Ten years following the UK stumbled into a hurried public vote that polarised the country and triggered disorder, a warning emerges from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and electorate drifted into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a referendum on a unified Ireland, sparking convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two leading journalists from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Not Ready
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely ill-prepared for a possibly contentious and seismic referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can emerge unexpectedly and can build support very quickly," the commentator said. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our region remains extremely volatile."
New Title Intends to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have studied the political, financial and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a book, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the issue with a series of public talks that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What concerns everybody, or should haunt every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented O’Toole.
"We do not want a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose implications have remained undefined because then you end up with an extraordinarily divided society where people who have lost are resistant to losing and the those successful lack clarity quite what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it is indicated that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other pro-unification groups claim that moment is looming, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the likelihood, making it uncertain whether or when there could be a referendum.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric for and against unification has obscured the shortage of informed dialogue, noted the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the notion but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has occurred in universities but very few politicians or campaigners are willing to participate with the essentials. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the book, neither author endorses unification or the existing arrangement. Each authors two articles that seek neutrality in detailing the case for a unified Ireland and the argument against, gathering economic and social figures, past examples and governmental frameworks.
Arguments encompass identity markers, levies, health services, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of loyalist violence. The objective is to enlighten and encourage discussion.
"There's huge interest in the subject but there is still lacking a discussion," stated O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an recognition of the concept that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where voters claim they favour unity but refuse greater financial contributions or implementing a different emblem to acknowledge unionists' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to establish what the proposal from Irish nationalism is aside from just stating: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," said O’Toole.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist considers a referendum in his lifetime is possible and that it may take place suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a ill-advised or a negligent secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have credible, legitimate arguments, he commented. "Somebody will win on this issue and the other side will eventually not succeed but all factions has got valuable insights to gain from the opposing viewpoints."
Appeal for Broader Debate
Westminster needed to join the discussion, stated O’Toole. "This involves Britain. It's a British question equally as it is an Irish matter."
