Ten years after the UK stumbled into a hurried referendum that polarised the country and unleashed chaos, a warning is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and citizens drifted into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering disturbances for which no one is prepared.
That represents the warning from two respected commentators from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a possibly tense and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The team have analysed the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any structural alteration in a book, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the topic with a roadshow of lectures that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What concerns everyone, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We should prevent a national vote on a binary, ambiguous question whose implications have remained undefined because then you land with an highly polarised community where those defeated are unable to accept losing and the people who have won are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is approaching, and a group called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity if and when there will be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the absence of serious debate, noted the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the idea but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has taken place in academia but very few government figures or activists are willing to participate with the essentials. To illustrate, what sort of state would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, neither author supports unity or the existing arrangement. They writes two pieces that seek neutrality in laying out the rationale for a united Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling financial and social data, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Debates range over flags and symbols, levies, healthcare systems, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the danger of loyalist violence. The objective is to enlighten and stimulate conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," said O’Toole. "Debate suggests an recognition of the notion that there may exist good arguments on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where voters say they favour unity but reject paying higher taxes or introducing a alternative symbol to recognise unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland must work out what the proposal from nationalist groups is aside from just stating: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated O’Toole.
Likelihood of Referendum
The journalist considers a national vote in his lifetime is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a mad or a ill-advised or a incompetent official who declares: 'We should proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, legitimate arguments, he stated. "Somebody will succeed here and the other side will in the end lose but each side has got important lessons to acquire from the alternative arguments."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster needed to engage with the dialogue, said O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
