Browse regulations

This Order amends the Medicines Act 1968 to revise the regulatory framework for responsible pharmacists and superintendent pharmacists in retail pharmacy businesses. Key changes include: creating an exemption from the responsible pharmacist requirement when no medicinal products are being sold or dispensed; transferring rulemaking authority from Ministers to the General Pharmaceutical Council (Great Britain) and Pharmaceutical Society of Northern Ireland; adding a proportionality principle requiring minimum necessary burdens; allowing continued general sale list medicine sales during pharmacist absence; imposing new senior manager requirements and a 'safe and effective running' duty on superintendent pharmacists; and revoking the 2008 Regulations with transitional provisions. The Order extends to all UK jurisdictions.

While this Order introduces some burden-reducing measures (exemptions when no medicines are sold, GSL sales during absence, proportionality principle), it overall expands regulatory complexity in pharmacy by adding prescriptive senior manager requirements for superintendents, vague 'safe and effective running' duties creating expanded liability exposure, and new professional responsibility standards. The shift from parliamentary-level regulations to professional body rules reduces democratic accountability without clear evidence of benefit. The pharmacy regulatory regime fundamentally restricts who may operate a retail pharmacy business and how—with no demonstrated market failure justifying these additional constraints. Many provisions are vague enough to create compliance uncertainty and litigation risk. A more genuinely liberal approach would be to simplify rather than complicate this regulatory structure.

The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) (No. 14) Regulations 2022 amend the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 to expand sanctions relating to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The regulations prohibit export, supply, delivery, and provision of energy-related goods, G7 dependency and further goods, oil and oil products, gold, and coal and coal products to or for use in Russia. They also prohibit related technical assistance, financial services, funds, and brokering services. New chapters establish import bans, acquisition restrictions, and supply chain prohibitions for these commodity categories.

These sanctions represent protectionist trade restrictions that harm British businesses and consumers. While motivated by foreign policy objectives, they restrict voluntary commerce, distort market signals, and impose compliance costs on UK firms. Britain historically prospered through free trade, not through trade prohibitions. The regulations suppress legitimate commerce with a nation of 144 million people, harming British exporters, energy companies, and financial services firms. The stated goal (deter Russian aggression) could be achieved through alternative means such as targeted diplomatic measures or defence spending, rather than broad trade prohibitions that reduce British economic welfare and set dangerous precedents for future protectionism.

This Order amends the Medicines Act 1968 to extend existing legal defenses for preparation and dispensing errors (previously limited to registered pharmacies and retail pharmacy businesses) to cover 'relevant pharmacy services' in hospitals, prisons, immigration removal centres, and other institutional settings. It defines 'relevant pharmacy service' as one provided in these settings that has a 'chief pharmacist' with significant managerial authority over medicines supply. The Order also updates related professional standards in the Pharmacy Order 2010 and Pharmacy (Northern Ireland) Order 1976 to include chief pharmacists.

This regulation reduces liability for genuine dispensing errors in institutional pharmacy settings, creating parity with retail pharmacies. The requirement for a chief pharmacist ensures accountability while enabling safer reporting of errors without fear of disproportionate prosecution. Removing this would increase defensive medicine practices in hospitals and institutional settings, potentially harming patient care and driving errors underground rather than encouraging learning from them.

The Sizewell C (Nuclear Generating Station) Order 2022 is a Development Consent Order (DCO) granted under the Planning Act 2008, authorising the construction and operation of a new nuclear power station at Sizewell in Suffolk. The Order establishes the legal framework including definitions, land acquisition powers, harbour provisions, marine licensing, environmental requirements, and associated development such as park and ride facilities, road improvements, and rail works. It grants development consent for Work Nos. 1A-1E (main reactor structures), Work No. 2 (cooling water infrastructure), and various associated developments, along with compulsory acquisition powers for required land.

This Order exemplifies government picking winners in the energy market through project-specific legislation. Rather than reforming the nuclear licensing regime that creates barriers to entry, Parliament has repeatedly resorted to bespoke consent Orders for individual projects, bypassing normal democratic planning processes. The Order externalises massive costs onto consumers and taxpayers through the regulated asset base funding model while insulating the project from market disciplines. Nuclear power's inherent risks and costs are socialised while profits remain privatised. A dynamic free-trading Britain would have competitive energy markets where multiple technologies compete on merit without government-granted development consents and special legislative frameworks.

Technical amendment to the Financial Conglomerates and Other Financial Groups Regulations 2004 that updates cross-references to point to specific point-in-time versions of the FCA Handbook, PRA Rulebook, and related regulatory instruments (as of 17th August 2022), replacing floating references to 'IP completion day'. Also inserts new regulation 23A providing static definitions of regulatory sourcebooks for interpretation purposes.

This is a consequential/technical amendment that merely fixes cross-references to specific point-in-time versions of regulatory handbooks to ensure legal certainty. It does not independently impose new regulatory burdens or restrict activity - it simply preserves the legal meaning of existing references. Without such fixes, regulatory interpretation would become uncertain as handbooks are updated. The amendment serves a mechanical drafting function necessary for legal coherence rather than expanding regulatory scope.

This Order appoints 1st August 2022 as the day the Pensions Regulator's Code of Practice on Authorisation and Supervision of Collective Defined Contribution (CDC) Schemes comes into effect. It extends to England, Wales, and Scotland. CDC schemes pool contributions and invest collectively, offering retirement benefits tied to fund performance.

This Order imposes a regulatory authorisation and supervision regime on CDC pension schemes, creating compliance costs that are passed on to scheme members. Such codes of practice, while presented as consumer protection, frequently become vehicles for regulatory creep that restricts competition, raises barriers to entry for innovative pension products, and limits the very diversification of retirement options this scheme type was meant to provide. The market, through proper disclosure requirements and competition, is better positioned to discipline providers and protect consumers than a prescriptive authorisation regime from the Pensions Regulator.

These Regulations are a commencement order that brings into force provisions of the Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021 on 25th July 2022. They cover the establishment of the Forensic Science Regulator, the code of practice, investigation powers, disclosure provisions, and Crown application. The Regulations also contain a transitional provision maintaining the existing Codes of Practice and Conduct (issue 7) until a new code under section 2 comes into force.

This is an administrative commencement order that merely triggers enforcement of an Act already passed by Parliament. While forensic science quality standards may serve a legitimate function, the Act establishes a new bureaucratic regulator with discretionary powers over an industry. Rather than allowing market standards and professional accreditation to ensure quality in forensic science provision, this creates a government body that can impose compliance costs, restrict entry, and dictate conduct codes. The transitional provision deferring to an existing privately-produced code (issue 7) demonstrates the private sector already had mechanisms for self-regulation. A fresh regulatory layer serves to raise costs, reduce flexibility, and potentially shield incumbent providers from competition.

These Regulations extend the exclusions from UK Internal Market Act market access principles to cover legislation prohibiting the sale of single-use plastic items including straws, cotton buds, drink stirrers, plates, cutlery, balloon sticks, and polystyrene food/drink containers. They enable environmental anti-plastic legislation to operate within the internal market framework by exempting such bans from the Act's non-discrimination principles.

This regulation enables prohibitions on specific products based on their material composition, restricting commercial freedom and consumer choice. It effectively grants preferential treatment to non-plastic alternatives without justification. The exclusions themselves reflect a paternalistic approach that substitutes government judgment for individual preference. While framed as environmental policy, such product-specific bans distort market signals and impede innovation in alternatives. A genuinely free market would allow consumers and producers to make their own choices about materials, packaging, and environmental trade-offs without government mandates selecting winners and losers.

The Beavers (England) Order 2022 amends the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to reclassify the Eurasian Beaver (Castor fiber) from an 'animal no longer normally present' to a protected native species in England. It adds beavers to the European Protected Species list and updates their status in Schedule 9 of the 1981 Act.

Without protected status, beavers reintroduced to England would lack legal protection against persecution, undermining the significant investment in reintroduction programmes and their ecological benefits including flood mitigation, wetland creation, and biodiversity gains. While any land management regulation carries costs, protected species status imposes minimal compliance burden on most landowners while preventing the tragedy of the commons whereby individual actors could unilaterally undo broader conservation efforts. The regulation achieves species preservation through property-rights-compatible means that would be difficult to replicate otherwise.

These Regulations implement the Building Safety Act 2022's provisions regarding remediation of building defects (particularly following Grenfell). They establish: (1) procedures for remediation orders and remediation contribution orders via the First-tier Tribunal; (2) mechanisms for landlords to recover remediation costs from 'responsible landlords', 'contributing landlords', and through cost apportionment among multiple landlords; (3) notification requirements obliging landlords to inform leaseholders about relevant defects and request leaseholder deeds of certificate; (4) appeals processes for challenging remediation cost allocations. The Regulations apply to 'relevant buildings' with qualifying leases in England.

Without these regulations, leaseholders in buildings with serious safety defects (cladding, structural issues) would face astronomical remediation costs through service charges—costs resulting from builders' and developers' failures, not their own doing. The leaseholder deed of certificate requirements and cost allocation mechanisms ensure costs fall on those responsible (developers, landlords) rather than innocent leaseholders. While compliance is complex, the alternative—leaseholders facing bills of tens of thousands of pounds for defects they played no role in creating—represents a genuine market failure that private contracts alone would not solve given information asymmetries and power imbalances between parties. The appeals processes provide necessary due process protections.

The Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2022 amend the 2017 Money Laundering Regulations to extend anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing obligations to cryptoasset businesses. Key provisions include: new 'Part 7A' requiring cryptoasset exchange providers and custodian wallet providers to collect, verify, and pass on originator/beneficiary information for transfers; customer due diligence for transfers exceeding 1,000 euros; record-keeping requirements for inter-cryptoasset business transfers and unhosted wallet transfers; and reporting obligations to the FCA for missing information. The regulations implement the FATF 'Travel Rule' for cryptoassets and transpose elements of the EU's 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive.

While AML/CFT objectives are legitimate, this regulation imposes substantial compliance costs on UK cryptoasset businesses at a critical developmental stage for the sector. The information collection requirements (particularly the 1,000 euro threshold triggering full identity verification), record-keeping mandates, and FCA reporting obligations create barriers that drive business to less-regulated jurisdictions like Dubai and Singapore. The 'unhosted wallet' provisions are technically problematic—requiring crypto businesses to refuse making cryptoavailable if requested information isn't received creates operational conflicts. Most significantly, these rules represent gold-plating: FATF recommendations are guidance, not binding law, yet the UK implemented them more strictly than necessary. The compliance burden falls disproportionately on smaller UK crypto businesses while providing marginal additional security—sophisticated bad actors will simply use offshore or decentralized exchanges beyond UK reach. A principles-based approach with industry-developed standards would achieve AML goals at lower economic cost.

UK regulations amending retained EU Common Agricultural Policy legislation, removing transitional provisions related to rural development payments, degressive payments, apiculture programmes, and LEADER funding requirements. Made pursuant to Brexit, these regulations modify EU Regulations 1305/2013, 1308/2013, and 2020/2220 to operate outside the EU framework.

These regulations perpetuate the EU's Common Agricultural Policy interventionism — a system of subsidies, market distortion, and bureaucratic compliance requirements that artificially supports uneconomic farming at enormous cost to consumers and taxpayers. While Brexit provided an opportunity to liberate British agriculture from this anti-market framework, these amendments merely tweak inherited EU rules rather than dismantling them. The cross-compliance system ties payments to regulatory conditions, distorting farmer behavior. Agricultural subsidy regimes, as an institution, create monopolistic advantages for established farmers, suppress innovation, and redirect resources away from more productive uses. Deleting these amendments would signal intent to replace CAP with a genuinely free market approach — lower food prices, restored competitiveness, and allowing entrepreneurial farmers to succeed based on merit rather than subsidy dependency.

These regulations amend the Business and Planning Act 2020 to extend the expiry date of temporary pavement licence provisions from 30 September 2022 to 30 September 2023. The original 2020 Act created streamlined outdoor licensing for businesses (particularly hospitality) to use pavement areas during the pandemic, bypassing normal planning requirements.

Deleting this regulation would harm Britons by removing a deregulation that benefits consumers and small businesses. The pavement licence regime represents a rare example of regulatory simplification—allowing businesses to use public space without lengthy planning processes that would otherwise exclude them. Without extension, outdoor dining/retail would revert to more restrictive licensing, reducing consumer choice and impeding business recovery, particularly for smaller operators who lack resources to navigate complex planning regimes. The sunset clause itself remains intact, preserving the option to let these provisions lapse when no longer needed.

A commencement regulation that brings into force sections 61(1)-(2) and Schedule 10 of the Immigration Act 2016 (immigration bail) in Scotland and Northern Ireland on 31st August 2022, with associated transitional provisions in the Schedule.

This is a purely procedural commencement regulation with no independent regulatory effect. It does not itself impose restrictions but merely activates provisions of the Immigration Act 2016 that Parliament has already enacted. The substantive regulatory scheme of immigration bail exists through the primary legislation, not this SI. Deleting this regulation would not remove the underlying immigration bail framework but would merely create legal uncertainty about when those provisions took effect. As a procedural administrative instrument with no autonomous regulatory burden, it serves no purpose warranting retention on the books.

Extends specific provisions of the UK International Criminal Court Act 2001 to Guernsey: section 23(5) (UN Act 1946 powers), sections 44-45 (prisoner transfers with modifications), and section 83/Schedule 10 (repeals of certain Genocide/Geneva Conventions provisions). Supports implementation of the International Criminal Court (Guernsey) Law 2019.

Deletion would create legal lacunae in Guernsey's criminal justice framework. The prisoner transfer provisions (ss.44-45) facilitate humanitarian treatment of prisoners and reduce state control over individual liberty. While the UN Act 1946 powers extension grants executive authority, this extends existing UK law rather than creating new regulatory burden. Without this Order, Guernsey would lack statutory basis for certain international criminal cooperation mechanisms, potentially leaving serious crimes unprosecutable.