Ten years after the UK entered into a rushed public vote that split the nation and caused disorder, a warning is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two prominent writers from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely ill-prepared for a potentially fraught and monumental referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can come out of the blue and can gather momentum rapidly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our islands remains very unstable."
New Title Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have examined the governmental, economic and societal arguments for any structural alteration in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the issue with a tour of public talks that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles all parties, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We must avoid a referendum on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have remained undefined because then you land with an extraordinarily polarised community where those defeated are not reconciled to defeat and the victorious side are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim such a time is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists minimise the prospect, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Partisan language supporting and opposing unity has hidden the absence of serious debate, said McBride.
"Individuals are often for or against the idea but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to realise it has largely not occurred. Much has gone on in scholarly circles but scarcely any politicians or activists seek to involve themselves with the fundamentals. As an example, which kind of country should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the book, no writer advocates unification or the current situation. Each authors two essays that aim for objectivity in presenting the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, gathering financial and societal figures, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Debates encompass national emblems, taxes, healthcare systems, retirement funds, public liabilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The objective is to inform and encourage conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there hasn't quite been a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the idea that there may exist valid points on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters say they favour unity but refuse paying higher taxes or introducing a new flag to reflect unionists' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland must establish what the proposal from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We desire a united Ireland and we love you'," said the commentator.
Probability of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his era is probable and that it might occur abruptly. "You could have just a reckless or a ill-advised or a feckless government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, valid arguments, he commented. "One side will win here and somebody will eventually lose but all factions has got valuable insights to learn from the other's positions."
Appeal for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster must engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish question."
