🔗 Share this article

Ten years after the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that split the country and triggered disorder, a warning emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.

Policymakers and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking disturbances for which no one is prepared.

That conveys the caution from two respected writers from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.

Administrative Institutions Ill-Equipped

The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially tense and seismic referendum.

"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains highly fragile."

Book Publication Seeks to Encourage Dialogue

The pair have examined the political, economic and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.

They seek to provoke discussion on the topic with a series of speaking events that will take them to Westminster soon.

"What troubles everybody, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.

"We do not want a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you land with an highly divided society where the losing side are resistant to losing and the those successful lack clarity quite what it is that they have won."

Constitutional Provision

Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official should call a public vote on Irish unification if it appears likely that a most voters would support.

Sinn Féin and other nationalists argue this point is approaching, and a group called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and pro-UK factions minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there will be a national vote.

Insufficient Substantive Discussion

Political rhetoric for and against unity has hidden the lack of informed dialogue, said McBride.

"People tend to be for or against the notion but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to make it possible is mostly absent. A lot has occurred in academia but scarcely any government figures or campaigners seek to involve themselves with even the fundamentals. To illustrate, which kind of country should be desired? Centralised? Decentralised?"

Publication's Method

In the publication, no writer supports unity or the status quo. Both composes two articles that aim for impartiality in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the case against, assembling economic and social data, previous instances and governmental frameworks.

Debates cover flags and symbols, taxes, healthcare systems, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the risk of loyalist violence. The aim is to educate and provoke discussion.

"Considerable attention exists in the topic but there hasn't quite been a debate," commented O’Toole. "Dialogue suggests an acknowledgement of the notion that there could be valid points on either side."

Parallel Votes

A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where citizens claim they prefer unification but oppose paying higher taxes or introducing a new flag to recognise unionists' British identity.

"Authorities in Dublin does need to establish what the plan from nationalist groups is other than just saying: 'We seek a united Ireland and we welcome you'," remarked the commentator.

Probability of Public Vote

The journalist thinks a referendum in his generation is probable and that it could happen unexpectedly. "There might be just a reckless or a bad or a feckless official who says: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"

Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid perspectives, he commented. "One side will succeed on this issue and somebody will in the end be defeated but each side has possesses valuable insights to learn from the opposing viewpoints."

Appeal for Broader Dialogue

Westminster must participate in the debate, urged O’Toole. "This concerns Britain. It is a UK matter as much as it is an Irish question."