Ten years after the UK stumbled into a hurried public vote that divided the country and triggered disorder, a warning is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
The government and electorate drifted into Brexit and the identical may happen with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is ready.
That is the message from two respected commentators from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Structures Unprepared
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly tense and monumental public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can gather momentum very quickly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains very unstable."
New Title Intends to Stir Debate
The pair have analysed the political, economic and cultural reasons for any structural alteration in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the matter with a tour of public talks that will bring them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns everyone, 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, vague proposition whose consequences have remained undefined because then you land with an extremely polarised community where the losing side are resistant to defeat and the victorious side are uncertain precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would support.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue that moment is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the possibility, making it uncertain if and when there will be a national vote.
Absence of Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric for and against unification has obscured the shortage of informed dialogue, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to achieve it is mostly absent. A great deal has gone on in academia but very few elected officials or activists are willing to participate even with the essentials. To illustrate, what sort of state might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the book, no writer advocates unification or the current situation. Each authors two essays that strive for impartiality in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, assembling economic and social statistics, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments cover national emblems, taxes, healthcare systems, retirement funds, public liabilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to educate and provoke conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there hasn't quite been a discussion," said O’Toole. "Debate suggests an acceptance of the concept that there might be good arguments on either side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens claim they prefer unity but refuse greater financial contributions or implementing a alternative symbol to reflect pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should work out what the plan from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We want a united Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride thinks a national vote in his era is probable and that it might occur suddenly. "You could have just a mad or a ill-advised or a incompetent secretary of state who declares: 'Let's just do this and get it out of the way.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he said. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and the other side will eventually not succeed but each side has got something to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Call for Wider Dialogue
Westminster needed to participate in the discussion, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a British issue as much as it is an Irish matter."
