A decade following the UK entered into a rushed public vote that polarised the nation and unleashed disorder, a caution emerges from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and voters drifted into Brexit and the identical may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering upheavals for which no one is ready.
That is the message from two prominent journalists from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a possibly contentious and transformative public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The pair have examined the governmental, economic and cultural arguments for any structural alteration in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the topic with a tour of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everybody, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose results have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily divided society where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the people who have won lack clarity quite what it is that they have gained."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a most voters would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue that moment is approaching, and a group named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the likelihood, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements for and against unity has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"Many are for or against the notion but the concrete planning which may surpass that to make it possible is mostly absent. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but hardly any politicians or advocates want to engage with the basics. To illustrate, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the publication, neither author endorses unity or the current situation. They writes two essays that aim for impartiality in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument against, gathering economic and social data, previous instances and constitutional models.
Debates cover national emblems, levies, medical care, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the risk of loyalist violence. The aim is to educate and provoke conversation.
"There's huge interest in the subject but there has not yet occurred a debate," stated O’Toole. "Debate implies an acceptance of the notion that there may exist valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate say they favour unity but reject greater financial contributions or implementing a different emblem to recognise unionists' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland does need to work out what the plan from pro-unification movements is other than just declaring: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked O’Toole.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride considers a referendum in his era is probable and that it may take place unexpectedly. "You could have just a reckless or a bad or a feckless secretary of state who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, valid arguments, he said. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and somebody will ultimately lose but both parties has possesses valuable insights to acquire from the other's arguments."
Call for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster needed to participate in the debate, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish question."
