of the Executive, as they were democratically elected to do. Kate spoke about the frustration of being an MLA who cannot legislate to address the suffering her constituents are experiencing. Alliance’s position is that if the DUP do not want to take their position in the Executive, Alliance is more than happy to take their place. 

On the prospect of reform of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement, the panel each had their own ideas. There was broad consensus that the principles of the Agreement were fundamental and should remain the bedrock of future discussions, but also that some variety of reform was needed. Kate suggested that communal designations in the current system (i.e. Unionist or Nationalist) should be removed, as non-aligned voters do not count in community-consent votes. In other words, some voters in the region have more limited access to democratic privileges than others based on how they identify, which is somewhat ironic given that Alliance is fundamentally a cross-community party. Claire advocated for incentivising co-operation more, potentially by phasing out the veto system (i.e. the controversial petition of concern originally intended to protect minority rights but which has in fact been abused by some of the larger parties). Doug shared this idea and wanted reform to ensure that no one party could collapse the Executive entirety by itself.

Panel 3: Academics on Northern Ireland

Our final panel, chaired by Dr Helen Thompson, welcomed academics who work on Northern Ireland to consider in a more analytical sense what the Agreement means for Northern Ireland’s past and future, and its relationship with its external partners. Helen was joined by Professor Deirdre Heenan (Ulster University), Professor Jon Tonge (University of Liverpool), Dr Mary Murphy (University College Cork), and Professor Brendan Simms (University of Cambridge). You can find their full profiles at the bottom of the page.

As with the previous two panels, the academics began by flagging areas where they thought the Agreement had been successful, including when it comes to the reduction in violence, the improvement of relations across the border, Stormont’s periods of functioning and legislative output. The panel also set out some of the broad areas where they felt its ambitions hadn’t been fully realised, including when it comes to the integration of communities, continuing echoes of paramilitarism, and Stormont’s ongoing dysfunction . Dr Mary Murphy characterised the post-Agreement society as one of ‘negative peace’, in which a society has an absence of ongoing violence but where reconciliation has yet to be achieved. For Northern Ireland to achieve a ‘positive peace’ there must be equity, equality, integration, and a culture of cooperation and dialogue, something Mary considers to be lacking at present. Professor Deirdre Heenan echoed Claire Hanna’s comments from the previous panel that the reduction in violence, whilst hugely significant, cannot continue to be used as a metric for success, and argued that Northern Ireland must strive for better. For Deirdre, reconciliation hasn’t happened in any ‘meaningful way’ and she cautioned against the view that integrated schools are a ‘panacea’, noting that any such progress would be limited should students return home from integrated schools to segregated communities.  

Mary explored some of the reasons why she feels the Agreement hadn’t worked completely. She argued that the problem wasn’t with the Agreement itself, but with the complacency with which it has been treated by governments. She also holds Brexit as a key ‘disruptor’ to all three strands of the Agreement in the way that it destabilised political relations in the Assembly and Northern Ireland, complicated the North-South relationship and its institutions, and damaged British-Irish relations.

In terms of reforming the Agreement, all the panellists had ideas of what needed to change. Professor Jon Tonge thought the title of Deputy First Minister needed to be amended to co-First Minister, and that the veto system should have a time limitation included in it, so that a government can be formed without a vetoing party after a set period. He also argued that the communal designation should be scrapped and replaced with a weighted-majority system in Stormont - reflecting the issues faced by non-aligned parties that Kate Nicholl (Alliance) had raised in the previous panel - and that it is essential for the nationalist and unionist communities that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland publishes clear criteria on the requirements that would be needed to hold a border poll (something the British Labour Party have vowed to do if they win the next UK General Election). Mary stressed that no reform would be possible without a clear commitment from all parties to the original Agreement. Any appetite for reform would have to be cross-party in order to bear fruit. Professor Brendan Simms called for ‘outside actors’  to be more honest about their own priorities. He cited Leave supporters in the UK for not declaring that achieving Brexit would be more important to them than the integrity of the UK,  and also ‘Remain’ supporters  for voting against previous deals between the EU and UK that could have offered Northern Ireland more stability  such as Theresa May’s deal. Brendan also criticised the EU and the Irish Government for not declaring that for them, the sanctity of the Single Market was more important than protecting the Agreement. For Brendan, the problem is not about having priorities, but rather about being clear about what they are, and not weaponizing the Agreement at their expense. He also called for a return to the ‘creative thinking’ of 1998 that he thinks would be dismissed today as ‘magical thinking’. 

Despite the capacity for reform  being built into the Agreement, Deirdre thinks it has been essentially forgotten about. For her, the question is not whether the Agreement is fit for purpose but whether Northern Ireland’s Government is. Deirdre is a specialist in health policy, which is a devolved power in Northern Ireland,  and took time to highlight the appalling state of health services in Northern Ireland. She recounted a visit to a Liverpool health trust, which had a similar population size to Northern Ireland,  before the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that there were ten people waiting more than a year to see a consultant, and that the health trust were working actively with the ten people in question to get them the treatment they needed. Deirdre has calculated the comparable figure of people waiting for a consultant in Northern Ireland to be 120,000 . It is likely these numbers have worsened since the beginning of the pandemic. Where Prime Minister Rishi Sunak had just announced an investment of £2.6 billion for workplace planning for England’s NHS, Northern Ireland’s health service had just received cuts of £300 million. In total, however, and paradoxically, Northern Ireland spends the most money per head of population for health of anywhere in the UK.  Deirdre argued, therefore, that the authorities in Northern Ireland needed to take a good look at how they were spending this money and transition to a health care system that prioritises prevention rather than failing to provide a cure. Deirdre criticised that the media – rightfully – reports on any outbreak of violence in Northern Ireland but doesn’t report on the scale of chaos and deficit in public services which are also costing lives. In a revealing anecdote, she set out how upon witnessing the state of Northern Ireland’s health system, an English visitor expressed that the same conditions in England would likely provoke rioting to which someone replied that ‘we’ve had 30 years of rioting; we won’t go back to that’. For Deirdre, this is the wrong attitude – that the absence of violence is good enough and that to ask for more would be too ambitious. 

The panel also considered the geopolitical context of Northern Ireland and the Agreement, and the region’s relationship with external partners. Brendan explained that 1998 Agreement was a fairly unique moment in which the UK Government could argue that it had no selfish strategic interest in the island of Ireland. Although he thinks it wasn’t true at the time, people could believe it. That has now changed with Brexit and the war in Ukraine. It is well-documented that the Irish State has only limited defence capacity and should Russian planes attempt to fly down the Irish Sea from the north, the RAF would be responsible for dealing with them and thus the UK Government has an obvious strategic interest. The geopolitical situation wasn’t static before 2016, either . Jon noted that the era of liberal interventionism in the 1990s that aided the spirit of optimism around the Agreement was brought to an abrupt end by 9/11. Mary also argued that the politics of the EU and the Republic has widened the sense of distance between Northern Ireland and the Republic. Ireland has taken big steps forward on issues such as abortion and gay marriage in recent years. As the debate on geopolitical issues such as Ireland’s policy of neutrality becomes more central alongside questions about Irish unification, the Republic’s relationship with Northern Ireland is facing new scrutiny.

Q&A

The conference finished with a Q&A session, chaired by Dr Niamh Gallagher featuring all our panellists. The panel offered a chance for panellists to discuss among themselves, as well as to take questions from the audience. 

One issue raised pertained to Irish neutrality, something that Professor Brendan Simms touched on in his intervention. Mark Langhammer asked whether Ireland would have to make a choice between independence or a united Ireland (referencing Eamon De Valera). Whilst Conor Murphy acknowledged that the neutrality question was a ‘thorny one’, he argued that his sense was that lots of people in Northern Ireland shared an instinct of not wanting to play major roles in foreign wars, given the history of colonisation and associated violence. Conor also challenged comments about the available polling data on the prospects for a border poll, which have repeatedly shown only minority support for an imminent poll. Such polls always ask if a person would vote for a united Ireland ‘tomorrow’, he argued, which he thinks even those in support of unity largely wouldn’t do. He wants to see much more structured conversations about what the plan for unification would look like, including addressing the major issues including with respect to healthcare, taxation, and public services, and then polling public attitudes towards that plan. 

A fruitful avenue of the discussion concerned a general focus on sectarianism in Northern Ireland, a problem the panel of academics discussed to a greater degree than the politicians or grassroots actors did. As Dr Gallagher highlighted, the previous panels spoke about other divisions such as class, region, and access to public services. Dr Mary Murphy noted that as an identity marker, the idea of a ‘green/orange’ division does play a key role in the legislative process but that it was interesting that the grassroots panel shared that, day-to-day, most people didn’t experience the ‘sharp end’ of identity markers as witnessed in the Assembly. The question remains of how identity markers can be managed in a constructive manner, but Dr Murphy thought that maybe now was the time to start challenging the Agreement on this matter. Claire Hanna made a similar point that many people did work and live alongside one another without hostility, and that perhaps what was being seen at an electoral level wasn’t reflective of the true lived experience of people in Northern Ireland. 

On fostering reconciliation, something that all the panels had brought up as one of the less successful outcomes of the Agreement, various ideas were raised. Mickey Cooper rightfully asked whether reconciliation can be imposed from the top-down, noting that you cannot force people to attend certain schools, or live in certain areas. Brian Dougherty argued that more political leadership wasn’t the answer considering that much of the progress he’d seen in Derry/Londonderry was a result of civic groups and community-led projects. Both Mary Murphy and Conor Murphy stressed that true reconciliation takes time, potentially generations, to set in, and that Northern Ireland is not unique amongst post-conflict societies grappling with this issue. Conor did suggest that the reconciliation process would be aided by resolving the legacy issues that are contributing to enduring tensions.

Panellist information

Introduction and Q&A

Dr Niamh Gallagher

Niamh is a Fellow of St Catharine's College and Lecturer in Modern British and Irish History at the University of Cambridge. She has published widely on the history of these islands. In 2021, she was a member of the Independent Historical Advisory Panel for Northern Ireland, appointed by the UK government. Niamh is currently the recipient of a lectureship in modern Irish history generously funded by the Irish Government's Department of Foreign Affairs' Peace and Reconciliation Fund and is co-convenor of the Cambridge Future of the Island of Ireland series. 

Panel 1: Grassroots perspectives

Dr Barry Colfer (chair)

Barry is Director of Research for the Institute for International and European Affairs think tank in Dublin. He holds a Ph.D. and M.Phil from the Department of Politics and International Studies at the University of Cambridge. Prior to joining the IIEA, Barry was Max Weber Fellow at EUI Florence and previously held postdoctoral fellowships at the University of Oxford, Harvard University, and the Politecnico di Torino in Italy. He has worked at both the Irish and European Parliaments as well as with a number of leading European think tanks. He is the co-convenor of the Cambridge Future of the Island of Ireland series.

Mark Langhammer (panellist)

Mark leads the National Education Union (Europe’s largest education union) in Northern Ireland. He served as Chair of the Northern Ireland Citizens Advice Bureaux and as an Independent Labour councillor throughout the 1990s until 2005. He served on the National Executive of the Irish Labour Party (2005-08) and was an early graduate of the TUC and Harvard University’s ‘Leading Change’ programme (2008). Mark has been elected three times to the NI Committee of the ICTU. He is the author of two books and has written in a variety of local and UK publications on education, industrial relations, trade unionism and politics.

Emma Murphy (panellist)

Emma Murphy is the President of Queen’s University Belfast Students’ Union. She is a campaigner and activist representing students, and is passionate about sustainability, democracy, and equality. She has studied English Literature at Queen’s University, participated in the Washington Ireland Class of 2021, and has secured significant support for students to combat the Cost-of-Living crisis. She also opened the Agreement 25 conference celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement alongside Hillary Clinton and George Mitchell.

Mickey Cooper (panellist)

Mickey Cooper is the owner of DerryBlueBadgeGuide.com, one of Ireland’s largest tour guiding companies. Throughout the last 20 years he has been involved in the development and delivery of a range of community tourism and heritage projects and is currently the project manager of the Derry Peacemakers Museum which will chronicle the evolution of the conflict in the Bogside from August 1972 to 2007. Involved in the Republican Movement since his teenage years, he served as a councillor for ten years and is currently chairperson of the Pól Kinsella cumann in Derry and Director of Elections for the Foyleside DEA.

Brian Dougherty (panellist)

Brian has been involved in the voluntary and community sector for over 25 years working primarily in Unionist/Loyalist communities. He is currently CEO of the North-West Cultural Partnership, a collaborative group for 6 cultural organisations who work extensively across the Derry/Strabane District Council area, the Province, cross-border and internationally. He is co-chair of the Northern Ireland Department for Communities’ Ulster-Scots Language, Heritage, and Culture Strategy. In 2007 Brian received an MBE for services to the community in Northern Ireland. He is currently studying for a PhD at Ulster University examining progressive leadership through the Londonderry Bands Forum.

Panel 2: Party Politicians

Professor Richard Bourke (chair)

Richard took his first degree at University College Dublin and completed his PhD at the University of Cambridge. He was elected to the Chair in the History of Political Thought at Cambridge in 2018. In 2022 he was awarded an honorary degree of Doctor of Arts by University College Dublin. He previously co-directed the AHRC-funded project on Popular Sovereignty in Historical Perspective. He has held a number of Fellowships in Europe and the United States, including at the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, the Free University in Berlin and the University of Munich. Richard was elected a Fellow of the British Academy in 2018.

Doug Beattie (panellist)

Doug Beattie was elected as a UUP MLA for Upper Bann in 2016 and became the leader of the UUP in 2021. Before joining politics, Doug served 28 years in the British Army, rising to the rank of Captain and serving in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. He was awarded the Military Cross in 2006 for his actions in Afghanistan and is the author of two best-selling books about his military career.

Claire Hanna (panellist)

Claire Hanna is an SDLP Member of Parliament for South Belfast, elected in December 2019. Claire has been representing South Belfast since 2011 as a Belfast City Councillor, then as an MLA in the NI Assembly until her election to Parliament in 2019. In Westminster, Claire serves as a member on the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and is the SDLP's Spokesperson for Europe and International Affairs. 

Conor Murphy (panellist)

Conor Murphy is a Sinn Féin MLA for Newry & Armagh and is currently Sinn Féin spokesperson on the economy. He was first elected to the Assembly in 1998 and has played a leading role within the party's negotiation team. Having held a number of ministerial positions within the power-sharing Executive since 2007, in the last Executive, Conor served as the Finance Minister and was at the forefront of the Executive's response to the global pandemic and cost of living crisis.

Kate Nicholl (panellist)

Kate is an Alliance MLA for Belfast South, first elected in 2022. She served as the 79th Lord Mayor of Belfast from June 2021 to May 2022, having served on the Belfast City Council since 2016. Her tenure as Lord Mayor saw her focus on policies such as the health and well-being of children, as well bringing young people’s voices into meetings. 

Panel 3: Academics on Northern Ireland

Professor Helen Thompson (chair)

Helen is Professor of Political Economy in the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University. Her most recent book Disorder: Hard Times in the 21^st Century (2022) was shortlisted for the 2022 Financial Times Business Book of the Year. She has written for, among other outlets, the Financial Times, New York Times, Sunday Times, Guardian as well as Foreign Affairs, UnHerd, Nature, and Prospect. She co-presents the politics podcast These Times.

Professor Brendan Simms (panellist)

Brendan is Professor of the History of European International Relations and Director of the Forum on Geopolitics at the University of Cambridge. His publications, which have been translated into many languages, European and non-European, include Europe, the struggle for supremacy, 1453 to the present day (2013) and Britain’s Europe. A thousand years of conflict and cooperation (2016). His latest book (together with Steve McGregor) is The Silver Waterfall. How America won the Pacific War at Midway (2020). He is currently working on a book on the Great Powers today.

Dr Mary Murphy (panellist)

Mary holds a Jean Monnet Chair in European Integration and is a senior lecturer and Head of the Department of Government and Politics at University College Cork. She specialises in the study of the European Union relationship with Ireland, north and south, and has published widely on the subject of Brexit. Mary’s research has been supported by her role as co-investigator on the ESRC project ‘Between two unions: The Constitutional Future of the Islands after Brexit’ (2017-2020). She is a regular media commentator on Ireland/Northern Ireland and the EU, and has written for Irish and international media, including The Irish Times and Foreign Policy.

Professor Jon Tonge (panellist)

Jon is Professor of Politics at the University of Liverpool. He has written books on all the main political parties in Northern Ireland, with the latest, on Alliance, due out later this year with Oxford University Press. Professor Tonge has been Director of each Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Northern Ireland General Election survey since 2010 and is currently leading a £500,000 ESRC research project entitled ‘Beyond Unionism and Nationalism in Northern Ireland’. He is a regular television and radio commentator, working for the BBC on recent Northern Ireland elections.

Professor Deirdre Heenan (panellist)

Deirdre is Professor of Social Policy at Ulster University. She was formerly Provost and Dean of Academic Development at the University’s Magee Campus and has published widely on healthcare, education policy, social care and devolution. She is a co-founder and former co-director of the Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey. In 2011 she was appointed by the health minister to join a five strong panel of experts to oversee a radical review of Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland. In 2012 she was appointed to the Irish President's Council of State as one of the seven personal nominees of President Michael D. Higgins.