The last quote I pulled from the Vic Gov report.
Most respondents agreed the guidelines on providing professional engineering services did not require any additional information or amendment. However, based on feedback from respondents that disagreed, the guidelines would benefit from expanding the descriptions of the terms ‘engineering’, ‘service’ and ‘engineering service’. Respondent feedback also suggests the guidelines would be improved by the inclusion of an additional section that assists readers to distinguish professional engineering services from other services, including other engineering services which are not intended to be captured by the Act, such as those provided by technologists and technicians.
Would seem to be a fairly clear idea of intent on who/what it is NOT trying to capture.
Again, watch the video. It is reasonably clear that actual design work means you doing "professional engineering work", a technogist is just someone who implements that design.
The Legislation as I have stated isn't ambiguous Not an Engineer Not able to get the bit of paper to work as ..... What scope those self identifying as Engineers or working in that field can do is I think still open for some debate over the next few years.
Watch the video.
I'd capture the part if I can find it again.
EDIT: Found it, around the 1:00:00 mark

From that it is very clear that professional engineer is the one that does the design work, and the technologist implements it.
The first column includes a lot of stuff that Engineers
don't do.
The "raw materials" are processed in factories by people who may be Physicists, Chemists, Metallurgists, "Technologists", & maybe, even Engineers.
(Along the way, before the factory, others come into it :-, like various flavours of miners, who are probably from around Certificate level, to Mining Engineers, to, again, Metallurgists, but let's ignore that part).
Some of the EE's "raw materials" are completed devices from semiconductor factories, others from places that make resistors, capacitors, inductors, etc.
Some of the physical hardware comes from metal extrusion factories, some specials are made up by "Engineering Works", who will include in their ranks, specialists in casting, machining, & so on, including a few Engineers.
Going from the "raw materials" to the finished product hasn't been how things were done since back in Da Vinci's time-------& he was a sculptor, not an Engineer!
The "Maintenance" column, though probably fairly valid in Civil Engineering, is Bollocks for Electronics "out in the wild".
Hoping not to insult anyone, I'd like to point out that, in my long experience, EEs in general were very poor at finding faults in equipment-------------it isn't their job!
The same is generally true with Automotive Engineers.
The M.I.A.M.E. up on your car repairer's wall doesn't mean they are degree holders.
Unfortunately, at least with Electronics, TAFE has been so dumbed down that the so- called "Techs" being turned out are just marginally more effective than the guys answering the phone & reading off a script.
The idea of a qualified Boss & a lot of "arms & legs" running about doing their bidding seems to be the ideal of the MBAs, & the like, running today's industry.