Ten years following the UK stumbled into a hasty public vote that split the country and triggered chaos, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two prominent commentators from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can build support rapidly," O’Toole said. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains very unstable."
New Title Intends to Stir Debate
The duo have examined the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any constitutional change in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the issue with a roadshow of speaking events that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles all parties, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We should prevent a referendum on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an extremely divided society where people who have lost are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would approve.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists argue such a time is imminent, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but both governments and unionists minimise the prospect, resulting in ambiguity when or if there will be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements for and against unification has obscured the lack of substantive discussion, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it has largely not occurred. Much has gone on in scholarly circles but very few government figures or campaigners are willing to participate even with the essentials. To illustrate, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, no writer supports unity or the existing arrangement. Each composes two articles that seek objectivity in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the case opposing it, gathering economic and social data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Debates cover national emblems, duties, health services, pensions, sovereign debt obligations and the danger of unionist unrest. The aim is to enlighten and stimulate dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there hasn't quite been a discussion," stated the writer. "Debate indicates an recognition of the notion that there may exist valid points on each side."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters report they prefer unity but refuse greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British culture.
"The Irish government does need to determine what the plan from pro-unification movements is aside from just saying: 'We seek a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride believes a national vote in his era is probable and that it might occur suddenly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a negligent government minister who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have credible, justified points, he commented. "One side will prevail in this matter and somebody will in the end not succeed but each side has possesses important lessons to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster must engage with the discussion, urged O’Toole. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It's a British issue as much as it is an Irish question."
