Ten years following the UK entered into a hasty public vote that polarised the country and triggered disorder, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Authorities and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two leading writers from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can come out of the blue and can gain traction very quickly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the governmental framework of our region remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Aims to Stir Debate
The duo have examined the governmental, economic and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a book, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the matter with a tour of public talks that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns everybody, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose results have not been clarified because then you land with an extraordinarily split population where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the people who have won lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue such a time is imminent, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there could be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Political rhetoric for and against unity has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the notion but the actual thinking which could extend past that to make it possible is mostly absent. A lot has gone on in universities but hardly any politicians or advocates are willing to participate with even the basics. As an example, which kind of country might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the book, no writer advocates unification or the status quo. Both authors two essays that strive for impartiality in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, assembling economic and social data, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Arguments encompass identity markers, levies, health services, retirement funds, public liabilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to educate and stimulate discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the notion that there might be valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters say they favour unification but reject increased taxation or implementing a alternative symbol to recognise unionists' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to determine what the proposal from Irish nationalism is other than just stating: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said O’Toole.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride thinks a referendum in his era is likely and that it could happen suddenly. "It is possible just a mad or a bad or a negligent secretary of state who states: 'Let us proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have credible, valid points, he commented. "One side will prevail on this issue and somebody will ultimately lose but each side has possesses valuable insights to acquire from the other's positions."
Appeal for Broader Discussion
Westminster must join the discussion, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."
