Ten years after the UK entered into a hurried referendum that polarised the nation and triggered turmoil, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That conveys the caution from two respected journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Unprepared
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a potentially tense and seismic referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our islands remains highly fragile."
New Title Aims to Stir Debate
The pair have analysed the governmental, economic and cultural rationales for any constitutional change in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the topic with a roadshow of public talks that will lead them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts everyone, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We should prevent a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose implications have not been spelled out because then you end up with an highly split population where the losing side are unable to accept defeat and the those successful are uncertain exactly what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a majority would approve.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue this point is imminent, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions play down the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a national vote.
Insufficient Serious Debate
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the absence of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A lot has occurred in universities but very few government figures or advocates are willing to participate with even the essentials. For instance, what sort of state might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the volume, neither author advocates unification or the current situation. Each composes two pieces that strive for neutrality in presenting the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling economic and social statistics, previous instances and structural examples.
Discussions range over national emblems, taxes, medical care, elderly benefits, public liabilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The aim is to inform and encourage dialogue.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Debate indicates an recognition of the concept that there could be reasonable perspectives on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters say they favour unification but reject paying higher taxes or adopting a different emblem to reflect pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"The Irish government must establish what the offer from pro-unification movements is beyond just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," remarked the commentator.
Probability of Public Vote
The journalist thinks a national vote in his era is possible and that it may take place suddenly. "You could have just a reckless or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, justified arguments, he commented. "One side will win in this matter and somebody will in the end not succeed but each side has has valuable insights to learn from the opposing positions."
Appeal for Wider Debate
Westminster needed to join the dialogue, stated O’Toole. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It's a British question equally as it is an Irish matter."
