A decade after the UK embarked on a rushed public vote that split the country and caused disorder, a caution emerges from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and electorate drifted into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That represents the warning from two prominent commentators from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a possibly tense and monumental referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our region remains very unstable."
Book Publication Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have analysed the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any governmental shift in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to encourage dialogue on the issue with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns all parties, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose implications have not been clarified because then you end up with an highly polarised community where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side lack clarity precisely what it is that they have gained."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups say that moment is imminent, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions downplay the likelihood, making it uncertain whether or when there might be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Partisan language supporting and opposing unification has masked the absence of informed dialogue, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the actual thinking which may surpass that to realise it is mostly absent. A great deal has occurred in scholarly circles but hardly any government figures or activists seek to involve themselves even with the basics. As an example, which kind of country might be preferred? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the volume, neither author advocates unity or the existing arrangement. Each composes two essays that aim for impartiality in presenting the case for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling economic and social figures, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, duties, health services, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The objective is to inform and stimulate dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there hasn't quite been a discussion," commented the writer. "Debate indicates an acceptance of the concept that there might be good arguments on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where the electorate say they prefer unification but oppose increased taxation or implementing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland must work out what the offer from nationalist groups is beyond just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we value you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride thinks a referendum in his lifetime is possible and that it may take place suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a incompetent government minister who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, justified points, he stated. "One side will prevail on this issue and the other side will in the end be defeated but each side has possesses important lessons to gain from the alternative viewpoints."
Call for Broader Discussion
Westminster must engage with the dialogue, said O’Toole. "This concerns Britain. It's a UK matter equally as it is an Irish matter."
