This is a notion of ownership that affronts the idea of representative democracy that many politicians and other opinion leaders believe best serves Australia.

But there is an opportunity here for political leaders to bridge the divide between the traditional notions of representative democracy — that is, the politicians we elect should determine on our behalf who is Australia's head of state —and the deep desire in the republican heart of this country for a directly elected president.

Instead of continuing to deny the Australian people the chance to vote on a choice of republican models for fear that they will choose the route of a directly elected president, political leaders, particularly those on the conservative side of the fence, should seize the opportunity.

They could renew faith in Australian democracy by placing their trust in the electorate to make the judgement.

Such a strategy would be a difficult pill to swallow for those political leaders, such as Republican Malcolm Turnbull, who are adamantly, and seemingly intractably, opposed to a directly elected Australian president.

But if they view the republican debate in the broader context of allowing Australians greater choice in constitutional reform matters, and therefore an opportunity to reinvigorate the democracy, then the pill may seem a little more sugar-coated.

Whatever the permutations of the republican debate over the next few years one thing is certain — this is not an issue that has withered on the vine because of public lack of interest.

Such a statement will no doubt surprise those in the Australian community who cling to a British monarchy whose best days are well behind it, or those Australians who just don't see the relevance of the republican debate.

The republican cause has an ongoing persistence about it.

The fact that about 60% of Australians continue to support an Australian republic — a figure that has changed little in the past 10 years — indicates that the issue is still important and relevant for many in the community and it lingers in the public consciousness as a matter still be to resolved.

That's why even a cautious politician such as Kevin Rudd believes it is time to light a fire under the republican embers.

But perhaps what explains the persistence of the Australian republican debate in our body politic is that it is linked inextricably to our sense of identity.

Even in a country such as Australia, where identity politics has none of the resonance that it does in the US or France, any issue that taps into our identity — be it the republic, Gallipoli, the Kokoda Trail or the Australian flag — is potent in our community.

A road map to achieving an Australian republic is not a straightforward one.

There are cul de sacs, winding avenues and very few short cuts and six-lane highways.

But what this road map would present is a genuinely exciting journey, one that provides an opportunity for republicans across Australia to build a new and innovative way of conducting political and constitutional discourse. It would also enable Australians to take hold of their constitution in a way that has hitherto been considered impossible.

An Australian republic that emerges from a process that genuinely connects opinion leaders with the Australian community will help to reshape this country in the 21st century.

The founders of Federation could look back on their work with a genuine sense of nation-building pride.

The difference between Federation and the republic is that if we let it happen, it won't just be political and opinion leaders who are the architects of success, but all of us.