Ten years after the UK stumbled into a hasty referendum that divided the country and triggered chaos, a caution comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating upheavals for which no one is prepared.
That is the message from two prominent commentators from either side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Unprepared
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are extremely ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and seismic referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can build support swiftly," the commentator stated. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our islands remains very unstable."
New Title Intends to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have studied the governmental, financial and cultural arguments for any constitutional change in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the matter with a tour of public talks that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts all parties, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We should prevent a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been clarified because then you end up with an highly split population where people who have lost are resistant to defeat and the people who have won don't know exactly what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists argue such a time is approaching, and a group named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists play down the prospect, leaving it unclear whether or when there could be a referendum.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unity has obscured the absence of substantive discussion, said McBride.
"Many are for or against the idea but the concrete planning which could extend past that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in universities but hardly any government figures or advocates want to engage with the basics. As an example, which kind of country would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the book, no writer supports unification or the status quo. Each composes two pieces that seek neutrality in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, marshalling financial and societal data, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Discussions range over identity markers, levies, health services, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of unionist unrest. The goal is to enlighten and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue implies an recognition of the concept that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where the electorate report they prefer unification but refuse increased taxation or introducing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"Policymakers in Ireland should establish what the offer from nationalist groups is aside from just declaring: 'We want a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride believes a referendum in his lifetime is possible and that it might occur suddenly. "It is possible just a reckless or a bad or a incompetent official who declares: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have credible, valid arguments, he stated. "Somebody will succeed on this issue and somebody will in the end lose but each side has got something to gain from the opposing positions."
Request for Wider Dialogue
Westminster needed to participate in the dialogue, urged O’Toole. "This involves your state. It's a UK matter equally as it is an Irish matter."