🔗 Share this article

Ten years following the UK embarked on a hurried public vote that divided the nation and unleashed chaos, a caution emerges from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.

Policymakers and electorate entered unwittingly Brexit and the same might transpire with a referendum on a unified Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is equipped.

That is the message from two prominent writers from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.

Administrative Institutions Unprepared

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

"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction rapidly," O’Toole remarked. "In my opinion that the governmental framework of our islands remains extremely volatile."

Book Publication Intends to Provoke Discussion

The pair have examined the political, financial and cultural reasons for any constitutional change in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.

They seek to stir debate on the topic with a series of public talks that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.

"What concerns everybody, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.

"We should prevent a referendum on a binary, unclear proposal whose implications have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extraordinarily split population where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the people who have won don't know exactly what it is that they have gained."

Legal Framework

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

Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim such a time is looming, and a organisation called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a national vote.

Lack of Informed Dialogue

Ideological statements for and against unification has masked the shortage of informed dialogue, stated the journalist.

"Individuals are often for or against the idea but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in universities but hardly any politicians or campaigners are willing to participate even with the fundamentals. As an example, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"

Publication's Method

In the volume, no writer supports unity or the current situation. They writes two pieces that seek impartiality in presenting the case for a unified Ireland and the argument against, assembling financial and societal statistics, past examples and constitutional models.

Discussions cover flags and symbols, levies, healthcare systems, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to educate and stimulate conversation.

"There's huge interest in the issue but there has not yet occurred a debate," commented the writer. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the notion that there could be reasonable perspectives on each side."

Parallel Votes

A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters say they favour unity but refuse greater financial contributions or adopting a alternative symbol to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British culture.

"The Irish government must establish what the plan from Irish nationalism is other than just declaring: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated the commentator.

Probability of Public Vote

McBride believes a national vote in his generation is probable and that it might occur suddenly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a feckless government minister who declares: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"

Each of the pro-unification advocates and pro-UK supporters have plausible, justified perspectives, he commented. "One side will prevail in this matter and the other side will eventually lose but each side has has valuable insights to gain from the alternative positions."

Request for Wider Discussion

Westminster needed to participate in the dialogue, stated O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It's a British issue just as much as it is an Irish question."