Ten years following the UK embarked on a hurried public vote that polarised the country and triggered disorder, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which no one is ready.
That conveys the caution from two leading journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a potentially tense and transformative referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole said. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our islands remains extremely volatile."
New Title Intends to Provoke Discussion
The duo have examined the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any structural alteration in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the issue with a series of public talks that will bring them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles all parties, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose results have not been clarified because then you end up with an extraordinarily divided society where those defeated are resistant to losing and the those successful are uncertain exactly what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland official is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unification if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim this point is imminent, and a organisation called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there could be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unity has hidden the shortage of informed dialogue, said McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the notion but the concrete planning which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in scholarly circles but very few government figures or campaigners are willing to participate even with the essentials. To illustrate, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, none of the commentators endorses unity or the status quo. Each authors two articles that seek objectivity in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, gathering financial and social statistics, previous instances and constitutional models.
Debates encompass national emblems, duties, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to inform and stimulate dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there has not yet occurred a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Debate implies an acknowledgement of the idea that there may exist valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate report they support unity but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to acknowledge pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to determine what the proposal from nationalist groups is aside from just saying: 'We want a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated O’Toole.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride thinks a referendum in his generation is possible and that it could happen abruptly. "You could have just a mad or a bad or a feckless government minister who says: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he said. "Somebody will succeed on this issue and somebody will ultimately be defeated but each side has got something to learn from the opposing positions."
Appeal for Broader Discussion
Westminster needed to join the debate, said O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It's a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
