🔗 Share this article

Ten years after the UK entered into a rushed public vote that polarised the country and unleashed turmoil, a advisory is issued from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.

The government and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering disturbances for which nobody is ready.

That represents the warning from two leading writers from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.

Governmental Institutions Not Ready

The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a possibly tense and monumental public vote.

"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction rapidly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."

Released Volume Aims to Stir Debate

The pair have studied the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any structural alteration in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.

They aim to stir debate on the issue with a tour of public talks that will take them to Westminster in the coming weeks.

"What haunts everybody, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented O’Toole.

"We do not want a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose implications have not been spelled out because then you end up with an highly split population where the losing side are unable to accept defeat and the victorious side don't know precisely what it is that they have gained."

Constitutional Provision

Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would approve.

Nationalist parties and other nationalists argue that moment is approaching, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists play down the prospect, making it uncertain whether or when there could be a national vote.

Lack of Informed Dialogue

Ideological statements for and against unity has hidden the shortage of serious debate, stated McBride.

"People tend to be for or against the notion but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to realise it has largely not occurred. A great deal has gone on in academia but scarcely any government figures or campaigners seek to involve themselves with the basics. For instance, what type of nation might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"

Book's Approach

In the volume, no writer endorses unity or the existing arrangement. Both authors two pieces that seek neutrality in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, assembling financial and societal figures, historical precedents and constitutional models.

Arguments cover identity markers, duties, medical care, pensions, sovereign debt obligations and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to inform and encourage dialogue.

"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there is still lacking a dialogue," commented the writer. "Debate indicates an acknowledgement of the notion that there may exist good arguments on either side."

Dual Referendums

A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where citizens claim they favour unification but reject paying higher taxes or adopting a alternative symbol to recognise pro-UK communities' British identity.

"Policymakers in Ireland does need to establish what the proposal from pro-unification movements is other than just stating: 'We want a unified Ireland and we value you'," said the commentator.

Probability of Referendum

McBride thinks a national vote in his era is likely and that it could happen suddenly. "There might be just a reckless or a bad or a negligent secretary of state who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"

Each of the nationalists and unionists have credible, legitimate perspectives, he stated. "One side will succeed in this matter and somebody will ultimately not succeed but all factions has possesses important lessons to learn from the alternative arguments."

Call for Broader Discussion

Westminster needed to engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This is about your state. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish question."