Drone warfare and surveillance are rapidly evolving, as is the importance of situational awareness and the deployment of counter-drone capabilities. In this context, the regulatory frameworks surrounding counter-drone need to reflect these realities.
On 30 October 2026, DroneShield appeared before Australia's Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence to provide evidence on the Defence Legislation Amendment (Accelerating Capability and Protecting Bases) Bill 2026.
Representing DroneShield as the sole counter-drone technology company invited to provide evidence, Government Affairs Director Kacey Lam-Evans outlined the operational and technical considerations involved in developing counter-UAS capabilities against rapidly evolving threats.
This Bill seeks to address two important challenges for Australian Defence Forces: reducing regulatory barriers that can slow the development and testing of new capabilities, and providing clearer powers to protect bases and other designated sites from emerging threats, including drones.
As highlighted during the hearing, drone technology and adversarial tactics continue to advance, creating challenges for regulatory frameworks built around established technologies and operating methods.
“Drones are becoming more complex and are increasingly designed to evade detection and defeat. Drone warfare is a continual cat-and-mouse race where the enemy gets a vote,” noted Ms Lam-Evans.
Drone Threats Do Not Always Operate Within Regulatory Boundaries
Counter-drone technology is developing in response to adversaries that continuously change their tactics, technologies and operating methods. As with any nefarious operators, adversaries don’t need to play by the rules.
This creates a fundamental challenge for capability development. Australian counter-UAS companies need to be able to develop and test against the threats Defence may face tomorrow, not simply those that fit neatly within existing regulatory frameworks today.
DroneShield spoke to the need for regulatory frameworks to support relevant counter-UAS research and development, including technologies designed to address threats operating beyond conventional commercial frequency bands.
“Not surprisingly, state actors here and overseas do not care whether the drone they are using operates on the same spectrum as an Australian telco provider, so we must be able to conduct R&D relevant to these threats without regulatory complexity,” said Ms Lam-Evans.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine illustrates how rapidly drone technologies and operating methods can evolve, reinforcing the importance of research and testing environments that reflect emerging operational realities.
Ms Lam-Evans added that “traditionally, commercial off-the-shelf drones have operated on particular bands, and the Russians don't care that they're the bands that everyone else uses. They will use any bands, which is why, now, drone detection companies are looking at wideband detection.”
In essence, regulations should provide the safeguards needed without inadvertently creating predictable limitations that an adversary can exploit.
“The enemy gets a vote, and anything that you limit in this bill will essentially mean that that's where the loopholes are for adversaries to then operate in those categories,” highlighted Ms Lam-Evans.
Accelerating Sovereign Capability Development
The Bill establishes a framework intended to streamline regulatory processes associated with developing, testing and evaluating advanced defence technologies. For DroneShield and other Australian defence technology companies, this has the potential to make a material difference.
Counter-drone R&D can require companies to navigate several regulatory processes covering the operation of drones, radiofrequency spectrum and other activities necessary to realistically test capabilities against emerging threats.
DroneShield welcomed the intent of the reforms. As Ms Lam-Evans put it:
“This is the right direction if we want counter-drone innovation and R&D to remain in Australia, because DroneShield must continue to innovate at the speed of relevance, not requirement.”
Australia is not alone in trying to address the regulatory challenges created by rapidly emerging technologies. Other countries have introduced regulatory sandboxes and emerging technology programs to provide greater flexibility for capability development.
Importantly, Ms Lam-Evans told the Committee the framework contemplated in the Bill could position Australia at the forefront:
“Should this Bill pass, Australia will be world-leading in the way that we would be able to perform sovereign capability development in Australia.”
And for a company such as DroneShield undertaking significant counter-drone R&D domestically, the implications go beyond regulatory efficiency.
“For us as an innovator, and a world-leading innovator at that, if I may say so, of counter-drone technologies, this would incredibly support the decisions that we make to ensure that our R&D remains in Australia,” said Ms Lam-Evans.
Protecting Defence Bases Means Understanding the Whole Threat
The Bill also puts forward new powers to support the protection of defence bases and other designated Defence Security Zones, including measures to detect, monitor and track drones.
DroneShield strongly supports the intent of providing authorities with the tools required to protect Defence sites. However, effective counter-UAS operations require more than simply knowing where a drone is.
As Ms Lam-Evans told the Committee:
“With our technologies, it's not just about the location of the drone but also about where the pilot is.”
That distinction can be critical. Drone activity around a sensitive location does not necessarily represent a hostile act. A drone may be operated by a hobbyist who has entered restricted or sensitive airspace without understanding the implications. In other circumstances, the operator themselves may be central to understanding the nature and intent of the activity.
“In a detection-first approach to security and in educating a drone operator who might just be a hobbyist who's operating in a sensitive space, knowing their location, for instance, is equally as important as knowing where the drone is,” Ms Lam-Evans concluded.
Counter-UAS therefore requires more than the ability to identify an object in the sky. Operators need sufficient awareness to understand the wider situation and determine an appropriate response.
Building a Framework That Can Keep Pace
DroneShield supports the intent of the Defence Legislation Amendment (Accelerating Capability and Protecting Bases) Bill 2026 and recognises the importance of progressing reforms that strengthen Australia's defence capabilities.
Double-click to edit...