A republic is irrevalent unless a treaty is signed with the Indigenous people and the constitution changed, when that happens you will then be in a moral position to change the Head of State.

I think that a republic is a 95th-order issue, it will do nothing in itself to change, or make it easier to address, any issue of substance. Conversely, the form of the republic might introduce problems, e.g. tension between rival power centres. Until a clear case can be made for how our lives would be enriched by any form of republic, the issue should stay in the closet.

The republic is an "itch" which a few people want to scratch. If and when it's scratched, they'll need another itch to occupy their time, energy and moral fervour; and on it goes.

I am wondering to what extent people have been brine-washed in English semi-colonies if even PM refused understanding a simple thing: nothing occured in socio-political vacuum.

Approaches to tackling all the problems mentioned by PM K.Rudd differ according to a social demand on, and endlessly feeding London-based feudals for getting assess to internationally supplied loans is not an option from long-term national interest as returning money will pay too high price for at political stage in the future.