Mr BROUGH (9:21 PM) —One thing I am sure we can all agree on here tonight is that on 7 November—the day after this referendum—Australia will not be somehow confronted with a civil war. We all know that, whatever the result, the Australian public have enough good sense and enough judgment to move on and Australia will continue very much as it was on 5 November. I believe that is very much the reason why we have had one of the most successful democracies in the world. It is not because of our Constitution; it is because of the quality and judgment of the Australian people. We as a nation have been through some very difficult times. But, in doing so, we have never once moved towards civil conflict since Federation, and I do not believe we will after this vote is taken.

Many emotive issues will be raised. There will be many misrepresentations made on both sides of this argument, and some of them we have heard here tonight already. But what concerns me is the lack of bipartisanship. If you wish to say that the Prime Minister's original position and that of the government's was to push this debate one way and to give an unfair advantage, then just as equally you could say that the amendment proposed by the Leader of the Opposition could do just the same.

I would actually question how many people in this place would know enough about the Constitution to be able to make fine judgments about what the Governor-General can and cannot do and the powers of the Prime Minister in particular circumstances. I certainly do not have that detail, and I am sure that the majority of the electors of Longman do not have that detail. What they want to know is: will we have an Australian head of state? Will we remain with the status quo? How is that person to be elected? Whether or not that person can dismiss the Prime Minister, or whether the Prime Minister can dismiss that person, will be open to conjecture for many of them. That is not the detail which many of them are going to ever get around regardless of whether it is in this question or not.

I believe that the amendment moved in this House tonight and on which we will vote is a right and proper question to put before the people. It states quite clearly and succinctly that we will be moving from a Queen and a Governor-General to a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth parliament. People can make a judgment knowing how that person is to be appointed. Sure there are other processes to be followed, and they will form part of the argument for those who wish to support a republic, just as those supporting the monarchy and the status quo will no doubt rile against such moves.

For those who claim that the Prime Minister will have so much more power over the President, reflect back to 1975. It is my clear understanding that, if the Prime Minister of the day, Gough Whitlam, had thought for one moment that Sir Roden Cutler would have actually dismissed him, he would have jumped first and sacked the then Governor-General and perhaps put in his place Sir Roden Cutler—

Mr Edwards —What if the Governor-General was Sir John Kerr?

Mr BROUGH —Sorry, Sir John Kerr. The point I was going to make was that he perhaps might have put in his place Sir Roden Cutler, the Governor of New South Wales, whose clear point was never to act in such a way.

Therefore, the powers that we are debating tonight and the powers that will be debated in the two to three months ahead are really not relevant to the question. What is important is whether Australia wants to take the next deliberate step forward in becoming a republic and becoming self-sufficient in all its forms. I believe that the time is right. I believe it is right because it is a time when Australia is not in conflict and is not tearing itself apart. It is a time when we can have a debate and when, if you call a public meeting, you are likely to get 50 people there. That is because it is not a top of the mind issue. Perhaps this is the best time in which to decide these things: when a lot of the emotion is out of it and we get down to people actually having to make a decision—and, in doing so, making a rational decision.

Mr Charles —It is still pretty emotional.

Mr BROUGH —Yes. As I have just been reminded by my colleague, it is still very emotional for some. But it is not for the greater majority of Australians.

Mr Speaker, I end where I began: regardless of this decision, Australians will wake up on 7 November in the same peaceful nation that we reside in today—with a few people with a few more headaches celebrating one way or another that Australia's great state will continue because of the quality of the people who make up this nation.

Opposition members interjecting —Where do you stand?

Mr BROUGH —I'm a republican.

Mr SPEAKER —Order! One would have thought that the sort of maturity that allowed people to hear differing views in silence would at least exist in this debating chamber.