Browse regulations

This Order makes consequential amendments to various UK social security regulations to integrate the new Scottish Adult Disability Living Allowance ( SADLA ) into the existing UK welfare framework. It extends to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland in various parts, allowing claimants to transition between Scottish disability benefits and UK benefits (DLA, PIP, Income Support, JSA) without losing entitlement. Key changes include adding SADLA definitions, modifying residency and presence conditions, and allowing PIP claims after SADLA awards.

This regulation causes no regulatory burden — it merely coordinates existing UK and Scottish disability benefits to prevent claimants from falling into gaps when transitioning between systems. Without these amendments, disabled individuals moving from Scottish to UK benefits could face arbitrary delays, loss of entitlements, or be unable to claim PIP after receiving SADLA. Deleting it would harm vulnerable claimants by breaking the administrative linkage between two legitimate benefit systems, producing no economic gain while creating genuine human costs.

This Order continues in force the Excise Duties (Surcharges or Rebates) (Hydrocarbon Oils etc.) Order 2022 until 22nd March 2026, preventing its automatic expiration under the 1979 Act and previous continuation orders. It is a procedural extension mechanism for fuel excise surcharges/rebates.

This is a zero-scrutiny continuation order that extends an inherited EU-era excise regime without parliamentary debate on whether the surcharge/rebate system on hydrocarbon oils serves any legitimate purpose. The regulation perpetuates fuel taxation that distorts energy markets, raises costs for consumers and businesses, and was never subject to democratic review when originally retained post-Brexit. Deleting this order would allow the 2022 Order to expire, forcing Parliament to consciously re-enact any fuel excise measures they deem necessary — restoring democratic accountability for taxation.

This Order amends election regulations (Representation of the People, Police and Crime Commissioner Elections, Recall of MPs) to add the Scottish Adult Disability Living Allowance mobility component to the list of benefits qualifying disabled voters for proxy vote arrangements, ensuring Scottish recipients have equivalent voting access as those receiving UK-wide disability benefits.

While regulations generally create unintended consequences, this is a minor technical amendment maintaining voting rights parity for disabled Scottish citizens who receive the newly devolved Scottish Adult DLA. The amendment simply adds a Scottish benefit to existing lists already containing equivalent UK-wide benefits (DLA, PIP, armed forces independence payment). Deleting this would disadvantage disabled Scottish voters by excluding them from proxy voting arrangements available to others with equivalent mobility impairments. The regulation does not expand the class of eligible voters—merely reflects devolution of disability benefits to Scotland.

These Regulations amend the Register of Overseas Entities (Delivery, Protection and Trust Services) Regulations 2022, extending protections for vulnerable individuals (under 18 or lacking capacity) on the Register of Overseas Entities and creating a new regime for disclosure of protected trusts information. Key changes include: new definitions for 'applicant' and 'relevant overseas entity', updated application processes for protecting personal information, provisions allowing disclosure of trusts information to applicants with legitimate interest, and criminal offences for breach of disclosure conditions.

These regulations compound the compliance burden on overseas entities investing in UK property without clear evidence of benefit. The offence provisions (paragraph 9-10) create criminal liability for procedural breaches of disclosure conditions, adding regulatory risk without addressing the fundamental issue that beneficial ownership registers, while targeting legitimate goals, impose substantial compliance costs that may deter foreign investment. The complex application and notification requirements (multiple parties to notify, specific timelines, authorisation evidence) add administrative burden without proportionate benefit, particularly for smaller overseas entities. The legitimate interest test for trusts disclosure creates uncertainty and potential for arbitrary refusal by the registrar.

These Regulations amend the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 by removing a paragraph from regulation 1 and replacing the fixed review date (1st April 2020) with a rolling five-year 'review period' cycle beginning 13th July 2023. The amendment ensures perpetual regulatory review occurs, with subsequent five-year cycles triggered by report publication or period end.

This amendment institutionalises endless bureaucratic review cycles without any mechanism to reduce regulatory burden. Rather than eliminating gold-plated or unnecessary regulations inherited from EU frameworks, it ensures regulations remain under continuous scrutiny by the same regulators who created them. The five-year rolling review cycle guarantees that the 2014 Regulations — which constrain healthcare provision through licensing requirements, quality standards, and bureaucratic compliance mandates — will face perpetual review rather than reform or repeal. A free-trading nation would benefit more from outright deletion of these regulatory constraints than from scheduling more reviews of them.

This Order sets fee charges for wildlife licences in England, replacing the 2018 Order. It establishes fixed charges (ranging from £46 to £690 depending on licence type) and variable charges (£121 per hour) for licence applications involving protected species (bats, badgers, Schedule 1, 2, 5, 6, 8 species) and habitats under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017. It distinguishes between simple (<5 hours assessment) and complex (≥5 hours) applications, allows exemptions for public health/safety, research, conservation purposes, and bat roost mitigation, and gives Natural England discretion to reduce or remit charges.

This Order adds administrative cost burdens onto wildlife licensing without addressing underlying regulatory complexity. The £121/hour variable charge creates unpredictable costs that could deter legitimate conservation work, research, and land management. While exemptions exist, the complex tiered structure (simple/complex applications, additional charges for further information, rounding rules) adds compliance costs with no conservation benefit. The retained EU-era framework of species licensing itself restricts land use and development—the charges merely extract further rent from an already heavily regulated activity. A free Britain should trust landowners and researchers rather than taxing wildlife cooperation.

These Regulations establish a framework for approved educational courses as alternatives to prosecution for specified traffic fixed penalty offences. They designate UKROEd and police bodies as specified bodies, mandate a fee allocation structure (52% policing body, 42% provider, 6% UKROEd for UKROEd-approved courses), and restrict course eligibility to once per three years for similar offences.

These regulations create a government-mandated monopoly structure for traffic offender education, with UKROEd (a private company) receiving a guaranteed 6% cut of all fees simply by being the approved body. The mandatory fee splits prevent market competition from driving down costs or improving quality. The restriction preventing course repetition within three years is arbitrary and denies individuals the freedom to voluntarily seek education. Rather than allowing the market to provide alternatives to prosecution, these regulations erect barriers to entry, protect established course providers from competition, and use the state's coercive power of prosecution to funnel offenders into a approved vendor list — a classic regulatory capture pattern that benefits industry at consumers' expense.

These Regulations establish the funding framework for the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA), setting a total levy of £40,042,000 for the charging period 1st April 2025 to 31st March 2026. They impose a production levy on offshore production licensees meeting certain activity criteria, and a non-production levy on exploration licensees and certain production licensees. The Regulations include discounted rates (80% or 90%) for micro-enterprises holding promote or innovate licences, late payment interest at 5% above Bank of England base rate, and provisions for surplus reconciliation. They also amend the Oil and Gas Authority (Fees) Regulations 2016 to add 'change in control' consent applications as a new fee category.

Without this levy regime, the OGA would lose its primary funding mechanism for regulating petroleum extraction in the North Sea. The orderly management of shared offshore resources requires a regulator to prevent the tragedy of the commons, coordinate infrastructure, and ensure safety and environmental standards. While the micro-enterprise discounts introduce some distortion, the alternative (defunding the regulator or shifting costs to general taxpayers) would be worse. Deletion would leave a regulatory vacuum, potentially causing disorderly extraction, stranded assets, and reduced investor confidence in UK energy governance.

Health and Care Professions Council (Miscellaneous Amendments) Rules Order of Council 2025 - An Order of Council approving amendments to HCPC Rules, coming into force 29 April 2025, extending across all UK jurisdictions. The actual amendments are contained in a Schedule not provided here.

This Order is merely a procedural approval mechanism that ratifies amendments contained in an unseen Schedule. Without visibility into the actual Rule amendments, meaningful parliamentary scrutiny is impossible. The Order exemplifies the problem of retained EU-derived law and secondary legislation being approved without proper democratic review of their actual effects on professionals, patients, or public finances.

These Regulations amend Council Tax discount disregard and exempt dwellings rules to add a new Class G for Ukrainian refugees under the Homes for Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme. They extend Council Tax discounts to persons with permission to stay under the Homes for Ukraine route or those for whom a sponsor receives 'thank you' payments under the Ukraine Permission Extension scheme.

While this regulation creates a nationality-based tax distinction that could be seen as arbitrary, deleting it would harm both Ukrainian refugees (who would lose Council Tax discounts) and British hosting households (who benefit from the thankyou payment structure). The humanitarian crisis in Ukraine represents exceptional circumstances where targeted, time-limited support is justified. The regulation is narrow in scope, has minimal administrative burden, and addresses a genuine emergency rather than creating permanent market distortions.

Amendment regulations that update flat rate payment from £235.88 to £254.06 and high band payment from £324.50 to £349.50 for NHS commissioning; remove secure training centre references from regulation 10 and Schedule 3; and substitute 'Immigration removal centres' for the previous heading in Schedule 3 Part 2.

While the payment updates are minor inflation adjustments and removal of obsolete secure training centre references appears benign, these amendments perpetuate the NHS centralized payment tariff system that restricts local commissioning flexibility. The flat rate and high band payment structure artificially constrains what Clinical Commissioning Groups can pay service providers, reducing market responsiveness and innovation in healthcare delivery. The regulation also lacks any sunset clause or parliamentary review mechanism, representing retained EU-era bureaucratic structures that should be subject to democratic scrutiny. Better Britain recommends deletion to allow market-based pricing for NHS services.

These Regulations impose a 50 mph speed limit on the M23 junction 7 northbound off-slip road (approximately 212 metres), extending from a point south of Shepherd's Hill Road Overbridge to where the slip road joins the A23. The regulation applies only to this specific stretch of road and includes an exception for speed restrictions in force under section 14 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (temporary orders for roadworks or emergencies).

This is a targeted, proportionate safety measure on a specific slip road with tight geometry and limited sight lines, not a broad regulatory imposition. Slip roads present genuine safety externalities - accidents can block major routes and require emergency services. A 50 mph limit on a slip road is not burdensome (higher than most urban limits) and contains a built-in exception mechanism under s.14 RTRA 1984 for temporary situations. The regulation is narrow in scope, applying only to one specific road segment. While one could argue drivers should judge speeds themselves, the physical constraints of this location make a fixed limit a reasonable safety baseline that does not appreciably restrict legitimate use.

Amends Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 on TSE prevention, control and eradication. Modifies Annex 7 Chapter B by removing point 2.2.3 and stripping conditional requirements from points 3.5(d) and 4.6 — removing 'If' clause requirements that imposed specific obligations following TSE detection in bovine, ovine and caprine animals. England-only regulation effective April 2025.

TSE regulations address genuine public and animal health risks — BSE caused variant CJD deaths and devastated the beef industry. While this amendment relaxes certain measures, complete deletion would remove safeguards without which Britain could not demonstrate 'negligible risk' status for BSE, closing export markets and harming farmers. Food safety certifications require such protocols; they cannot be simply removed without alternative frameworks.

This Order amends the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Exemption) Order 2001 to add National Wealth Fund Limited to Part 1A of the Schedule, exempting it from the general prohibition on carrying on regulated activities without authorization. It also removes paragraph 15D from Part I. The Order extends to all of the UK and comes into force on 31 March 2025.

This amendment grants National Wealth Fund Limited a competitive advantage over private sector financial firms by exempting it from the general prohibition without equivalent regulatory oversight. Creating preferential exemptions for state-linked entities distorts competition in financial markets and drives business to less efficient operators who benefit from regulatory privileges unavailable to private competitors. The undemocratic nature of such exemptions—added by secondary legislation without full parliamentary scrutiny—exemplifies the very bureaucratic favoritism that erodes market confidence and London's global competitiveness. Removal would restore a level playing field.

The Public Service Pensions Revaluation Order 2025 implements section 9(2) of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013, specifying the revaluation rate for public service pension schemes (Local Government, NHS) for the period 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025. It sets the change in prices at 1.7% and change in earnings at 4.5% for indexation purposes.

This Order perpetuates an unfunded defined-benefit pension system that imposes massive hidden liabilities on future taxpayers. By linking revaluation to earnings growth (4.5%) rather than prices (1.7%), public sector pensions accumulate value faster than the broader economy can sustain, creating intergenerational inequity. The underlying Public Service Pensions Act 2013 itself reflects a structural commitment to generous public sector pensions that distort the labor market, attract excessive competition for public-sector jobs, and burden businesses with higher taxation. While deletion would create short-term disruption to existing legal frameworks, retaining this mechanism ensures continued expansion of an unsustainable liability. The regulation's purpose is to preserve a privilege for public sector workers funded by private sector taxpayers — a form of redistribution that Hayek and Friedman would recognise as distorting price signals in the labor market and impeding natural correction of wage structures.