Ten years after the UK embarked on a hasty referendum that divided the country and caused disorder, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and voters drifted into Brexit and the same may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two leading writers from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a potentially contentious 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 swiftly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our islands remains very unstable."
Book Publication Intends to Stir Debate
The pair have analysed the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any governmental shift in a book, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the matter with a series of public talks that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles all parties, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We should prevent a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extremely split population where those defeated are resistant to losing and the people who have won lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it appears likely that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups claim this point is imminent, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity when or if there will be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has hidden the lack of serious debate, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it is mostly absent. Much has gone on in scholarly circles but scarcely any elected officials or advocates seek to involve themselves with even the basics. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, no writer advocates unification or the status quo. Each writes two essays that aim for objectivity in laying out the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale against, assembling financial and societal figures, historical precedents and constitutional models.
Arguments encompass flags and symbols, levies, healthcare systems, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The aim is to inform and stimulate conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a dialogue," said the writer. "Debate implies an acceptance of the concept that there may exist reasonable perspectives on either side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate say they support unity but oppose greater financial contributions or implementing a alternative symbol to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"The Irish government should work out what the proposal from nationalist groups is aside from just stating: 'We want a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Probability of Referendum
McBride considers a referendum in his generation is possible and that it may take place suddenly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a negligent official who states: 'Let's just do this and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have plausible, valid points, he commented. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and somebody will eventually lose but each side has got important lessons to learn from the opposing viewpoints."
Call for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster needed to engage with the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It's a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
