A decade following the UK entered into a hurried public vote that divided the country and triggered disorder, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and electorate drifted into Brexit and the similar may happen with a referendum on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That represents the warning from two prominent commentators from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a potentially fraught and transformative public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator stated. "In my opinion that the governmental framework of our islands remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Seeks to Stir Debate
The duo have analysed the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any governmental shift in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to encourage dialogue on the matter with a series of speaking events that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts all parties, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose implications have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extremely polarised community where people who have lost are not reconciled to defeat and the people who have won don't know precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists say that moment is approaching, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, making it uncertain when or if there might be a national vote.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Partisan language for and against unification has obscured the absence of serious debate, stated McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the concept but the concrete planning which could extend past that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has gone on in scholarly circles but very few elected officials or advocates seek to involve themselves even with the basics. For instance, what type of nation might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, neither author endorses unity or the current situation. They authors two pieces that seek objectivity in presenting the rationale for a united Ireland and the argument against, gathering financial and societal figures, historical precedents and constitutional models.
Arguments range over national emblems, taxes, health services, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The objective is to inform and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the idea that there could be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens report they prefer unification but reject greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to acknowledge unionists' UK heritage.
"The Irish government should establish what the offer from nationalist groups is beyond just stating: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his generation is likely and that it could happen suddenly. "It is possible just a mad or a ill-advised or a incompetent government minister who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, valid perspectives, he said. "Somebody will win on this issue and somebody will eventually be defeated but both parties has got something to gain from the alternative arguments."
Call for Broader Dialogue
Westminster must engage with the discussion, said O’Toole. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It's a UK matter just as much as it is an Irish issue."
