Ten years after the UK stumbled into a rushed public vote that divided the country and caused disorder, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and electorate entered unwittingly Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating disturbances for which nobody is prepared.
That represents the warning from two respected writers from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Structures Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a potentially contentious and seismic referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that events can come out of the blue and can gather momentum rapidly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our region remains very unstable."
New Title Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have examined the political, economic and cultural arguments for any constitutional change in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to provoke discussion on the issue with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts everybody, or should haunt everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, vague proposition whose implications have remained undefined because then you land with an extraordinarily split population where those defeated are not reconciled to losing and the victorious side are uncertain quite what it is that they have gained."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim this point is imminent, and a group called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and pro-UK factions minimise the prospect, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there might be a national vote.
Lack of Serious Debate
Ideological statements for and against unification has hidden the shortage of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"Many are for or against the idea but the actual thinking which may surpass that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A great deal has taken place in scholarly circles but very few politicians or advocates are willing to participate even with the essentials. As an example, which kind of country would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, neither author supports unity or the current situation. Both composes two pieces that aim for impartiality in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling economic and societal figures, historical precedents and structural examples.
Debates range over national emblems, duties, health services, pensions, public liabilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The goal is to inform and encourage discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a debate," commented the writer. "Discussion implies an acknowledgement of the notion that there may exist valid points on each side."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters report they favour unification but oppose increased taxation or introducing a alternative symbol to acknowledge unionists' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin should work out what the plan from nationalist groups is beyond just stating: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride considers a national vote in his era is probable and that it might occur unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a negligent secretary of state who says: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he commented. "Somebody will win on this issue and the other side will in the end lose but each side has possesses something to learn from the opposing viewpoints."
Request for Wider Dialogue
Westminster should participate in the dialogue, stated O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a British issue equally as it is an Irish matter."
