Ten years after the UK entered into a hurried public vote that split the nation and caused turmoil, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, sparking upheavals for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two respected 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 form a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a potentially tense and monumental public vote.
"The lesson of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff 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 Intends to Provoke Discussion
The team have examined the political, financial and societal arguments for any structural alteration in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the matter with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everyone, or must worry every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, vague proposition whose results have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily split population where people who have lost are unable to accept losing and the victorious side don't know quite what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland official is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim such a time is looming, and a non-profit called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the likelihood, leaving it unclear when or if there might be a referendum.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has hidden the shortage of substantive discussion, stated the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the notion but the actual thinking which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has occurred in universities but hardly any government figures or activists are willing to participate with the fundamentals. For instance, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the book, no writer endorses unity or the status quo. They composes two essays that seek objectivity in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, assembling economic and social statistics, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Arguments cover identity markers, levies, medical care, retirement funds, public liabilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The objective is to enlighten and provoke dialogue.
"There's huge interest in the subject but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated the writer. "Debate suggests an recognition of the concept that there may exist valid points on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where voters say they prefer unification but refuse paying higher taxes or implementing a different emblem to recognise unionists' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should determine what the plan from Irish nationalism is beyond just declaring: 'We want a united Ireland and we welcome you'," remarked the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
McBride believes a referendum in his era is possible and that it might occur abruptly. "There might be just a mad or a bad or a feckless government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have credible, valid arguments, he said. "Somebody will win in this matter and the other side will ultimately lose but all factions has has important lessons to learn from the alternative arguments."
Request for Wider Debate
Westminster needed to participate in the debate, urged O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter equally as it is an Irish matter."