‘Head of State - The Thread that Binds the Fabric’.

The position should be The Conduit–The Trinity between The Parliament, The Executive and The Judiciary. Together with the States

The position should remain known as Governor General so as to maintain the status quo and thus eliminating any false misunderstanding that the Head of State (or ‘President’) usurps the Executive Government.

The Commonwealth would call for nominations for this position, through Local Government Councils, 120 days or more prior to a General Election.

The candidates to be put to the people should be Australian Citizens aged between 39 and 69 years of age as at the date of nomination. A candidate will not be a current or an immediate past member of any parliament in Australia.
A final list of up to five candidates, for election, could be chosen as follows;
Candidates for election to position of Governor General may be nominated by any registered voter residing in any Local Council area. Each Local Council will call for the nomination of any citizen residing in any Local council area. The nomination should be in writing on a prescribed form, the completed form to be submitted to the Local Council via mail/web site or deposited in a ballot box at the Local Council premises by due date. The voters name would be marked off the roll, electronically, on receipt of a nomination.

The elected members of each Local Government Council should vote, by secret ballot and elect up to five candidates from a list of up to ten nominees receiving the greatest number of nominations received from the voters, this count of postal and deposited votes to be conduced by the Local Council’s returning officer.

These nominated candidates, from each Local Council, to be forwarded to the State and Territory Electoral Commission to construct a list of up to twenty nominees from those candidates receiving the highest number of nominations received, for each State or Territory Parliament to vote upon.

(continued

Each State/Territory parliament, in a joint sitting (if two houses exist), of each State, Territory would then vote, by secret ballot, for up to ten candidates from the lists of nominees constructed from the Local Councils returning officers by the State, Territory Electoral Commissions.

(Alternatively:

A joint house standing committee be formed in the second year of the parliament would canvas the citizens from approbate levels of society, viz; legal, military, indigenous, business, academic but not current or immediate past politician. They would create a list of ten nominees (in camera) and prepared for the commonwealth electoral commission.
This may not be conceded political appointments by the general public.)

Then;

This final list would be forwarded to the Commonwealth Electoral Commission who would formerly invite each nominee, in camera, to stand and have them accept or reject the nomination in writing on a prescribed document and within the prescribed time frame.

Should a nominee reject their nomination the next nominee receiving the greatest number of votes would be added to the final list of five (and so on).

A joint sitting of both houses of the Commonwealth plus the Premier or Chief minister of each State, Territory would vote.

This secret ballot, for five candidates, from the list constructed by the electoral commission of up to ten candidates gaining the highest number of nominations nationally, these five candidates, voted on by this meeting, will be put to the people for election.

At this stage of the process the final list of five nominees will be published, at the same time as writs are issued for the upcoming election, in the public notices of the local and or national press.

At no point during this process should the nominee or any nominator be permitted, by law, to promote the nominee by way of positive media comment or paid advertising

In reply to JMCC who wrote:
A candidate will not be a current or an immediate past member of any parliament in Australia.

I disagree with the philosophy of barring any Australian from aspiring to become head of state. Barring past or present politicians
is akin to the same type of discrimination which exists within the current laws of succession to the British (and hence Australian) throne. These laws state that:-
(i) the monarch must carry the blood of the late Sophia, Electress of Hanover;
(ii) the monarch must be a member of the Church of England. This debars Presbyterians, Methodists, Salvationists, Jews, Muslims, Seventh Day Adventists and so on ad nauseam;
(iii)members of the Catholic faith may not become monarch nor may the monarch marry a Catholic because "it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this protestant kingdom to be governed by a papist."
(iv) a younger male child takes precedence over an older female i.e. primogeniture. Thus, if King George VI and Queen Elizabeth had had a son after Princess Margaret was born he would have been king.

This type of sectarian bigotry and gender prejudice might have been acceptable in 17th century England but not in 21st century Australia.
It is disgusting in this modern age that we still have a monarchy which is based on such hatred and prejudice. It is time to move on.

Therefore, the position of head of state of Australia should be open to any Australian over, say, twenty one years of age,irrespective of religion, gender, marital status,sexual orientation, occupation either past or present. Yes! Even a politician

What about used car salesmen?

> But by all means, vote for a 'beer swilling yobbo' if you wish.

My point, Grim, is that people with the reputation you require scarce. Add to this the requirement for broad experience and knowledge of legal matters (unless you regard ignorance and incompetence as desirable qualifications), the ability to engage in meaningful and authoritative dialogue with the military, Aboriginals, all Ozns including the unborn, and willing to avow fulfilment of his responsibilities "with no say in Government policy", and you have either a saint (in very short supply), a moron (very plentiful) or a scheming liar (ditto). Would YOU undertake such a task? Come now, be honest ...

> All of these "truly remarkable (set of) responsibilities" currently exist
> ... under the control of the PM and her relevant Ministers.

The plural (i.e. "PM and her relevant Ministers") may have escaped your attention. Perhaps if the President were multiply schizoid ...

> How ... they are addressed is therefore currently a matter of policy

The policy is always to promise the unattainable. The spin is to claim that it has been delivered. The reality is that no-one (least of all those making the promises and claims) believes any of it.

> I might also suggest you Google the word 'ambition' ...

So Presidential candidates are to arouse and avow a burning ambition to achieve what no sane person would believe possible? This clearly demonstrates either delusion or dissimulation. Surely we already have a surplus of such moral reprobates in office?

> The point of a popularly elected but apolitical President is that the only
> promise he/she can make is to perform the duties specified; nothing else.

And as I've said, no sane, honest person would make such a promise; unless they live in Lala Land.

Roy; I attach cover notes from my 'Paper' on this matter:

5. The title ‘Governor General’ will not infer the position is above the
Parliament and maintains the current position, most people wrongly think the Governor General is indeed our ‘Head of State’

6. Why the age range of 39-69 years? A person attaining the age of 39
Would be conceded to have attained the life skills to handle the position.

Also at 39 the incumbent would be able to hold the position for four terms of parliament – 16 years – while still been able to nominate for a further 16 years. Likewise a person of 69 years could still serve 16 years if desirable.

In addition the position should be of an extended period to cement a feeling of stability as the Head of State, beyond the normal electoral cycle. A monarchical figure; seen as an elder ‘Statesperson’; a person to admire; an ‘A-political’ person.

7. In general terms I understand the general public do not want a current ‘Politician’ or one who resigns from the Parliament to nominate for the position. Or even to be seen as been nominated by other politicians as a prize after retiring from any immediate past parliament. After the time frame of two parliaments a past politician could nominate so that icons of Australian life; the likes of Gough Whitlam, Jennie George, Nick Greiner, Natasha Scott-Despoja, Tim Fisher, Malcolm Fraser,
Bob Hawke, Bob Carr, Julie Bishop, John Howard, Kim Beazley,
Paul Keating, John Hewson or Meg Lees could still aspire to serve
Australia should they so desire.