Browse regulations

This Order amends the definition of 'collective investment scheme' in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 to exempt certain peer-to-peer lending arrangements. Specifically, it excludes from the definition arrangements operated by authorized electronic lending platform operators (article 36H RAO), including related holding of client money, compensation mechanisms for lender defaults, and arrangements connected to winding up such operations. The effect is to provide regulatory clarity that P2P lending platforms do not constitute collective investment schemes, removing a potential regulatory barrier for fintech lenders.

This amendment DEREGULATES by carving out peer-to-peer lending from collective investment scheme definitions. Deleting it would reintroduce regulatory ambiguity that could capture P2P platforms as collective investment schemes, subjecting them to requirements designed for traditional investment funds. This would harm competition in lending, raise costs for borrowers, reduce returns for lenders, and drive business to less regulated jurisdictions. The amendment correctly recognizes that P2P lending arrangements do not present the same investor protection concerns as pooled investment vehicles and should not be regulated as such.

Amends the School Information (England) Regulations 2008 to add definitions for 'in-year coordination scheme', 'normal admission round', 'late application', and 'in-year application'; modifies website publication requirements for school admission information; and revises the definition of 'non-standard application' for reporting purposes.

This regulation layers additional definitional complexity onto an already burdened school admissions system without clear evidence of benefit. The in-year coordination scheme creates another layer of local authority coordination that adds administrative friction. From a Friedman/Hayek perspective, mandatory coordination schemes suppress the spontaneous order that would emerge from genuine parental choice and school competition. These procedural definitions (normal admission round vs late vs in-year) impose compliance costs on schools and local authorities without improving educational outcomes. The disclosure requirements represent regulatory micro-management of how schools communicate information—market competition would naturally incentivize transparency to attract students. This is retained EU-derived bureaucracy with no democratic review justifying its costs.

These Regulations amend the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel) (England) Regulations 2020 to add Maldives, Nepal, and Turkey to Schedule B1 (countries subject to additional travel measures), prohibit aircraft arrivals from Maldives and Turkey, prohibit vessel arrivals from Turkey, and modify road haulage worker exemptions. The regulations include a savings clause preserving prior rules for arrivals between February 15 and May 12, 2021.

Travel restrictions on aircraft and vessel arrivals represent classic protectionism that damages the aviation, shipping, tourism, and business travel sectors. The selective prohibition on Turkey and Maldives (while allowing other countries with similar case levels) demonstrates arbitrary rather than science-based policy. Road haulage exemptions prove policymakers recognize the economic harm but retain broad restrictions anyway. The savings clause itself creates perverse retroactive inconsistencies. Such blanket arrival prohibitions harm the City of London's accessibility and Britain's competitiveness as a global hub, while the targeted country exclusions suggest political rather than public health motivations.

Temporary Harbour Revision Order for St. Ives, Cornwall enacted to manage maritime operations during the G7 Summit in June 2021. The Order: (1) temporarily extends Cornwall Council's harbour authority jurisdiction to an additional coastal area; (2) grants powers to issue general and special directions for navigation safety, safety of persons, and protection of property/flora/fauna; (3) enables appointment of constables in the harbour police area; (4) incorporates existing harbour legislation and applies it to the additional area during the G7 period. The Order was explicitly temporary, ceasing to have effect at 11:59pm on 15th June 2021 — a period of approximately 8 days.

This Order is already defunct — it ceased to have effect at 11:59pm on 15th June 2021 and was enacted solely to manage maritime operations for a specific one-time event (the G7 Summit 2021) that has long passed. Keeping expired, event-specific legislation on the statute book serves no ongoing purpose and contributes to regulatory clutter. The temporary powers it granted (harbour authority jurisdiction over additional areas, power to issue directions, appointment of constables) were only ever needed for the 8-day G7 period and have no further application. This represents exactly the kind of unnecessary regulatory accumulation that should be removed during any serious review of retained EU laws or statutory instruments.

These Amendment Regulations (2021) adapt three Scottish procurement regulations (Public Contracts, Utilities Contracts, and Concession Contracts) to reflect post-Brexit UK independent membership in the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). They update definitions to reference UK instead of EU GPA commitments, create new 'GPA party' definitions, add obligations for contracting authorities to accord equal treatment to GPA party suppliers, and list GPA member states (including the EU, US, Japan, Canada, etc.).

While these regulations implement an international trade agreement rather than domestic regulatory policy, deleting them would sever the UK's independent GPA commitments, harming British exporters seeking government contracts in GPA markets (US, Japan, Canada, EU, etc.) and creating legal uncertainty. The GPA opens foreign public procurement markets to UK firms; without these amendments, UK firms would lose that access. The regulations do not add regulatory burden but adapt existing frameworks to maintain UK's pre-existing international market access obligations.

Amends the Recognition of Professional Qualifications (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 by omitting certain 'save to the extent that paragraph 47 applies' derogations in paragraphs 42 and 44, and substituting new text for paragraph 47 regarding how Regulation 68 (appeals relating to alert decisions) continues to apply after IP completion day. The key modification removes the power to 'direct the alert be withdrawn or amended accordingly' from regulation 68(5)(b).

While this regulation stems from retained EU law, deleting it would create legal uncertainty regarding which appeal procedures apply to professional qualification alert decisions post-Brexit. The modification actually streamlines the process by removing the directive power to withdraw/amend alerts, reducing regulatory intervention. Professionals and regulators need clear, functioning procedures for qualification recognition appeals; reverting to pre-amendment chaos would harm Britons more than maintaining this technical but workable framework. The amendment provides necessary post-Brexit transitional clarity without imposing new regulatory burdens.

Amendment to the Valuation Tribunal for England (Council Tax and Rating Appeals) Procedure Regulations 2009, adding a definition of 'hearing' to include oral hearings conducted by video link, telephone, or other instantaneous two-way electronic communication. Comes into force 9th June 2021.

This is a procedural modernization that reduces barriers to access to justice by allowing remote participation in tribunal hearings. It imposes no compliance costs, restricts no economic activity, and enables greater flexibility for appellants who may have difficulty attending in person. Britons would be worse off without this regulation as it would revert to an inflexible oral hearing requirement that burdens appellants with unnecessary travel costs and time away from work, potentially denying access to justice for those unable to attend physically.

A correcting statutory instrument that amends errors in the Immingham Open Cycle Gas Turbine Order 2020. The Order provides a table specifying which provisions are corrected and how, signed by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in force from 17th May 2021.

This correcting order has already served its purpose by applying corrections to the 2020 Order. The corrections are now embedded in the underlying 2020 Order itself. Keeping this spent correcting instrument on the statute books serves no ongoing regulatory function. Like a receipt confirming a transaction has been completed, its retention is purely archival and adds no value to the legal framework. If deleted, Britons would face no worse outcome as the corrections to the 2020 Order remain intact.

The Export Control (Amendment) Order 2021 amends the Export Control Order 2008 to update definitions (adding terms like 'cyber incident response', 'digital computer', 'satellite navigation system', 'vulnerability disclosure', 'UAV') and modify schedules controlling military goods and dual-use technology exports. Key changes include: adding handguns for animal slaughtering/tranquilising to controlled items; restricting military offensive cyber operations software; updating weapons mountings and accessories definitions; and clarifying vehicle armor and satellite navigation standards. The amendments implement Wassenaar Arrangement commitments and add carve-outs for vulnerability disclosure and cyber incident response activities.

This instrument expands export controls on military goods and cyber technology, adding compliance burdens and restricting trade in dual-use items. While national security justifications for some military export controls exist, the expansion of software controls over 'military offensive cyber operations' and broad definitions of 'digital computer' technology risk suppressing legitimate cybersecurity research and impeding the UK's cyber capabilities. The vulnerability disclosure carve-out is narrow and insufficient to protect good-faith security research. Export controls inherently restrict the free flow of technology that made Britain great; regulatory refinement should come through targeted national security provisions rather than comprehensive export licensing regimes covering dual-use items.

Amends the Civil Proceedings Fees Order 2008 to consolidate fee categories by omitting fees 1.2 and 1.4(c), removing various exclusions and exceptions (CCBC cases, Money Claim Online users), and simplifying fee 8.1 to a single £83 rate. The amendment removes distinctions between case types and claim values, streamlining the fee structure for civil court proceedings in England and Wales.

Court fees represent user charges for public services rather than regulatory burden in the traditional sense. This amendment primarily consolidates and simplifies an existing fee structure rather than introducing new regulatory requirements. Without comprehensive data on the actual cost of court service provision and the impact on access to justice, the costs of deletion (reversion to more complex, fragmented fee structures with multiple exclusions and exceptions) are less clear than the benefits of the simplified structure introduced here.

COVID-19 international travel regulations for England, amending requirements for transport operators, passenger locator forms, negative test results, and designated ports, with exemptions for certain workers including diplomats, seamen, and ship inspectors.

Pandemic-era emergency regulation now obsolete — COVID-19 travel restrictions have been lifted globally. The regulation imposed significant compliance costs on transport operators and restricted international travel commerce, with exemptions that reflect arbitrary bureaucratic distinctions (e.g., shuttle services vs other transport). The UK's competitive position as a global travel hub was damaged by such restrictions. These emergency measures were never subject to proper democratic scrutiny as Parliament was presented with fait accompli amendments. Freed movement of people is essential to a dynamic free-trading nation; such controls should not persist beyond their emergency justification.

The Merchant Shipping (Cargo Ship) (Bilge Alarm) Regulations 2021 require cargo ships under 500 gross tons and 24m+ in length to have bilge water level detectors with audible alarms in engine rooms and spaces where bilge water may accumulate. Alarms must sound at the control position immediately upon detection, and in accommodation spaces after 30 seconds if not silenced. Visual indicators must show which detector triggered. Systems must operate without main power. The regulations create criminal offences for non-compliance and allow the Secretary of State to grant exemptions.

This regulation imposes compliance costs (equipment, installation, maintenance) on ship operators with no corresponding democratic review, having been retained wholesale from EU law without scrutiny. While the safety objective is legitimate, the market already provides strong incentives for ship safety through insurance underwriters, classification societies (Lloyd's, etc.), and port state control inspections—alternative mechanisms that achieve equivalent safety outcomes without command-and-control mandates. The 30-second accommodation alarm delay and main-power-failure operation requirements reflect specific political choices rather than唯一的 safety solutions. Furthermore, criminalizing ship owners, managers, charterers and masters for non-compliance adds legal costs and uncertainty. Post-Brexit regulatory independence provides the opportunity to let market mechanisms and international maritime conventions (SOLAS, MARPOL) operate without gold-plated domestic criminal sanctions.

These Regulations apply provisions of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 to the Financial Conduct Authority for enforcement purposes related to the Civil Liability Act 2018's whiplash provisions. They extend FCA powers including information gathering (Part 11), disciplinary measures (Part 14), injunctions and restitution (Part 25), and related procedural provisions to enable regulation of persons subject to section 6 of the Civil Liability Act 2018 regarding whiplash claims restrictions.

This regulation extends the FCA's extensive regulatory apparatus to enforce price controls and market restrictions in the motor insurance sector introduced by the Civil Liability Act 2018. It creates regulatory burden on insurers with no corresponding benefit to consumers. The underlying premise—that government should restrict how insurers handle whiplash claims—distorts the market for motor insurance and reduces incentives for efficient claims processing. The FCA's enforcement powers add compliance costs that are ultimately borne by policyholders. While deleting this instrument would not repeal the parent Civil Liability Act 2018, it would remove the detailed regulatory framework enabling active FCA supervision of these market restrictions, reducing regulatory creep and preserving resources that would be spent on enforcement of an economically counterproductive regime.

These Regulations transfer employees from the UK Space Agency to the Civil Aviation Authority when the CAA assumes regulator responsibilities under the Space Industry Act 2018. They apply TUPE-style protections to this specific transfer, ensuring contract continuity, rights transfer, objection rights for employees, and modified pension arrangements. The Regulations clarify that employment contracts do not terminate but continue with the CAA, with all rights and liabilities shifting accordingly.

This is machinery of government rather than regulatory burden on private enterprise. Without these provisions, the transfer of regulatory functions from UK Space Agency to CAA would create legal uncertainty around employment status, potentially disrupting space sector regulation. The general TUPE 2006 framework may not adequately address this specific restructuring scenario. Deletion would risk employment disputes, regulatory gaps, and chaos during a sensitive transition period — harms that fall on public administration and ultimately taxpayers, not private sector competitiveness.

Confirmation instrument for the Highways England M58 Junction 1 Improvement (Special Roads) Scheme 2020, authorizing the construction of road improvements at M58 Junction 1. The Scheme is set out in a Schedule with accompanying plans deposited at the Department for Transport and Highways England offices. Becomes operative upon publication of confirmation notice per Schedule 2 of the Highways Act 1980.

This is an infrastructure authorization, not a regulatory burden. It confirms a specific road improvement scheme rather than imposing rules that distort incentives, restrict supply, or increase costs on businesses or individuals. Deleting it would simply delay necessary infrastructure improvements and require a new confirmation process, causing additional administrative cost and postponing safety and congestion benefits for road users. There is no gold-plating, no EU-derived bureaucracy, and no restriction on private enterprise here — only public infrastructure authorization.