A decade after the UK embarked on a rushed public vote that polarised the nation and unleashed disorder, a warning 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, triggering upheavals for which nobody is ready.
That is the message from two respected writers from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a possibly tense and seismic public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gather momentum very quickly," O’Toole said. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The pair have examined the governmental, economic and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the matter with a series of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles everyone, or must worry every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We should prevent a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, unclear proposal whose results have not been clarified because then you land with an extraordinarily split population where people who have lost are not reconciled to losing and the victorious side lack clarity precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups claim this point is approaching, and a group named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists minimise the prospect, making it uncertain when or if there will be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has masked the lack of serious debate, noted McBride.
"Many are for or against the notion but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has gone on in universities but hardly any elected officials or campaigners seek to involve themselves with even the essentials. To illustrate, what type of nation might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the publication, none of the commentators supports unity or the status quo. They composes two articles that aim for objectivity in presenting the rationale for a united Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling economic and societal figures, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Discussions cover national emblems, taxes, health services, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The objective is to inform and provoke dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there hasn't quite been a discussion," stated the writer. "Discussion indicates an acceptance of the notion that there could be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where the electorate claim they prefer unification but oppose increased taxation or adopting a different emblem to acknowledge unionists' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to determine what the proposal from pro-unification movements is aside from just declaring: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," said O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride considers a national vote in his generation is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a reckless or a ill-advised or a feckless secretary of state who declares: 'Let's just do this and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, valid arguments, he stated. "Somebody will win in this matter and somebody will in the end not succeed but both parties has possesses important lessons to acquire from the alternative positions."
Request for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It's a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
