The Department for Transport (DfT) will introduce new measures around the use of drones. The announcement comes after two days of chaos at Gatwick Airport that disrupted travel for more than 100,000 people just before Christmas. But these laws are more likely to impact activists than those breaking the law.
New and updated laws
On 7 January, the DfT published Taking flight: the future of drones in the UK. It updates existing laws on the use of drones while also introducing new ones.
Updated measures include expanding the no-fly zone around airports from 1km to 5km. New measures include requiring drone pilots to register details and pass an online test, and a proposed minimum age for ‘operators’ of 18. The ‘operator‘ is the “person or organisation who has management of the small drone but may not be directly controlling the flight”. The government and drone manufacturers will work together on “geo-fencing“; software that automatically stops drones from flying into designated spaces. Police will be able to issue fines for minor offences such as not registering. Drones can be seized for serious offences.
ensure safety, security and accountability of the drone industry, whilst harnessing the benefits that drones, used in a safe way, can bring to the UK economy.
Use by activists
Taking Flight recognises a variety of drone uses. Sugg says they can be used, for example, to:
drive more efficient ways of working, to monitor environmental change, to deliver medicines, and to assist infrastructure inspections and construction.
Activism, though, is one area notably absent from the paper. Drones have had a slow but steady take-up by activists across the country for a variety of purposes. Protectors at the Lancashire fracking site Preston New Road have made widespread use of drones. Video and still images have been used to monitor the progress of well operator Cuadrilla‘s activity. Drones have been used by anti-fracking activists at other sites as well.
Hunt saboteurs also make use of drones. Groups across the country are using them to monitor the route and activity of hunts while out in the field. Drone use goes back as far as 2013, but has become increasingly common among groups across the country.
Writing for openDemocracy, lecturer and researcher Sarah Pickard outlined the matrix of laws and regulations that has tightened around activists since the 1980s. Political protest wasn’t the explicit target of laws such as Labour’s Crime and Disorder Act 1998. But through vague wording, these quickly became used to target campaigners and activists.
There’s an argument that laws, by themselves, don’t prevent crime but rather create crimes. Introducing new laws around drones won’t deter or prevent those with harmful intent. The police haven’t even been able to find those responsible for the Gatwick Airport incident. But activists, whose intent may only be aimed at those with power, will bear the brunt of these changes. Maybe the government intended that; maybe it didn’t. Either way, by rushing out new laws due to an embarrassing debacle, the government is once again tightening the matrix around activists.
Featured image via Matthew Henry/Burst
We need your help ...
The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.
Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.
We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.
Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?