Across South Africa’s mining sector, a quiet but persistent frustration is growing around the Department of Mineral Policy and Regulation (DMPR) and its administrative processes. What used to be a reasonably functional compliance relationship has, in many cases, become bogged down in red tape and uncertainty.
Over the past few months, I’ve spoken with several operations — from small quarries to mid-tier mines — and the pattern is strikingly similar. The challenge is not defiance or neglect on the part of the mines; it is the *system itself*. The DMPR’s administrative network appears overstretched, under-resourced, and in some instances, unsure how to interpret or implement its own frameworks in a way that is fit for purpose.
Requests for information or municipal input often disappear into silence. Officers rotate or carry multiple portfolios. Communication channels stall. What follows is a chain of follow-ups, reminders, and escalations that turn routine compliance into a slow, procedural grind. It has become, in many respects, a *war of emails* — not out of hostility, but out of administrative fatigue.
The deeper issue is not bad intent but a widening gap between policy design and operational understanding. Many officials have limited exposure to the realities of on-the-ground implementation — particularly around Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Human Resource Development (HRD) commitments. The result is a rigid, box-ticking culture that often overlooks the developmental impact that well-designed SLPs can deliver.
Meanwhile, mines continue to operate under pressure to comply, submit, and report — often without the reciprocal administrative responsiveness needed to close the loop. While penalties and revocations are occasionally mentioned, the real issue is not enforcement; it’s capacity. The system is trying to regulate faster than it can understand.
In this environment, the best approach for mining companies is consistency and documentation: meet the legal requirements, record progress carefully, and keep the SLP current. Even within a strained system, transparency and evidence of good faith go a long way.
Our approach has been to focus on clarity — short annual updates that capture what was actually achieved, and forward-looking five-year SLP cycles that are practical, measurable, and aligned with local realities. The administrative climate may be complex, but steady compliance and sound communication still build trust.
Gerrie Muller