A Non-Executive Presidential Model


The Governor General would cease to be our notional 'Head of State' and command-in-chief of the armed services.
The Governor General would cease all ceremonial duties, except those strictly connected with the machinery of government and parliament.
The President will not have the power to assent to or veto legislation or approve regulations.

The remaining duties of the Governor General would be strictly limited to the machinery of Government and Parliament:-

Administering the oath of office to ministers, prime ministers, judges, and other officials.
Officiate at the opening of a new session of parliament when all members and senators gather in the Senate chamber.
Read the speech that sets out what the new government intends to do.
Assent to Bills that have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Appoint statutory officers such as judges, heads of government boards, commissions and other agencies.
Convene meetings of the Federal Executive Council.
Approve Regulations according to existing Acts of Parliament, (including the armed services).
Issue of writs for federal elections.


The President would assume some of the following duties from the Governor General:-

Head of State.
'Notional' Command in Chief of the Armed Services.
Meet foreign Heads of state, and Ambassadors.
Attend Anzac Day ceremonies.
Travel overseas on trade missions.
Open public conferences and exhibitions.
Give speeches on the concerns and aspirations of all Australians.
Encourage Australians to have high regard for each other and their environment.
Formally award honours and decorations as Chancellor of the Order of Australia.
Meet underprivileged Australians and give voice to their plight and needs.
Voice opinions on matters of National significance.
Support many worthy organizations.
Protect the Constitution.


The President would assume the following powers from the Queen:-

The power to appoint or dismiss a Governor General, upon request from the Prime Minister.


Elections

In a fixed 4 year federal election cycle, Presidential elections could be held mid term. Political Parties should be able to submit eligible Presidential candidates. Once elected, the President-Elect must resign as a member of a political party or any affiliated organisation.

Term

Four Years

Sorry, but I can't really endorse this model- that would be TWO ceremonial figureheads sucking on Aussie taxpayers, when personally I think ceremonial governing roles should be tossed into the dustbin of history.

I would however support a President role (or better yet a Federal Council like in Switzerland- although elected differently) if it scrapped the GG office entirely, was elected by the people, and most importantly, had a practical function, such as create policy or override government policy/parliamentary motions/'conscience votes' on the condition the proposal be immediately put to referendum, and there was actually some compulsion to do this, instead of sit on their backsides and step in only when they can't actually get away with being inactive.

King Hazza,

I should have clarified that more, the Governor General would cease to also be a figurehead. In essence, the G.G. would be a public servant with only a secretary or two, but higher in stature than that of the Chief Justice of the High Court. You will never hear or see from the G.G. until before and after an election is called.

The G.G. would not need to travel outside of Canberra or even reside at Yarralumla any longer. So, the cost of the position should be vastly reduced.

On the otherhand, the President elected by the people should not be a silent figure-head, but must have a voice, should be able to express themselves openly, even if it means criticising the government of the day.

But, it is imperative that the new President resides at 'Old Parliament House', in the full public view, just down the hill from Parliament House

Why not just appoint a Generalissimo Supremo? Oh that's right - that's what the PM is supposed to be under the model you propose.

But the problem is that the symbolism doesn't actually substantiate to anything in politics.
John Howard would have strolled right past plain view of the War Memorials before entering Parliament House and signing up our troops to wars purely for diplomatic favor with an ally, all without batting an eyelid.

The Governor General (And for that matter, the President) simply don't perform an important enough practical function to substantiate either of their roles into existence, let sharing bits between them.

As I said, there would need to be a practical regular function of governance to justify the role- and there would only need to be one single office. And these powers would need to be balanced against other houses (and the people) to ensure it is proper and democratic.
Thus, veto on condition that the issue be put to a public vote is the only justification.

Unfortunately, under the Westminster system, the P.M. is currently and has always been the Generalissimo supremo.

I would much prefer a Prime Minister be like a super premier of the country, only responsible for matters within our borders.

While the President is only responsible for matters outside of our borders: foreign affairs, defence, trade, customs, immigration etc

I saw Rudd on TV months ago, whenever, one day he was in Tasmania, the next he was in Perth, the next Brisbane, the next Washington, the next in London. Our country is simply too large for a PM to cover all of it as well as the world.

But, I was told Monarchists and Republicans would hate it, no one would like it. So, I came up with this model, which I subsequently found out is similar to a model done by David Latimer in 2004.