Ten years following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that polarised the country and caused turmoil, a warning emerges from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Authorities and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two respected writers from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Unprepared
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a potentially contentious and monumental public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can come out of the blue and can build support rapidly," the commentator remarked. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The team have studied the governmental, financial and societal arguments for any structural alteration in a book, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the topic with a roadshow of public talks that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles everybody, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We must avoid a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have not been clarified because then you land with an extremely split population where those defeated are not reconciled to defeat and the those successful are uncertain precisely what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would support.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is looming, and a group named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the likelihood, leaving it unclear when or if there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has masked the shortage of serious debate, stated McBride.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the concrete planning which may surpass that to achieve it is mostly absent. Much has taken place in universities but very few elected officials or activists want to engage with even the essentials. As an example, what type of nation might be preferred? Centralised? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the book, no writer supports unification or the current situation. They writes two essays that aim for objectivity in detailing the rationale for a united Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling financial and societal figures, previous instances and constitutional models.
Arguments range over national emblems, levies, medical care, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The goal is to enlighten and provoke discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the issue but there hasn't quite been a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Discussion implies an acknowledgement of the notion that there could be valid points on either side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens report they prefer unification but oppose increased taxation or introducing a new flag to recognise unionists' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to establish what the offer from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we value you'," stated the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride believes a national vote in his generation is probable and that it might occur unexpectedly. "It is possible just a mad or a poor or a incompetent government minister who says: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the pro-unification advocates and unionists have plausible, valid arguments, he stated. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will in the end not succeed but both parties has got something to gain from the alternative arguments."
Appeal for Broader Dialogue
Westminster should participate in the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This is about your state. It is a British question equally as it is an Irish question."
