Victoria’s bushfire history shows a strong link between property loss and loss of life. For this reason, planning and building controls play a key role in reducing bushfire risk by controlling where people can live and the construction standards they build to.
Responsible agencies rely on complex planning and operational expertise to design and deliver their planned burn programs and other fuel management activities. They dedicate significant resources to these programs with the aim to reduce bushfire risk while also protecting ecosystems.
Victoria is the first state in Australia to use a risk-based target and measures to drive its bushfire risk-reduction activities.
Planned burning is the one of the main treatments that DELWP uses to reduce bushfire risk.
Bushfires are a naturally occurring feature of Australia’s landscape and can significantly impact people, property and the environment.
Australia’s southern states, including Victoria, are the most bushfire-affected areas in the country.
| Who we audited | What we assessed | What the audit cost |
|---|---|---|
| DJPR DELWP EPA GBCMA |
| Acronyms | |
|---|---|
| CL | contingent liability |
| DEDJTR | Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources |
| DELWP | Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning |
| DJPR | Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions |
We have consulted with DELWP, DJPR, EPA, GBCMA and LVMRC and we considered their views when reaching our audit conclusions. As required by the Audit Act 1994, we gave a draft copy of this report, or relevant extracts, to those agencies and asked for their submissions and comments. We also provided a copy of the report to the Department of Premier and Cabinet and the Department of Treasury and Finance.
DJPR and DELWP accepted all the recommendations addressed to them. The audit did not address recommendations to EPA, GBCMA and LVMRC.
ERR’s actions—particularly over the last 18 months—have begun to address identified weaknesses in its regulatory approach and improve its management of longstanding issues with the rehabilitation of mines and quarries.
However, ERR has further work to do to ensure its policies and guidance documents and its information management system provide the necessary instruction, data and processes to support it to be an effective regulator and reduce risk to the state from unrehabilitated mine and quarry sites.
ERR’s regulation of mining rehabilitation does not meet its responsibilities under the Act, relevant regulations and policies. As a result:
ERR has not effectively regulated rehabilitation bonds, meaning the state is financially exposed to significant costs for site rehabilitation. The amount ERR holds in bonds is likely to be at least $361 million short of the estimated cost of rehabilitating Victoria’s existing mines and quarries.
ERR cannot demonstrate that it ensures sites have been rehabilitated, as required, before returning the bond to operators. This includes ensuring that the state has no remaining liability.