The New South Wales (NSW) Parliament has passed new laws to introduce a registration scheme for professional engineers practising in the state.
As part of the Design and Building Practitioners Bill passed by the NSW Parliament yesterday, compulsory registration will soon apply to professional engineers in the fields of civil, structural, electrical, mechanical and fire safety engineering.
Engineers Australia CEO Dr Bronwyn Evans welcomed the move.
“The passage of the Design and Building Practitioners Bill through the NSW Parliament is a history-making development in the regulation of professional engineers in Australia and one which will significantly benefit the community and the engineering profession,” Dr Evans said.
“It will lift professional standards for the 60,000 engineers who work in NSW and who are vital to the state’s economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.”
While registration has been mandated in Queensland for 90 years, NSW has been slower off the mark, with incidents such as the Opal Tower evacuation highlighting the need for more stringent controls in the building industry and beyond.
“The catalyst for NSW was the Shergold-Weir report and its recommendations,” Jonathan Russell, EA National Manager for Public Affairs and Policy Advocacy, told create.
“The fact that Victoria and Queensland already had systems in law that applied to engineering practice across all industries added weight for NSW to do the same. It became obvious that NSW couldn’t be stuck in the middle with no checks and balances on professional practice.”
What does it mean for engineers?
If you’ve already obtained CPEng or are registered on the National Engineering Register (NER), then it’s likely good news.
“One of the big tasks for Engineers Australia during the next phase is to make sure that anyone who’s registered on the NER, or is chartered with EA, will also be able to use their status on those two systems as a pathway to statutory registration,” Russell said.
“Our strong argument to government is that NER and CPEng should be enough to satisfy the government that they should be registered on their system too.
“The Bill also makes it very clear that mutual recognition applies, so for anyone who is already registered in Queensland, and if people get registered in Victoria first, costs will be kept low because they’ll be entitled to be registered in NSW without any significant hoops to jump through.”
The new laws, set to commence on 1 July 2021, will apply to anyone wishing to provide professional engineering services, unless under the direct supervision of a registered engineer, or if only applying a prescriptive design.
And while five areas of engineering practice are initially covered by the Bill, additional areas of engineering might later be added via regulation.
“It provides for more [areas of practice] to be added down the track,” Russell said.
“We will definitely be wanting to work with the government this year and in the future to expand this to other areas.”
In a statement, Engineers Australia acknowledged Kevin Anderson, Minister for Better Regulation and Innovation, for his efforts, as well as Shadow Minister Yasmin Catley.
“This couldn’t have happened without a whole range of people in Parliament, industry and of course countless members who have provide advice during our consultation phases and supported direct engagement with Government,” Russell said.
“They understood the need and pushed really hard.”
Thanks for your article, Charlotte.
Are you able to comment on the application of this bill outside of ‘building work’?
That is great that NSW now has that legislation requiring Engineer’s registration but it is a shame that Australia does not have a national registration scheme rather than each state doing its own thing. We have been down that path many time before for for other things and it can be more costly and somewhat inefficient overall.
What about Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering ? or two are covered under Civil Enginnering?
In my opinion, this is an effort in creating more revenue for the Institute of Engineers (IE) Australia not for the benefit of the professional engineers. Most of the engineers in Australia are either having degrees from the Australian Universities or their Engineering Degree were assessed by IE-Australia then why they should register again and pay fee annually.
My question is that if a registered Engineer commit any professional mistake or a building collapse and people die then would the Institution of Engineers would take the responsibility as they have already charged a registration fee? It sounds like by registering an engineer IE-Aust is giving a certificate that this engineer will not do any mistake and if it does, we will take responsible. Also, now registered engineers do not require any Insurance to cover themselves as they are registered now. In my opinion, IE-Aust should instruct employer to assess qualififcation of engineers prior to appointment and if the employer have any doubt then they should contact IE-Aust for ensuring the degree and qualification is assessed by IE-Aust.
We the engineers are not getting any help from IE-Aust in case when we loose the jobs. Lots of engineering jobs have been outsourced and overseas engineers are working in our country at cheaper rates on temp visa and IE-Australia have not raised any voice in support of Engineers. If the IE-Australia register us for free (which will never happen) then it is acceptable. IE-Australia never helped engineers who are struggling to get jobs and are working on non-engineering jobs at a very low pay. Engineering seminars with diners and other events are arranged on payment without thinking in the direction of creating jobs for engineers.
Engineering Registration fails every test, in public safety, honesty, intelligence.
Engineering Registration is not Quality assurance of any project.
Engineering Registration cannot prevent or detect any rogue Engineer’s faulty design or construction eg Opal Towers.
Engineering Registration has no power to make compensation, restitution, liquidated damages, imprison rogues.
Only our Courts, Magistrate, District, Supreme, Federal, High Courts have those powers
to make compensation, restitution, liquidated damages, imprison rogues.
Any competent Engineer always seeks out knowledge for his/her and client’s benefits without holding a gun to his/her head with compulsory Engineering Registration .
It’s called freedom in Western Society.
In Western Society freedom comes with responsibility which is basis of all adults and our Magna Carta heritage.
Totally agree – can’t help but feel that this benefits the big engineering firms with an office in each state while making it difficult for small firms to do work interstate without first registering in multiple states and all the associated paperwork and cost required. This looks to me like a cash grab. A national approach is required.
Engineering Registration fails every test, in public safety, honesty, intelligence.
Engineering Registration is not Quality assurance of any project.
Engineering Registration cannot prevent or detect any rogue Engineer’s faulty design or construction eg Opal Towers.
Engineering Registration is thus a failure in public safety.
Engineering Registration is also a failure in honesty and is dishonest in that it claims to protect people when it does not.
Engineering Registration has no power to make compensation, restitution, liquidated damages, imprison rogues.
Only our Courts, Magistrate, District, Supreme, Federal, High Courts have those powers
to make compensation, restitution, liquidated damages, imprison rogues.
Any competent Engineer always seeks out knowledge for his/her and client’s benefits without holding a gun to his/her head with compulsory Engineering Registration .
It’s called freedom in Western Society.
In Western Society freedom comes with responsibility which is basis of all adults and our Magna Carta heritage.
Now we have 3 states requiring Registration (at fairly high cost) plus the cost of maintaining NER and CPEng etc, a National Scheme is required. Maybe EA will focus lobbying efforts upon a National registration with the states all having conforming legislation (they pretty much do already for NSW/Qld/Vic) with enabling legislation (not yet in place) so that national registration (one stop shop) is all that is required. Most of us, even in WA, work extensively across state lines and having to maintain now 3 registrations plus NER and CPEng will only get more difficult as more states require registration.
I am sure this is on the radar, so can someone at EA provide an update?
The absence of universal recognition between states is a ridiculous cash grab by states and also a restrictive practice which surely is contrary to our constitutional right to free trade across Australia. Is the claim in article that Victoria already has this legislation in place true, as at 6th June 2020?
The conditions in the Victorian Act are alarmingly penal and are more appropriate to shonky traders than properly trained professionals of any sort.
EA must really be salivating at the thought of forcing people to become members and chatered engineers and registering on the NER while earning handsome amounts of money from each of these people. I hope the government establishes its own independent agency to assess qualifications if at all and should be done at a very nominal fee. Throw a spanner in the works of EA greed…
Registration of engineers does not grantee sound engineering design. There are plenty of CPE’s that I wouldn’t trust to design my dogs house let alone a multi story building. Registration will also promote complacency from consumers as the sell on registering engineers is to eliminate negligent engineering practices. So will EA take responsibility for a negligent engineer they have endorsed? I strongly doubt it, they will not be putting their hand up should one of their endorsed engineers be liable for negligence. Perhaps an ethical approach should be endorsed rather than another excuse to take money for a false sense of security.
We need some formal registration process. I would like to see the IEAust lead and manage the registration of Professional Engineers on a federal level with the appropriate legislation protecting and allocating the title of Engineer. The title of engineer currently has no value outside of the profession simply because anyone can use it with no consequence. It needs protection and whilst the IEAust have pretty much lost its way with respect to representing the Professional Engineer they are still the logical choice.
1. Registered & Chartered Engineers Take advantage of the power granted by ENGINEERS AUSTRALIA, and therefore hire Engineers overseas and then they just put a signature and Done (Registration doesn’t help avoid these issues, they simply couldn’t monitor every single Registered Engineer)
2. Overseas Engineers are not here on temporary Visas and taking our jobs, they are working from their countries and sending designs on google drives and servers to those who pushed that change for their own selfish benefit (NB Most of those Registered Engineer are fellowship member and they Vote and change the Law the way it suits them)…
3. Important point. If an engineer works for five years in a company on only smaller projects, he is going to get registered and fuck up eventually.
4. There is no benefits of becoming a member anymore. Just Register after five year working under a Registered Engineer who will overwhelm you in his projects, exhaust you and make more profits at lowest salary (Because they know they are the only way and everybody needs there accreditation), and eventually, after serving him for years and making him millionaire, not giving you a reference as you’ll become his competitor.
5. Most importantly and Finally, the Shergold-Weir and the Opal Tower failed because of faux Chartered and Registered Engineers within Engineers Australia. Although their big annual Salary, they didn’t do their job properly at at reviewing and approving the designs. This includes useless Engineers occupying Cities Councils.
6. Finally, Knowing that Engineers are accurate and precise especially at identifying the problem. Unfortunately, Engineers Australia failed to identify the problem and they SHOT EVERY MEMBER OR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN AUSTRALIA
7. This new legislation wouldn’t change the reality. Wait and Watch the future………
I understand this is an important issue and it is one which I agree with. However EA seems to be constantly pursuing this state by state (whilst putting itself forward as the verifying body for each state) rather than pursuing this as a national issue.
As my EA membership and RPEQ are now both due for renewal and further RPE applications for other states to come then I am starting to question whether EA membership is something which I am willing to pay.
After 9 month, I’ve still yet to see any confirmation that an engineer registered as CPEng NER can qualify for the relevant fair trading categories.
So basically I’ve paid IEAust membership for no good reason. So it seems like we basically just need to cancel our membership with IEAust and move over to fairtrading accreditations. At least that’s recognised.
The NER should be the only Registration necessary; CPEng the gold standard. Any other level of “approval” is unecessary red tape. The state governments know full well that it is unecessary to have separate state based registrations for approval for an engineer to practice but are quite happy to take engineer’s money for the privelage of saying that they agree with the assessment scheme that they have already agreed to. There is no need whatsoever for the states to approve each and every engineer’s NER assessment as the NER system has already been approved as acceptable.
BPEQ and any state that adopts localised tick box approval of an engineer’s NER is at very least outdated and parochial. At worst somewhat arrogant. I have heard it said that “we build bridges and high risk structures in Queensland”. As if Queensland is the only place in the world where anything is built.
All that is needed to be done is Engineers Australia is mandated to do what each state is doing and each state authority can become part of Engineers Australia. The articles and explanations given for the bureaucracy are avoidant. I am wholly supportive of engineering registration but not bloated bureacracy and kingdoms within kingdoms.