A decade after the UK embarked on a rushed referendum that divided the country and unleashed disorder, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and electorate drifted into Brexit and the identical could occur with a referendum on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which no one is ready.
That conveys the caution from two prominent journalists from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a possibly contentious and transformative referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," the commentator stated. "In my opinion that the institutional structure of our islands remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Aims to Provoke Discussion
The pair have examined the political, economic and societal rationales for any governmental shift in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a tour of lectures that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns all parties, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We do not want a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been clarified because then you land with an extremely polarised community where people who have lost are not reconciled to defeat and the victorious side are uncertain precisely what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists say this point is looming, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the prospect, making it uncertain when or if there might be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has hidden the shortage of serious debate, said the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in universities but hardly any politicians or activists are willing to participate with the essentials. For instance, which kind of country should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, none of the commentators advocates unification or the status quo. Both authors two pieces that seek objectivity in detailing the case for a unified Ireland and the case against, gathering financial and social data, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Debates encompass national emblems, taxes, healthcare systems, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The aim is to enlighten and encourage dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the subject but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," said the writer. "Dialogue implies an acceptance of the idea that there could be good arguments on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where the electorate claim they favour unity but reject paying higher taxes or introducing a different emblem to reflect pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin must work out what the proposal from pro-unification movements is aside from just declaring: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Referendum
McBride thinks a national vote in his generation is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a incompetent government minister who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and the other side will eventually be defeated but both parties has possesses something to acquire from the other's viewpoints."
Request for Wider Discussion
Westminster should participate in the dialogue, said O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
