When I was a school leader, I used to enjoy thinking ahead to try and identify the potential effects on the institution of any proposed change to policy or procedure. It was routine practice to consider and discuss in detail each and every suggestion and to try and anticipate what the short term, medium term and long term consequences might be. Cost-benefit and risk analyses were built-in to the process; expert advice was taken and a variety of opinions were sought. We used to plan ahead, you see. This, I used to believe, was standard practice within all leadership and management teams in both the public and private sectors.

But the Brexit debacle has made me think again.

When the Brexit referendum was proposed and then orchestrated by David Cameron’s government, the issues were not considered logically, systematically or even carefully by our political leaders. Instead, immediate politicised battle lines were drawn and while ‘brexiteers’ promised freedom from Brussels bureaucrats, millions for the NHS and a ban on immigration, ‘remainers’ forecast economic ruin, cultural isolation and exclusion from European decision-making.

No one, as I remember it, clearly identified the difficult and protracted negotiations that would lie ahead, the myriad implications of painful but necessary compromises or indeed the significance of the Irish border and Belfast Agreement for the whole thing. Very few foresaw the implications for the union or the emergence of a fresh notion of Irish (re)unification. The process was emotionally driven, infused by fear and anger on both sides and guaranteed to increase disagreement and division from the outset.

That is no sound basis to run a company let alone a country but I suppose it is in the nature of democratic politics.

So, whatever happens next, it seems that the status of the United Kingdom and the potential for a border poll have been brought into sharper focus. However, such contentious and divisive issues invite the same emotionally charged and knee-jerk approaches that have led us into the current mess.

Where will we find the reasoned voices, cool heads and insightful analysts who will think hard and look ahead for us? Who will ask what are the social, political, economic and cultural implications of a divided UK or a united Ireland? What democratic structures need to be put in place to make it work for the good of all? How do we make sure that such seismic transitions can happen peacefully? What happens to people’s British pensions in an all-Irish state and what do we do with the schools and the health system? Who pays for it and who plans for it all?

In order to make an informed and reasoned choice the people of Ireland, north and south, will need access to reasoned and reasonable analysis of the potential costs and benefits for us all. And they will need to vote with a clear understanding of all the issues bearing in mind the best outcome for us all.

But who am I trying to kid? It is politics and it is Ireland and we would be naive to expect anything less than the vitriolic sectarian shouting match that has characterised our orange and green differences for years.

The key question is whether we can do it this time without the bombs and the bullets.

 

You might also enjoy:

Unionists, Brexit and the Reunification debate – Dean Farqhuar

The Renewable Brexit Incentive – John Stevenson

The Brexit Issue We’re Neglecting – Kerrie Milford

Northern Roots with Emma Rainey – ‘The idea was to move back home; Brexit has put a halt to that plan.’