Not *too* bad, I guess. Here's what I proposed 18 months ago: http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/Drones-PAR.html
Is this in the Senate Ctee list I wonder: > ... a legal responsibility to provide customers with documentation, training > and information (e.g. about the law, and about contact-points for regulatory, > licensing and support organisations), prior to passing possession of the > device to the customer. >Particularly for the more dangerous categories of drones and drone >applications, this might need to extend as far as a requirement to sight a >customer's insurance and/or licence to operate that category of drone, before >the organisation can pass possession of the device to the customer. And this: >Countries with a model aircraft association scheme that is subject to the >purview of the aviation regulator can consider refining it to ensure that it >applies to relevant drones and their operators, and hence draws them into an >existing club context that provides education and a values-based framework. >Countries without such a scheme should evaluate the scope for establishing >one. ... >[CASA] could have indtead imposed onerous conditions, thereby creating a >strong incentive for drone operators to join a club and bring themselves >within an environment that makes information available, and brings with it >both a sense of responsibility and insurance coverage. Let alone this: >Virtually all countries have imposed compulsory licensing on drivers of motor >vehicles and operators of mobile plant such as forklifts, including >requirements that they first demonstrate knowledge of the relevant laws and/or >proficiency in the operation of that category of vehicle. These are backed up >by civil and criminal sanctions. >Countries need to give serious consideration to extending the scope of their >driver licensing schemes to encompass drones, or establishing similar schemes >for drone operators, at least for categories of drones, drone uses or contexts >of use that give rise to significant risks. and this: >Many countries have imposed compulsory third-party insurance on owners of >motor vehicles. >Countries need to give serious consideration to extending the scope of their >compulsory third-party insurance schemes to encompass drone-owners, at least >for categories of drones, drone uses or contexts of use that give rise to >significant risks. This could be achieved, for example, by requiring drone >operators to join a model aircraft club. The idea that an Australian Parliament would actually enact privacy legislation of any consequence is of course laughable: >Countries need to revise or extend the existing regulatory framework, or >establish a coherent, comprehensive and balanced regulatory framework, at >least relating to surveillance using drones, but preferably encompassing >surveillance generally, including using drones. Clarke R. (2016) 'Appropriate Regulatory Responses to the Drone Epidemic' Computer Law & Security Review 32, 1 (Jan-Feb 2016) _____________________________________________ At 2:23 +0000 12/5/17, Stephen Loosley wrote: >Richard Chirgwin reports in The Register .. > >http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/10/senate_committee_wants_all_drones_registered > >The Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport, in >a response to an inquiry, has written to infrastructure and transport minister >Darren Chester with the following request > >www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Rural_and_Regional_Affairs_and_Transport/Drones/Media_Releases<http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Rural_and_Regional_Affairs_and_Transport/Drones/Media_Releases> > >"Immediate action should be taken to make drone use safer. In particular, >there are growing concerns both within the aviation industry and amongst the >general public about the safety of recreational drone use. These concerns >emanate from an increasing number of reports of aviation incidents and >mounting fears of the real prospect of a serious accident". >Richard also notes: > >The committee's most urgent requests are that owners undergo safety training; >that CASA be given the power to track all drones regardless of size; and >geofencing of airports and high-traffic zones. > >The letter adds that the committee is also considering measures mandating >flight logging and the display of registration marks. > >Current rules covering recreational drones include a 120 metre ceiling, a 30 >metre exclusion around vehicles, boats, >buildings and people, and operators have to keep their units within sight at >all times. > >-- >Cheers, >Stephen > > >_______________________________________________ >Link mailing list >[email protected] >http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link -- Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/ Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA Tel: +61 2 6288 6916 http://about.me/roger.clarke mailto:[email protected] http://www.xamax.com.au/ Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law University of N.S.W. Visiting Professor in Computer Science Australian National University _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
