In conclusion, the report's 64 pages offer no clear way forward. It recommends discussion with other agencies and more information to the public.

It is, though, unavoidable indecision.

There are too many grey areas and divided legal responsibilities for a definite policy on how the drones run by the Wing company should be allowed to operate. This is pioneering technology and the authorities have yet to keep up with the rules to regulate it.

Noise regulations and safety rules are too unclear for any one body to rule definitively.

It's a matter for national regulators as well as local and they will find it very hard to draw up new law without seeing how the technology actually works in practice. There is the danger of the law of unintended consequences where good intentions lead to unforeseen bad results.

On top of that, a rush to regulate might hamper the further development of an exciting and promising technology. On the other hand, holding back too long might allow a chaotic free-for-all and a backlash. The balance between acting too early and too late is important.

What the report does do well is flag up areas which need to be clarified by more powerful bodies than the ACT Legislative Assembly.

The experimental drones are taking off in Canberra's airspace but if the idea also takes off as workable and proven, the implications will be national and international. Other countries will look to Canberra to see what rules should apply.

One recommendation seems to be particularly relevant: "The committee recommends that the ACT government provide information to the Australian Information Commissioner to assist her in considering the benefits of, or need to place restrictions on, the collection by commercial delivery drones of the personal information of non-users."

If the scheme takes off, drones will fly across every inch of the city. The fear is that they could be an eye in the sky. When Google which is linked to Wing started driving cameras around towns and cities taking pictures of houses for Street View, there was a backlash. Some people didn't want their front door to appear on the web. Google obliged and didn't publish pictures if the householder didn't want it to.

Since then, concerns about privacy have multiplied. We have learnt how our information can be harvested and used by political parties and sellers of services and things.

There was once a view that Google was a great aid to the people who use it (which it is) but there's also now a realisation that we are also the product - what we do online is registered and used by companies seeking to sell us stuff.

For decades, regulation vanished from the political lexicon. It seemed as out-dated as steam. But now it is back. It is talked about. The political wind has changed, and the tech companies know that.

In its report, the ACT government recognises that big decisions by national regulators are needed.

On the face of it, the call for consultation sounds weak - just passing the ball on to others.

But, in fact, it is a wise call.