Mr HOCKEY (Financial Services and Regulation) (10:20 PM) —I do not intend to trivialise the debate by seeking to apply political semantics to the question that is before the House. I regret that members of the opposition have chosen to do so. What I want to do is place on record, especially to my electorate, my very strong support for the question that will be put to the Australian people. I support Australia becoming a republic, and that is entirely consistent with everything that I stand for and that I have stood for in the past.

I do so on the question of fundamentals. Do I believe that any individual should be entitled by birthright to a title or to leadership? No. Do I believe that any individual, by virtue of their religion, should be entitled to lead a nation? No. Do I believe that a man should enjoy a privilege ahead of a woman to lead a country? No. Do I believe that an Australian should be the head of state of Australia? Yes, and I believe it passionately. I believe it passionately because I believe passionately in Australia and its future. Most importantly, I believe passionately in the people of Australia.

When one enters this House, one does so carrying a very significant weight on their shoulders, the weight of representation. In many of our cases there are over 140,000 people in our electorate. I have consulted widely with the people in my electorate about this issue. I understand the differences in opinion. I understand how passionate returned servicemen are about the fact that they fought for Australia and they felt they were fighting for God, Queen and country, and for some God, King and country. I understand their sense of history. But my job as a legislator and as a representative of the people in my electorate is to look forward; it is to care not only about the people who live today but about Australians who will be living in 2050 and 2100 and the years beyond that.

What is important to those people is the symbol of nationhood, and the symbol of nationhood is about the inherent and intrinsic beliefs of each and every Australian, that is, that each and every Australian should have the opportunity to be our head of state, that any Australian, notwithstanding that they are Jewish, Catholic, Protestant or Moslem, should be entitled to be our head of state; that any Australian, notwithstanding whether they are born or resident in Coober Pedy or Cremorne, should be entitled to be our head of state. That is the nation that so many Australians have fought for and that is the nation that so many representatives in this parliament stand in here day in day out seeking to defend.

From my perspective, there is no question about which way I will vote when it comes to the referendum. I am not interested in entertaining some spurious arguments about direct election, because the direct election proponents are arguing for a change to the democratic system. They are not arguing for a change in the head of state; they are arguing for a change in the system. There are some aspects in a true liberal democracy that we should preserve. We should preserve those things that work well, but we should always seek to improve on the things that seek to make us a better nation. And this makes us a better nation, because it makes us a better people. It gives young Australians the opportunity to aspire to lead their nation. As far as I am concerned, that is my primary motivation for supporting the yes case.