Evidence of meeting #34 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was drone.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:30 a.m.
Capt Dan Adamus
No, there wouldn't be for that; however, I still believe there should be some sort of course that the user should take—a simple course, an online course, as for a boater's licence, for example.
10:30 a.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Very quickly, Mr. Fraser, do you have feedback on how we can implement a licensing process that won't stifle innovation?
After that, I'll turn it over to my colleague Mr. Sikand.
10:30 a.m.
Partner, McInnes Cooper, As an Individual
I think we already have the model with the boating cards. It's a program that implements a curriculum approved by Transport Canada. It's in the hands of third parties, and as long as they deliver it up to the standard, then it can be done.
I don't agree with the distinction between commercial and non-commercial; it should be entirely based on risk. If a hobbyist wants to go up 500 feet, they are incurring the exact same risk as a commercial person going up to 500 feet. The level of training and the level of licensing needs to be proportional to the risk of the operation, not whether somebody is getting paid.
10:30 a.m.
Liberal
10:30 a.m.
Liberal
Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Thank you.
Please forgive me if you find this question strange. I'm not a pilot. I'm thinking about this as if it were a lake and I were somebody who was boating.
We were speaking about a UAS's potential negative impacts from hitting an engine and whatnot. Do you see any positives? I know that planes are very sophisticated, but I'm equating this with a lighthouse or buoy markers. Do you think we can have positive benefits from using UASs to help and facilitate pilots in their operations?
10:30 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association
My first thought is no, but down the line when everything.... Let's think science fiction. They could be seen as lighthouses, if we could just keep them there, but that's in 30, 40, or 50 years. Certainly we could find something positive, but that would be science fiction, really, and then it would become reality at some point. Right now, at the point the technology has reached, we're not even close to that. It's more of a risk. If we can cohabit safely.... It's a risk.
10:30 a.m.
Capt Dan Adamus
I agree with Bernard. Right now, no, the technology is not there.
There is a lot of stuff. We haven't talked about geofencing for UASs that are equipped with GPS. You could program them so that if they go to within, say, nine kilometres of an airport, they're just going to stop and hover; they're not going to go any further. You could build that geofencing around the Parliament Buildings; it's the same sort of thing. You could build it so that there's a maximum height.
That technology is there, but it's not being used everywhere.
10:30 a.m.
Liberal
November 22nd, 2016 / 10:30 a.m.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Gentlemen, thank you for your participation this morning. I have a few quick questions. You can provide a yes or no answer with a brief explanation of the reasoning behind your answer.
In your opinion, is the recreational use of drones the most problematic, yes or no, and why?
10:30 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association
Yes, recreational use is the most problematic. The other uses are regulated and people are trained. They have insurance for drones and they know that they have to get a special flight operations certificate. They are familiar with the process.
10:30 a.m.
Capt Dan Adamus
I'm sorry; can you repeat the question?
10:30 a.m.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
In your opinion, is the recreational use of drones the most problematic?
10:30 a.m.
Capt Dan Adamus
Yes.
10:35 a.m.
Capt Dan Adamus
The reason is that most users do not understand the risks of flying a drone, especially in airspace that other aircraft are using and also over built-up areas and over people.
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
10:35 a.m.
Partner, McInnes Cooper, As an Individual
Currently, yes, it's a problem. I think these constitute the majority of UAVs that are out there, and they are being operated by people who have limited knowledge of how to safely operate them.
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
So we can agree that the use of drones for recreational purposes should also be regulated or supervised, as in the case of drones used for commercial purposes.
10:35 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association
The regulations should be tailored to the type of use, but also according to what we have been talking about since—
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
Should there be a distinction between the two, yes or no, or should the same sort of regulations apply to both?
10:35 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association
We think the same type of regulations should apply.
