🔗 Share this article

A decade following the UK entered into a hasty public vote that divided the country and unleashed turmoil, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.

The government and citizens drifted into Brexit and the similar could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, initiating convulsions for which no one is equipped.

That represents the warning from two respected writers from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.

Political Establishments Not Ready

Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a possibly tense and seismic referendum.

"The lesson of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can gather momentum very quickly," O’Toole said. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our region remains extremely volatile."

Book Publication Aims to Encourage Dialogue

The duo have examined the political, economic and cultural reasons for any governmental shift in a publication, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.

They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a roadshow of public talks that will bring them to Westminster soon.

"What haunts everybody, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated O’Toole.

"We do not want a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose results have not been clarified because then you end up with an extremely polarised community where people who have lost are resistant to defeat and the those successful lack clarity quite what it is that they have won."

Legal Framework

Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a most voters would approve.

Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim that moment is imminent, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the possibility, leaving it unclear if and when there might be a referendum.

Insufficient Informed Dialogue

Political rhetoric for and against unity has masked the absence of informed dialogue, said McBride.

"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the idea but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has gone on in academia but very few politicians or activists are willing to participate even with the fundamentals. As an example, what sort of state might be preferred? Unitary? Federal?"

Book's Approach

In the publication, none of the commentators endorses unity or the status quo. Each authors two essays that aim for objectivity in detailing the case for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, assembling financial and societal statistics, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.

Discussions cover flags and symbols, duties, health services, pensions, public liabilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The objective is to educate and stimulate conversation.

"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there hasn't quite been a discussion," stated O’Toole. "Debate implies an acceptance of the concept that there could be reasonable perspectives on either side."

Dual Referendums

A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where the electorate claim they prefer unity but oppose increased taxation or implementing a different emblem to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British culture.

"Authorities in Dublin should establish what the proposal from Irish nationalism is beyond just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," stated the commentator.

Possibility of Public Vote

The journalist believes a national vote in his lifetime is possible and that it could happen abruptly. "It is possible just a reckless or a ill-advised or a incompetent official who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"

Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he stated. "Somebody will win here and somebody will ultimately be defeated but both parties has got something to acquire from the alternative arguments."

Appeal for Wider Discussion

Westminster needed to participate in the debate, urged O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a UK matter equally as it is an Irish issue."