LATER this year Ireland will elect a new president.
By Ireland, of course, I mean the twenty six county Republic of Ireland which takes its name from the whole island — a little unfairly you might think if you live in Northern Ireland, the portion in the north east which remains part of the United Kingdom.
We in this northern part will not have a vote on the presidency. That’s OK by me though others are campaigning strongly for us to be included.
There have been times when the current president, Michael D Higgins has cheered me by saying the things that much of the country felt needed said, particularly in his criticism of Israel’s management of its war in Hamas and the heedless slaughter of Palestinian civilians.
There have been times when he has seemed gauche and tactless, even unduly irascible, but then he is human and no one can be note-perfect every time.
He has changed the terms on how a president functions. Essentially the holder of that office should be a figurehead representing the people of Ireland but only with the consent of the government of the time.
The president should be like a British monarch, impressive and engaging and yet somehow devoid of any but the most anodyne opinion.
That hasn’t been sustainable.
Past presidents made significant impacts just through being elected or through the rituals of office.
Mary Robinson, the first woman president, signalled a change in the character of modern Ireland with essentially, a fillip to feminism and the status of ‘na Mná na hÉireann’, the women of Ireland.
She retained a traditional Irish concern for developing countries, particularly in Africa, a legacy of past Irish Catholic missionary endeavour, and she facilitated the peace process in the north by travelling there and meeting people that party politicians preferred to distance themselves from.
Her successor, another woman, northerner Mary McAleese, welcomed the British Queen to Ireland. Elizabeth II actually bowed in reverence before a memorial to the Irish rebels who had fired on and killed British soldiers in Dublin in 1916.
This was essentially a message to the British identifying people of the North that if they derided the Irish nationalist tradition they could not say that they were doing it on her behalf.
Currently we have little idea who the next president might be though there is little prospect of northerners or the diaspora getting that desired vote in the short time left.
Intriguing complications might arise if they did.
British identifying unionists in Northern Ireland have the right, under the Good Friday Agreement, to identify as Irish and to carry Irish passports, which many do.
But how might they vote in a presidential election? Most might be indifferent but some might be tempted to vote mischievously and disruptively for candidates who are unpopular in the Republic.
Some might think more strategically about how they might vote to influence attitudes away from the aspiration for Irish unity.
If the idea of an extended franchise was to include all the Irish resident in Britain or even across the whole diaspora, the actual home vote for a president might be a minority, even a tiny fraction, of the eligible electorate.
These would then be the people with least say in who would represent the country as a national figurehead.
Surely that would be a calamity.
Currently we don’t even know who the candidates will be.
In the past, big political parties have pushed forward retired ministers, rewarding them for their service.
In this spirit some think that former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern should get the job; others perhaps that Gerry Adams, the former president of Sinn Féin should stand.
His would be a much more controversial candidacy given his past in republicanism.
Then there is a prospect, though a slight one, that the new mood of anti-immigration angst in the country, which has led to rioting on both sides of the border, might throw up a right wing racist.
Some have suggested Conor McGregor, the mixed martial arts champion who was welcomed into the Oval Office and even warmly hugged by Donald Trump on St Patrick’s Day.
In a civil case earlier this year, McGregor agreed to a financial settlement with a woman who had alleged sexual assault - a claim he has denied and for which no criminal charges were brought.
One big consideration for parties appointing candidates will be whether they want to restore the presidency after Higgins’s spell as a ritual figurehead or to continue with a trend towards opinionating and seeking to influence government policy.
There is an argument that the president, as elected by the people, has a duty to represent popular concern at times when a serious matter is overlooked.
Unfortunately popular concern does not always express the liberal secular perspective that modern Ireland prides itself on.
For now, the anti-migrant cause, despite its energy and passion, seems not to have found its spokesperson; but should such a person step up, a ready constituency is available and presumably a huge swathe of votes too.
Parties nominating candidates have to ask themselves now not just who they want as president but what kind of presidency they want, a vociferous presidency in the style of Michael D Higgins or a quiet genteel, ritual, well behaved presidency that disturbs no one.
