🔗 Share this article

Ten years following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that polarised the nation and unleashed turmoil, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.

Authorities and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the same might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is equipped.

That is the message from two leading commentators from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.

Administrative Establishments Not Ready

Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have determined that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a possibly tense and seismic referendum.

"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can build support very quickly," O’Toole stated. "In my opinion that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains highly fragile."

New Title Aims to Encourage Dialogue

The duo have analysed the political, financial and societal rationales for any constitutional change in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.

They hope to stir debate on the matter with a series of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.

"What haunts everyone, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented O’Toole.

"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose implications have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an highly polarised community where those defeated are unable to accept losing and the those successful lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."

Constitutional Provision

Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unity if it is indicated that a most voters would approve.

Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim this point is imminent, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and pro-UK factions minimise the possibility, resulting in ambiguity when or if there might be a referendum.

Absence of Serious Debate

Partisan language for and against unification has obscured the absence of serious debate, noted McBride.

"Many are for or against the notion but the concrete planning which might go beyond that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has taken place in academia but hardly any politicians or advocates seek to involve themselves even with the fundamentals. As an example, which kind of country would you want? Unitary? Federal?"

Volume's Strategy

In the book, no writer supports unification or the current situation. They authors two pieces that strive for impartiality in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, marshalling financial and societal figures, historical precedents and structural examples.

Arguments cover identity markers, taxes, medical care, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the threat of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to inform and stimulate dialogue.

"There's huge interest in the issue but there is still lacking a dialogue," said O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acknowledgement of the concept that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."

Parallel Votes

A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters report they prefer unification but reject paying higher taxes or implementing a new flag to reflect unionists' British identity.

"Policymakers in Ireland does need to determine what the offer from pro-unification movements is other than just saying: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," remarked O’Toole.

Likelihood of Public Vote

McBride believes a referendum in his era is probable and that it might occur unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a feckless official who states: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"

Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid points, he said. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and the other side will in the end be defeated but each side has got something to gain from the other's viewpoints."

Call for Broader Dialogue

Westminster must join the debate, stated the analyst. "This involves the United Kingdom. It's a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."