By on May 13, 2005

It is quite a challenge to keep up to date with all the legislative changes that occur on a near daily basis, why only yesterday the CMPA was informed of a review of the Australian Standard AS 2187.2 titled ‘Explosives – Storage, transport and use part 2’. This, combined with the CMPA releasing at least one submission every week has lead to a need to update members more fully on what the CMPA is presently investigating and what is anticipated in legislative reviews.



Following the submission by the CMPA as reported in the last newsletter, no further action has occurred. The Secretariat understands that this issue is presently in the report development phase, with a report not expected for several months. Copies of both the Discussion Paper and the CMPA’s submission are available from

To further clarify this issue, the ILMF discussion paper put forward several methods of achieving the aspirations of Indigenous Victorians in relation to their input concerning Crown Lands. Aspirations include the transfer of ownership of all Crown lands and their management over to the Indigenous peoples and the payment of royalties to the Indigenous people in addition to the Crown for land use.

This was the first time the paper was presented to the wider community and has created a considerable and justified backlash. It is anticipated that considerable work will be required on this issue to ensure a fair and equitable outcome for all CMPA Members.


The CMPA has commenced developing a submission for this study. The aim of the study is to explore the international competitiveness of Australia’s fiscal framework and particularly investigate:

  • Key outstanding fiscal issues identified by industry and Government
  • The scope for possible greater harmonisation of fiscal measures across Australia
  • Identifiable and possibly new fiscal measures to encourage and sustain the entry of new companies to the sector

Issues that are presently highlighted in the CMPA’s draft submission include the high costs training and education; the cost of complying with safety regulations; the additional burden of changed company tax depreciation allowances; the requirement for more information and balance for industry when supporting government objectives; the need to take industry concerns highlighted in Regulation Impact Statements more seriously; the many difficulties of the rehabilitation bond system; the damaging effects of land taxes; the lack of diesel fuel rebates for the quarry industry specifically; and the damage created by cross boarder anomalies.


The VEAC is investigating the River Red Gum Forests along the Murray River valley within Crown land. The investigation will look at how the land should be best managed to protect both the environment and those people who live off these lands. A submission was provided by the CMPA on the extent ‘Terms of Reference’ and now submissions are being called for addressing the Terms of Reference.

The CMPA would like to hear from anyone within the reference area in order for a submission to be prepared in time for the July 4th deadline.



This paper investigated what was holding back the state in regional and rural areas and caused by poor or out-dated regulation. The CMPA noted its support for several recommendations and views, namely:

  • 5-yearly review of the Victorian State Panning Policy Framework;
  • The view that the potential of a responsible authority to stall a project is still great;
  • That the Policy Impact Assessment managed by the EPA be independently reviewed;
  • The stricter, however fairer implementation of an Environmental Effects Statement;
  • That a MOU is created between DPI and DSE to allow streamlining;
  • Views held by several similar associations in that it is humanly impossible to comment upon all available submissions and that when comments are made, they must be more thoroughly reviewed by government.

There were several points that the CMPA disagreed with namely the high expectation of the skills of those making applications and several serious concerns in relation to the effect of the native vegetation legislation. This document is a credit to the government and it will be of interest to see how many of the recommendations are accepted.


There have been two submissions made to date concerning the National Mine Safety Framework to date.

The first was concerning ‘Strategy 4 – National Co-ordinated Protocol on Enforcement’. This presented a number of overriding issues included the need to encourage workplaces rather then simply fine, the need to recognise that business at different stages of their life-cycle will have different abilities, the need for consistent, clear, concise and practically attainable advice from regulators, the need to encourage ownership of results at all levels of employment, and finally the need to create real and lasting outcomes from incidents rather than alienate parties.

The second in this series of submissions is for ‘Strategy 6 – Consultation’. The CMPA made particular comment concerning the proposed guidelines for consultation at a workgroup or workplace level, at a state level, and finally at a national industry level.

This submission referred to the ‘Issue Resolution Form’ as one possible method of encouraging consultation particularly at a workplace level.


This submission investigated how the government, communities and stakeholders can better interact with one another. The CMPA noted concerns arising from:

Negative community lobbying; Poorly managed Local Town Planning Departments;

  • The need for a single industry regulator acting as enforcer, protector and promoter;
  • The requirement for the Work Authority Holder sitting on the MCMPR to assist in proper representation;
  • Ensuring that such engagement and consultation only occurs when warranted by community concerns and interest.


This call for submissions concerned the growth areas of Casey Cardinia, Hume and Melton-Caroline Springs. Although a number of issues were raised specific to these areas, there were also five overriding issues, being:

  • Lack of response due to the confidential and commercially sensitive nature of the information
  • The limited growth due to new regulations
  • That the issues raised are common to the state
  • The need to ensure resources are treated as a finite commodity
  • The sterilisation of capital and subsequently resources through the rehabilitation bond system.


Overall, the CMPA felt that these regulations should be able to be easily applied in the extractive industries due to the present treatment of other explosives.

The only concerns that were noted included:

  • To ensure any system of management matches the present explosives management system for ease of use,
  • That further direction is given in relation to ordering and what should be recorded, and
  • That the DPI be the reporting body for the extractive industries .

If you would like further information on any of these submissions, please contact the Secretariat via email at

Sponsored Ads