🔗 Share this article

Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that polarised the country and unleashed turmoil, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.

Policymakers and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering upheavals for which nobody is prepared.

That represents the warning from two prominent commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.

Administrative Establishments Not Ready

The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have determined that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly contentious and transformative referendum.

"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," the commentator remarked. "I would suggest that the governmental framework of our islands remains extremely volatile."

Released Volume Seeks to Stir Debate

The team have analysed the political, financial and societal rationales for any constitutional change in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.

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

"What concerns everyone, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.

"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose results have not been clarified because then you land with an extraordinarily polarised community where the losing side are unable to accept defeat and the people who have won lack clarity precisely what it is that they have gained."

Constitutional Provision

Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official should call a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a most voters would approve.

Nationalist parties and other nationalists argue that moment is approaching, and a organisation named pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and unionists play down the prospect, leaving it unclear when or if there will be a national vote.

Insufficient Serious Debate

Partisan language for and against unity has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, said the journalist.

"Many are for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to make it possible has largely not occurred. A lot has gone on in universities but very few government figures or advocates are willing to participate with even the basics. As an example, what type of nation might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"

Book's Approach

In the publication, no writer advocates unity or the status quo. Each composes two articles that seek neutrality in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument against, assembling financial and societal statistics, previous instances and constitutional models.

Arguments cover flags and symbols, taxes, healthcare systems, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the risk of loyalist violence. The objective is to educate and stimulate discussion.

"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there is still lacking a dialogue," said the writer. "Debate implies an recognition of the notion that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."

Simultaneous Plebiscites

A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters report they prefer unification but refuse increased taxation or implementing a alternative symbol to acknowledge unionists' UK heritage.

"Authorities in Dublin does need to work out what the proposal from nationalist groups is other than just stating: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.

Probability of Public Vote

McBride considers a referendum in his era is probable and that it could happen suddenly. "You could have just a reckless or a poor or a negligent secretary of state who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"

Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have plausible, valid perspectives, he stated. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will in the end lose but both parties has possesses something to learn from the alternative arguments."

Request for More Extensive Discussion

Westminster should join the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."