Transport Committee on Nov. 29th, 2016

[Stephen Wilcox]

I'd have to say today it's a lack of information. You can go to virtually any big box store online and buy a drone, and there's virtually no information that comes with that package, or only limited information.

I think the biggest issue is a lack of awareness and carrying the message of where you can and where you shouldn't operate them. I think we all recognize that the drones are going to be here, particularly on the recreational side. That's where the biggest deficiency comes. We're talking to professional drone operators and we allow them to operate in and around the airspace all the time. They're professionals; they have a coordinated process. The SFOC process that Transport Canada established is working very well.

The really big issue today is the lack of awareness on where you can and can't operate them, and what responsibility an individual takes when they hand one of these over either to themselves or to their child. Think of it from the safety perspective of handing your eight-year-old the keys to your car and saying, “Good luck, son. Let me know how you make out.”

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Johnson, what are your thoughts?

[Doug Johnson]

I would say that the most pressing issue is also probably an opportunity.

I think you appreciate how quickly the technology is moving with drones and drone technology. At the same time, technology does offer solutions to some of these safety problems we've heard about. I think we have an opportunity not only to build the rules and regulations that we need as a framework for this new and emerging technology but also to provide solutions that uphold and enhance safety.

I would highlight, with respect to airports in particular, an announcement from back in the spring from south of the border. There's a partnership, in effect, between an airport association in the U.S. and one of our member companies focused on airspace intelligence. They've developed a digital notice and awareness system specific to airports so that UAV operators can, first of all, determine whether they can fly in that area and then notify the local airport. The local airport also has the means to reach out to that operator with a message as well. This is one of many examples of technology and services and software developing solutions that help support safety, particularly in this case around airports.

I think a challenge is ensuring that we have the rules that strike the right balance between safety and innovation and allow this market to grow. At the same time, I think we have an opportunity to recognize that there are technological solutions sometimes that are superior to regulations in solving some of these problems. Although it's tempting to want to mandate something that looks attractive and beneficial, we would also caution against mandating specific solutions, as I stated in my remarks, because technology evolves, and there may in fact be a better way six months or six years down the road.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson.

The floor is yours, Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would also like to thank the witnesses for being with us here this morning.

My question is for you, Mr. Johnson.

You said something in your presentation that really surprised me. You talked about 100,000 jobs related to the drone industry over the next 10 years. I have trouble imagining such an explosion. What I see in my immediate surroundings is people who use this technology to create added value for an existing business. I am thinking for instance of a video company that also uses drones to capture different camera angles.

Can you briefly describe the potential development that leads you to talk about 100,000 jobs in 10 years?

[Doug Johnson]

The reference to the 100,000 figure was from a study by AUVSI, the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International. Although I don't have the study in front of me, I do know it takes a very holistic look at this market and this technology. Understandably, those jobs are in the commercial space. They are as diverse as new jobs within companies using this technology to support their operations or support safety in their industry sector to jobs related to training or education or other realms around drones. There are a variety of industry sectors and professions that can benefit from this technology. They took a look and quantified what that would be across various industry sectors.

I would be happy to submit for the record, Madam Chair, a copy of this study, if it would be helpful and instructive.

There certainly is a job creation potential here over the next several years, again depending on whether we have the right balance and policy framework in place to support it.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

I was just going to ask you for the study, if possible.

My next question is for both witnesses.

You both spoke, albeit from slightly different perspectives, of your desire to help the government develop regulations. On the one hand, Mr. Johnson, you said that we need flexible rules that can keep pace with changes in technology. On the other hand, Mr. Wilcox, you seem to want stricter regulations. At least that is what I understood. You have given two examples and talked about the importance of registering devices.

If possible, I would like you to tell us which three aspects you think should be a priority in future regulations. By that I mean three aspects that you think are missing from current regulations.

We can begin with Mr. Wilcox.

[Stephen Wilcox]

The drone itself is an aircraft. It's going to be operating in the airspace with aircraft, and we already have a series of very good guidelines to demonstrate how we operate aircraft.

First we need design standards. I realize the technology is evolving, but I believe we could establish performance-based standards that would allow us to make sure that the drones are going to operate within their design parameters. That's what we expect for aircraft, and we should expect no less for drones.

Second, we also need a set of standards for the operators of drones. We realize that we're going to hand these over. In some cases, they are as simple as a pleasurable toy in a backyard, and we should not necessarily limit that, but we do have to educate. I think it is appropriate that we license or approve operators of these. Today you can get a recreational licence in 25 hours and fly an airplane in airspace, so we already have a system in place that can allow risk-based licensing. We need licensing of the individual.

The third piece of the puzzle is registration. We need to be able to register them, because the only way that we can learn from the industry as it grows, and learn from our successes and failures, is through registration so that we can understand them. I know absolutely nothing about this drone, so there's very little I can do to prevent it from happening again. If I knew who the operator was, then through education and at times through enforcement we could educate them.

You asked me to send statistics. Part of the way we gather that is through registration, so—

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Excuse me for interrupting, but I would like to give Mr. Johnson a few seconds.

[Doug Johnson]

I would agree with Mr. Wilcox in at least a couple of these areas he flagged. We also agree that registration is very important. We got to the result we did on registration with the U.S. FAA through a collaborative process that included various stakeholders from aviation and the tech community.

The goal really was to link the owner with the drone. We took an approach with drone registration that focused on the owner and not the vehicle. We wanted a simple, straightforward, and convenient means of registration of drones, and we got that in the end.

On the knowledge test, education of drone operators is crucial. Whether you're talking about a recreational user or a commercial user, we want to make sure that's also easy. We like the self-test idea. For the low-end, lightweight drones, making that convenient and online is important. That's a second area of interest and concern.

The third one that I think is lacking is another area I agree with Mr. Wilcox on, which is performance-based standards. That is the approach we took with regard to drone flights over people. That is very much on our minds, and I think we have a lot more in common than we do differences in wanting to build this future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Fraser is next.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Thank you very much to our witnesses. I really appreciate your being here today.

First, for Mr. Johnson, you mentioned at the beginning of your remarks the importance of the innovation in this new industry. What can we do as a federal government to best support innovation in the UAV industry, or potentially support the development of new applications for this technology?

[Doug Johnson]

What you're doing with these hearings is important, and getting the perspectives not only from companies in this growing industry but from other stakeholders that have a role in the aviation market is vital.

Understanding where our technology is going is hard for all of us, but for that very reason we want to come up with a rules infrastructure that is flexible, as I mentioned in my remarks. We need flexibility of approach. With the rules that were put in place and took effect back in August in the U.S., we have that structure.

We're going to need to address future technology and directions with the drones, for example, with flights at night, flights over people, and flights beyond the line of sight. This is certainly foreseen. It is being tested in some cases, and used today in some cases, so we need permanent rules that address those needs of this technology as well.

Yes, innovation is at the heart of this industry, but safety is paramount. In striking the right balance, we need to protect and uphold both of those things.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

If you're a fan of what's gone on in the U.S., with it providing a bit of a flexible system that lays the landscape, is the easy solution for us to push toward harmonization between our regulatory framework and the one adopted in the U.S.?

[Doug Johnson]

Madam Chair, it is important to look at what's been accomplished, how it's working, and how it's been received by this market of diverse players. While I don't want to simply tell you to follow what they did south of the border, Transport Canada has taken a very considered approach to this topic. Transport Canada was involved in the micro-UAS ARC, which I talked about with drone flights over people. However, to the extent that we're building a policy framework that makes sense and strikes those balances, if we have best practices or something that's working, it's worth a careful look.

In the context of U.S.-Canadian trade and commerce, there is an apparatus available for alignment of various regulatory approaches. Therefore, we might want to look at opportunities to facilitate alignment and growth on both sides of the border with this industry.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Excellent.

I have a question for both of you. Perhaps just to break it up, we'll go to Mr. Wilcox first.

You both talked about the importance of an education campaign. I think Mr. Johnson referred to the Know Before You Fly campaign he was somewhat involved with. What would this look like if the federal government were to roll out something to educate users of UAVs? What would be the key elements of a public awareness and education campaign for these recreational users that seem to be of paramount concern?

[Stephen Wilcox]

We did the initial information piece on the no-fly drone signs that went up around airports. Getting some basic information out somehow at the point of sale, either in the packaging, at least with the existing ones, would be a very good start. That's what we need to look at with distribution at the initial stage. That would be my recommendation.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Johnson, go ahead.

[Doug Johnson]

I would like, Madam Chair, if there's interest, to submit for the record information about what's been done already.

There's quite a lot of information that drone manufacturers provide with their products that helps educate consumers. Whether it's printed material or something in the online set-up of that drone, a lot is being done now.

There is a program that has been in place for more than two years—I think almost three now—called the Know Before You Fly campaign. It could be duplicated. It could be adopted and reflected from various governments at various levels.

It's important to understand what's been done already, what's in place already, and then also what our U.S. Congress recently required manufacturers to do as well from our recent FAA Reauthorization Act. I'd be happy to provide a little more detail about that to the committee if there's interest.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

That would be very helpful, actually.

Madam Chair, do I have much time left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have a minute and a half.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Perfect.

On the identification or registration of new drones, is the best way to do this the equivalent way we do it with a vehicle, which might have a vehicle identification number and a registration process? When you go to buy a car, you go and get a licence. You're qualified. You buy a car and you register it with some central registry. How should this look?

Maybe Mr. Wilcox could go first.

[Stephen Wilcox]

We already have a national system for registering aircraft in Canada that Transport Canada administers. The most direct process is to drop this into a streamlined process within Transport Canada's national registry, because, again, it is a national issue. Airspace is the purview of the federal government, so that's the place for registration. It also needs to be, as was mentioned by Mr. Johnson, a fairly easy process. Most people want to comply. Nobody gets out of bed in the morning and wants to break the rules; people want to comply. We need to have a simple process for them to do so.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Johnson, we have just a few seconds remaining, if you want to let us know your thoughts.