🔗 Share this article

A decade following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that polarised the country and triggered disorder, a caution emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.

The government and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a referendum on a united Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is ready.

That represents the warning from two prominent commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.

Governmental Structures Unprepared

The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a potentially contentious and seismic public vote.

"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our islands remains highly fragile."

Book Publication Seeks to Encourage Dialogue

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

They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a series of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster soon.

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

"We must avoid a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, unclear proposal whose results have not been spelled out because then you land with an extraordinarily polarised community where those defeated are not reconciled to losing and the people who have won lack clarity quite what it is that they have won."

Constitutional Provision

Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it appears likely that a most voters would support.

Sinn Féin and other nationalists say that moment is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the prospect, leaving it unclear if and when there might be a national vote.

Absence of Serious Debate

Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has masked the absence of serious debate, stated the journalist.

"People tend to be supportive or opposed the idea but the actual thinking which may surpass that to achieve it is mostly absent. A great deal has taken place in universities but hardly any government figures or activists seek to involve themselves with the fundamentals. To illustrate, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"

Volume's Strategy

In the publication, no writer supports unity or the status quo. Both authors two essays that aim for impartiality in detailing the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument against, assembling financial and societal figures, past examples and governmental frameworks.

Discussions range over flags and symbols, levies, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of loyalist violence. The aim is to educate and encourage discussion.

"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there has not yet occurred a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Discussion implies an acceptance of the idea that there may exist reasonable perspectives on either side."

Parallel Votes

A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where citizens claim they support unity but refuse paying higher taxes or adopting a new flag to reflect unionists' British identity.

"Authorities in Dublin does need to establish what the offer from Irish nationalism is aside from just saying: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.

Likelihood of Referendum

The journalist considers a national vote in his lifetime is probable and that it could happen suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a feckless official who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"

Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, justified arguments, he commented. "Somebody will succeed here and the other side will in the end be defeated but both parties has got valuable insights to gain from the opposing positions."

Request for Wider Discussion

Westminster should participate in the debate, stated O’Toole. "This concerns your state. It's a British issue as much as it is an Irish issue."