🔗 Share this article

Ten years after the UK entered into a hurried public vote that divided the country and triggered turmoil, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.

Authorities and citizens drifted into Brexit and the similar may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating convulsions for which nobody is equipped.

That represents the warning from two leading writers from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.

Political Structures Ill-Equipped

The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a potentially contentious and seismic referendum.

"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," the commentator remarked. "It is my view that the political architecture of our islands remains extremely volatile."

Book Publication Aims to Provoke Discussion

The pair have studied the political, economic and societal arguments for any constitutional change in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.

They aim to encourage dialogue on the matter with a roadshow of speaking events that will take them to Westminster early next month.

"What troubles all parties, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.

"We do not want a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose implications have not been clarified because then you end up with an extremely polarised community where people who have lost are resistant to losing and the victorious side lack clarity quite what it is that they have won."

Legal Framework

Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would approve.

Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue that moment is approaching, and a group called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity when or if there might be a national vote.

Lack of Serious Debate

Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unity has hidden the lack of serious debate, noted the journalist.

"Individuals are often for or against the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in universities but hardly any elected officials or activists are willing to participate with the fundamentals. As an example, what type of nation should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"

Book's Approach

In the volume, no writer advocates unity or the status quo. They composes two articles that aim for objectivity in presenting the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, gathering economic and societal statistics, previous instances and constitutional models.

Discussions encompass identity markers, levies, health services, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the danger of loyalist violence. The objective is to inform and encourage dialogue.

"There's huge interest in the subject but there hasn't quite been a debate," commented O’Toole. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the concept that there may exist reasonable perspectives on both sides."

Simultaneous Plebiscites

A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate claim they favour unification but oppose paying higher taxes or introducing a new flag to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British culture.

"The Irish government should establish what the offer from pro-unification movements is aside from just declaring: 'We want a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," remarked O’Toole.

Likelihood of Public Vote

McBride believes a national vote in his generation is possible and that it might occur suddenly. "You could have just a mad or a ill-advised or a negligent secretary of state who states: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"

Each of the pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, legitimate arguments, he said. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will eventually lose but both parties has got something to acquire from the alternative positions."

Call for Broader Dialogue

Westminster must join the dialogue, stated O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."