All at once the anticlimactic business of finding a successor to Mrs Mary Robinson as President of Ireland has flared into a contest - and a contest of potent forces at that. Candidates of deeply differing outlook and conviction have emerged and it is now certain that the electorate will have a choice of candidates representing a great diversity of values. The Labour Party has had an undeniable coup in securing Ms Adi Roche as its nominee, not least since she had previously turned down an approach from Fianna Fail. And those who are running the campaign for former Eurovision singer, Dana, have made what is literally an unprecedented breakthrough in securing support from a number of local authorities. The contest for Fianna Fail's nomination comes to a head tomorrow with Mr Albert Reynolds as the front-runner by several lengths. Fine Gael has to choose between Ms Mary Banotti and Ms Avril Doyle.
Mr Eoghan Harris, who played no inconsiderable part in Mrs Robinson's successful campaign, remarked at the weekend that the Presidency is more about being than about doing. That may be an oversimplification but it is a useful and insightful observation. The President has some important things to do but the people of Ireland do not elect a first citizen to replicate the functions of the Executive or to counterweight the power of the Dail. The President is chosen to reflect the way we see ourselves, to project our preferred self-image to a wider world, to be, in Mr Harris's words, an embodiment of the Irish people.
Again, this is a generalisation. Yet in retrospect, it is apparent that previous Presidents broadly reflected national preoccupations and perceptions. We had elderly statesmen when their particular life achievements were the focus and the expression of our national self-respect. We had a succession of generally conservative former politicians when our laws and our social mores were a great deal more traditional than they are today. And we had a liberal, outward-looking woman at a time when this society began to free itself of authoritarianism and to look to a wider world with confidence.
So what sort of person embodies the self-image of the Irish electorate as we approach the end of the century? Is it Albert Reynolds, the wealthy entrepreneur-cum-politician, forced from office as Taoiseach in troubled circumstances, heavily laden with controversial baggage but clutching proudly at his role in the peace process? Is it Dana, the singer with deep religious convictions, certain that she has something valuable to give back to the Irish people but clearly in the hands of a movement with an agenda to roll back the tide of social change? Is it Mary Banotti or Avril Doyle, two women each with a long-standing commitment to public life and to politics? Or is it Adi Roche, a brave and selfless woman who has dedicated herself to helping some of the most wretched of the Earth yeta neophyte in conventional political affairs?
But are there now not several Irelands, each one with a different self-image and each one represented by the different candidates who have so far emerged? Mary Robinson secured the Presidency with a minority of first-preference votes, being elected only with Mr Austin Currie's transfers. Her real triumph was not just on polling day but on all the subsequent days when she showed herself to be the President of all the people, not just the faction which had voted for her. Therein lies the real challenge of the Presidency and therein ought to be the deciding consideration for the voters on October 30th. The President must be for all.