Ten years after the UK embarked on a rushed public vote that divided the country and triggered disorder, a caution is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
The government and voters drifted into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which no one is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two leading journalists from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a potentially contentious and monumental referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Seeks to Provoke Discussion
The duo have analysed the political, economic and cultural arguments for any structural alteration in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the matter with a roadshow of lectures that will bring them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts everybody, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We should prevent a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose results have not been clarified because then you end up with an extraordinarily divided society where the losing side are resistant to losing and the people who have won lack clarity exactly what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it seems probable that a majority would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups argue this point is approaching, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and unionists downplay the possibility, making it uncertain if and when there might be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Partisan language for and against unification has hidden the absence of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"Many are for or against the notion but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but scarcely any elected officials or advocates want to engage with even the fundamentals. As an example, what sort of state might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, none of the commentators advocates unity or the existing arrangement. Each writes two articles that aim for neutrality in laying out the case for a united Ireland and the argument against, gathering financial and societal data, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Debates range over national emblems, duties, medical care, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The aim is to educate and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there has not yet occurred a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the notion that there might be valid points on each side."
Parallel Votes
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters say they support unity but refuse increased taxation or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin should establish what the proposal from Irish nationalism is other than just declaring: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride believes a referendum in his era is possible and that it might occur abruptly. "You could have just a reckless or a bad or a incompetent secretary of state who declares: 'We should proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have credible, justified points, he stated. "One side will succeed on this issue and somebody will eventually not succeed but all factions has got valuable insights to learn from the opposing positions."
Request for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster should participate in the debate, urged O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It's a British issue just as much as it is an Irish question."
