Ten years after the UK embarked on a hurried public vote that divided the country and triggered chaos, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same may happen with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two prominent commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Establishments Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a possibly contentious and transformative referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can come out of the blue and can build support swiftly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our islands remains very unstable."
Released Volume Aims to Stir Debate
The duo have examined the governmental, economic and cultural rationales for any constitutional change in a book, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the topic with a series of lectures that will bring them to Westminster early next month.
"What concerns everybody, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We must avoid a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose results have remained undefined because then you land with an highly split population where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the those successful are uncertain precisely what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would approve.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is imminent, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity when or if there might be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has hidden the lack of serious debate, said McBride.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it is mostly absent. Much has occurred in scholarly circles but scarcely any politicians or campaigners want to engage even with the essentials. For instance, what type of nation might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the book, neither author endorses unity or the existing arrangement. They writes two articles that seek neutrality in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the argument against, assembling economic and social figures, past examples and structural examples.
Arguments range over flags and symbols, levies, health services, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to educate and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," stated the writer. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the notion that there could be good arguments on either side."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens report they prefer unity but oppose greater financial contributions or adopting a different emblem to acknowledge unionists' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland must establish what the plan from nationalist groups is aside from just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said O’Toole.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist considers a national vote in his lifetime is likely and that it may take place abruptly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a poor or a incompetent secretary of state who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, justified points, he stated. "Somebody will succeed here and the other side will eventually lose but both parties has got something to acquire from the other's viewpoints."
Call for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster needed to join the discussion, urged the analyst. "This is about Britain. It is a British question equally as it is an Irish matter."
