Home   >   Features   >   Statutory Endorsement

Statutory Endorsement

By on January 5, 2012

BRUCE McCLURE, General Manager of the CMPA reports on the recently released draft Statutory Endorsement Flow Chart.

STATUTORY Endorsement was introduced by the DPI under Stage 1 of the Minerals Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 (MRSDA) review. It was introduced to streamline work approvals by reducing or eliminating duplication of referrals to agencies. Statutory Endorsement is contained within the legislative Mineral Resources Amendment (Sustainable Development) Bill 2010 and will come into effect no later than 1 February 2012.

It should be noted that Statutory Endorsement:

  • Gives statutory recognition to the current administrative practice of work plan endorsement;
  • Only applies to mining and extractive industry work plans where there is a need for a planning permit (i.e. not exploration work plans or for approvals subject to an EES);
  • Will be incorporated into the DPI-DSE work plan Memorandum of Understanding; and the existing DPCD mining and extractive industry planning practice notes are being updated to reflect the change to the approvals process; and
  • Is not applicable to sites under the Code of Practice for Small Quarries.

DPI has introduced a flow chart to stakeholders that shows the statutory endorsement process. The flow chart only reflected DPI’s proposed procedure for assessing and endorsing work plans within the bounds of the new legislative requirements. The DPI quickly realised that the flowchart highlighted the need to seek inclusion of the legislation within the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPPs).

They reached agreement in principle with DPCD as to how the statutory endorsement legislation will appear within the VPPs. DPI then sort stakeholder feedback on the proposed changes as they realised that this would provide support to the process of getting the VPPs updated which DPI saw as key to making sure that statutory endorsement works.

The CMPA made a submission to DPI on the proposed flowchart and the proposed changes to the VPPs. The details on the CMPA submission are shown below.

As you are no doubt aware, the CMPA, although supportive of the aim of the statutory endorsement process, is highly concerned that the potential costs faced by proponents will increase substantially and restrict access into the industry, and also questions the ability of the DPI to ensure timely flow of statutory endorsements under its present budgetary and legislative position.

The proposal for changes to the VPPs appear to be workable from a planning permit perspective, however raises three queries:

  1. Will sites currently not requiring a Statutory Endorsed Work Plan (SEWP) or those working under the code of practice now require one to progress through the planning process?
  2. How will the clear definition of referral authorities presently given in Clause 66 of the VPP be made in the future?
  3. As the DPI will be doing much of the work previously undertaken in the planning permit process, will they be appropriately remunerated for their efforts by the DPCD or will the fees charged to proponents simply be further increased?

With respect to the flowchart itself being developed by DPI, the following comments are raised:

  • When a referral authority objects to endorsement on a specified ground/s, it is important that the issue/s are clearly defined so a proponent is able to address this without fear of ‘new’ reasons being brought forward by the referral authority if they choose to provide more information or revisions. Will this be prevented and if so, how will it be addressed?
  • At the first instance when VCAT can be accessed, can the application be simply for reconsideration of one referral authority’s objection and then resume the statutory endorsement process or must it consider the whole of the application? It would seem that if one authority objected, that the DPI could reasonably instantly refuse the proposal without waiting for responses from any outstanding referral authorities.
  • In the second instance when VCAT can be accessed, is this limited to issues relevant to the planning permit (and therefore not consider issues addressed during statutory endorsement)?
  • The last activities shown on the flowchart appear to lead onto a further action and required clarification.

A revised flow chart taking into account the comments from the stakeholders has not yet been released. The CMPA has some fundamental issues with the Statutory Endorsement process particularly as it may result in increased costs for members who are seeking work plan endorsement. History has shown that despite repeated assurances that governments want to reduce red tape, cut down costs and make approvals etc simpler to understand and easier to obtain, the exact opposite has usually been the inevitable result. One only hopes that the Statutory Endorsement process does not follow this trend.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Sponsored Ads