A decade following the UK entered into a rushed public vote that divided the nation and unleashed disorder, a advisory emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the same might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating convulsions for which no one is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two leading commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to create a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Establishments Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a possibly contentious and seismic referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Stir Debate
The duo have analysed the governmental, financial and cultural rationales for any governmental shift in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the matter with a series of speaking events that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts all parties, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose results have remained undefined because then you land with an highly divided society where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the people who have won are uncertain exactly what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it appears likely that a most voters would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups say such a time is looming, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but both governments and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a referendum.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unification has masked the absence of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the idea but the concrete planning which could extend past that to realise it is mostly absent. A great deal has taken place in universities but scarcely any government figures or activists seek to involve themselves with the basics. As an example, what sort of state should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, neither author advocates unity or the existing arrangement. Both composes two essays that seek impartiality in detailing the argument for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, assembling economic and social statistics, past examples and structural examples.
Arguments cover flags and symbols, taxes, medical care, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the threat of unionist unrest. The goal is to inform and encourage dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Debate indicates an acknowledgement of the notion that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens report they favour unity but refuse paying higher taxes or introducing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to work out what the plan from Irish nationalism is aside from just saying: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we love you'," said O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride thinks a referendum in his lifetime is likely and that it could happen suddenly. "You could have just a mad or a poor or a negligent secretary of state who states: 'Let's just do this and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he commented. "One side will win on this issue and somebody will in the end not succeed but all factions has has something to acquire from the other's viewpoints."
Request for Broader Discussion
Westminster must join the debate, urged O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a British question as much as it is an Irish question."
