MONETARY union may be a sideshow in the election campaign but it is guaranteed to demand much attention from whatever government is in power.
In just over 15 months the pound is set to link irrevocably with the core European currencies - with far reaching implications for the economy. And recent events suggest that the run up to monetary union may be rocky, with doubts resurfacing about the timetable. This could raise major strategic questions for the new administration.
The main parties, public opinion and major interest groups all decisively favour joining the first wave entering monetary union, due in 1999. It is seen as consolidating the benefits of the single market, underwriting stable and low interest rates and inflation and, in political terms, giving us a position at the core of Europe.
There are some reservations about Ireland going first if Britain, as looks certain, remains outside initially. But the Rainbow Government, as well as Fianna Fail, has said we must enter. The Progressive Democrats also broadly favour participation, though they argue that we must keep our options open. All the parties say the future does not lie in being regarded as a dependent Anglo Saxon economy.
Even with this agreement many key issues regarding monetary union remain to be decided. One of the most important will be determining which countries will go into the single currency at the beginning and which will wait on the sidelines.
That decision is likely to be finalised in May next year and it will be important that the next government is well placed to influence negotiations and the entry terms for the pound.
It is still not certain that monetary union will go ahead on time, although on balance it probably will. Events over the past week have confused the outlook, with an uncertain outcome for the French election and a potentially damaging row flaring between the Bundesbank and the German government. But any change in the timetable would provide the Government with major challenges.
The debate about whether Ireland should join appears to be over. All the major political parties are in favour of joining in all circumstances. The Progressive Democrats favour "keeping our options open", particularly in relation to entering without Britain. But senior party figures said at their manifesto launch that they too thought that, on balance, we should probably join.
The Green Party is also less than enthusiastic about monetary union. It favours a referendum on the issue and officially "views with disquiet the headlong rush" to push the State into the system.
The main parties believe monetary union could bring benefits, especially in terms of lower interest rates and cutting business costs. Fianna Fail stresses the need to maintain and improve our competitiveness and to control borrowing.
This would allow the State to respond to any short term shocks to the system without infringeing the terms of the European Stability Pact, the rules applying to monetary union members.
Fine Gael also stresses that the debate must focus on how to extract the maximum possible advantage and bow to chart the correct policy course, particularly if Britain does not join. It makes the point that the benefits of relative price and exchange rate stability, as well as low interest rates, will ensure we remain highly attractive to international investment.
All parties know there will be bumps. The decline in the value of the pound in recent weeks is an example of what lies ahead. It will be important that the Government has a cohesive stance on the exchange rate to avoid even more serious targeting by international speculators in the run up to the final locking of exchange rates.
The rate at which the pound will lock into the system will have far reaching implications. If we lock in at too low a rate it could be a recipe for inflation. On the other hand, lock in at too high a rate and we could be at a competitive disadvantage to the other countries.
The ESRI has already come out in favour of entering at a relatively low rate, which would please the exporters and farmers, arguing that slightly higher inflation over the first couple of years could be a price worth paying. The Government parties have not yet made up their minds on this and it is also unclear where Fianna Fail and the PDs stand.
This type of decision would be far easier if Britain were to join at the same time. Then the fear of a competitive devaluation could be put aside - as could the worry about entering at too high a rate.
However, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Labour Party are all committed to entering with or without Britain. The PDs are the only party which voice any doubts about not waiting for our nearest neighbours and their argument appears to be that we should not finally commit ourselves until we begin negotiations on entry terms.
Of course, all parties will be taking comfort from the British Labour Party's moves to reintegrate into Europe. Nevertheless, the chances of Britain participating from 1999 are still very slim.
The PDs in particular stress that we will be vulnerable to an asymmetric shock or a sharp rise or fall in sterling. The consequences of such a shock to the Irish economic system could be extremely serious, the manifesto notes. The party thus advocates more extensive consultation on the matter before a final decision on EMU. In particular, the views of small and medium enterprises, which will be most exposed, must be listened to, they argue.
The PDs also want an entirely new form of partnership agreement. The party notes that, in a crisis, competitiveness can be protected by reducing wages, but it says that it would be unfair to expect private sector workers to accept wage cuts when the public sector would be getting increases.
The other issue is to what extent the government will educate business and consumers about what lies ahead.
Overall, EMU raises tricky issues. All the main parties have been happy during the campaign to "doff their caps" to the principle of membership but few have been willing to spell out to the electorate the challenges which membership may bring.