A decade after the UK embarked on a rushed public vote that divided the country and caused chaos, a warning comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two prominent writers from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments 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 possibly fraught and seismic referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains very unstable."
Released Volume Aims to Provoke Discussion
The duo have analysed the political, financial and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the issue with a tour of speaking events that will lead them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns everyone, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a binary, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily divided society where people who have lost are resistant to defeat and the victorious side lack clarity quite what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a most voters would support.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim such a time is looming, and a group called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions minimise the likelihood, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a referendum.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Political rhetoric for and against unification has hidden the absence of informed dialogue, said the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the actual thinking which may surpass that to realise it is mostly absent. A great deal has occurred in universities but very few government figures or advocates seek to involve themselves with the basics. As an example, which kind of country might be preferred? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, neither author endorses unification or the current situation. Both writes two pieces that strive for objectivity in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, assembling economic and social figures, previous instances and constitutional models.
Discussions range over identity markers, taxes, medical care, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The goal is to educate and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there is still lacking a discussion," commented the writer. "Discussion indicates an acknowledgement of the idea that there could be reasonable perspectives on either side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they support unification but refuse paying higher taxes or implementing a different emblem to recognise unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should determine what the plan from Irish nationalism is aside from just saying: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," said O’Toole.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist considers a national vote in his lifetime is possible and that it could happen suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a negligent secretary of state who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the pro-unification advocates and pro-UK supporters have credible, justified points, he said. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and somebody will ultimately be defeated but each side has has something to learn from the other's arguments."
Request for Wider Dialogue
Westminster should engage with the debate, urged O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish issue."
