The empty chair at the debate on Irish unification

A paper containing so much blue-sky, but detailed, thinking that, in the absence of actual government papers, it gained concerted debate and focus.

Imagine Belfast brought together women from across the community in a debate hosted by Aras Ui Chonghaile to discuss a united Ireland and what was discovered was that, not only could debates be held with thoughtful respect, much common ground could be found.

On the same day, Belfast and Dublin City Councils hosted an event on an economic corridor linking the two cities. A visionary concept where the border is invisible and trade and opportunity are the watchwords.

Leo Varadkar was the main speaker; back to his optimistic self, he was clearly in a post-Protocol mindset.

The Irish government's Shared Island initiative saw Simon Coveney's commitment to the role of civic society in the debate on constitutional change. Shifting the focus from the political sphere has been central to progress on all constitutional issues since the 1990s on this island.

From the peace process to equal marriage, civic actors provided momentum, popular engagement and, ultimately, informed the nation-changing franchises that provide the backdrop to much of the current discourse on the constitutional future.

Later that evening, Ireland's Future produced their document on the economic benefits of a united Ireland.

Bringing together contemporaneous research and the issues of British subvention, economic investment and the legacy of partition into one document, this initiative will undoubtedly be a touchstone for the debate as it gets less conceptual and more detailed in the coming weeks and months.

It was a week marked by confidence and optimism, where we moved from speaking about this debate's legitimacy, or potential divisiveness, to scoping referendum planning.

In the RTE debate, former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern's idea that the referendum could take place on the 30th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement - 2028 - became the touchstone. Far enough away to feel safe, close enough to know we may get our skates on planning.

Last week, Colum Eastwood mooted the potential scenario of a British Secretary of State calling a snap border poll and how that would catch everyone off guard.

Maybe that was the needed boot up the proverbial backside to concentrate minds. Maybe it was the adverts of Irish America in American newspapers urging border poll planning, or the US Senate resolution on its commitment to the Good Friday and Stormont House Agreements in all of their parts.

Whatever the motivation, March came in with border poll scepticism and goes out with border poll concentration.

Meanwhile, in every discussion there is a striking absence. That absence is noticed, engaged with and spoken about. Political unionism is not in the room.

It is not engaging with these debates. It is pretending that the status quo will remain the same and they do not need to be engaged.

While nationalism and republicanism is at pains to mention the special place of unionism, the value of unionism and the need for unionism, unionism stays outside the door.

There is a warmed chair by the fire waiting for them and the cushions are being regularly plumped with ideas of what can make it more comfortable. But unionism stays outside.

It was instructive that, in the RTE debate, Gregory Campbell spoke of there being three minorities in the north: nationalism, other and unionism.

This was an extraordinary statement, but this thinking may well speak to the uncertainty and insecurity that underpins unionism's lack of engagement in the discussion.

The planning is under way and will necessarily include planning for unionism's place in a new Ireland.

Surely, political unionism wants to influence that? Before events, or time, overtake them.

Andree Murphy is deputy director of Relatives for Justice and a political commentator