Browse regulations

Amendment to Road Vehicles (Defeat Devices, Fuel Economy and Type-Approval) Regulations 2018, changing a single date: the commencement date from 6th April 2020 to 1st April 2020. Purely a date correction with no substantive policy changes.

This regulation has no current practical effect — both the original date (6th April 2020) and the substituted date (1st April 2020) are long past. As a purely retrospective date correction with no ongoing regulatory impact, it occupies statute book space without providing any benefit. Regulations should serve present and future purposes, not merely document historical corrections. The amendment can be repealed without any adverse effect on Britons, as it merely tidies up a commencement date that has already passed.

The Public Service Pensions Revaluation Order 2020 implements section 9(2) of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013 by specifying revaluation rates for public service pensions for the period 1st April 2019 to 31st March 2020: price increase of 1.7% and earnings increase of 4%. These percentages determine how public service pension benefits are adjusted each year.

This is a mechanical implementation of already-enacted legislation (the 2013 Act). Deleting it without also repealing the underlying statutory framework would create legal uncertainty and administrative chaos, not improve outcomes. The regulation merely applies predetermined statutory formulae to calculate revaluation rates. Any objection to public service pension levels should be directed at the underlying scheme design, not this technical implementing order.

These Regulations implement Part 12ZD of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, establishing statutory parental bereavement pay (SPBP) for eligible individuals upon the death of a child. They define qualifying relationships (biological parents, adopters, intended parents, persons with whom a child was placed for adoption, and partners), set the weekly payment rate at £187.18 or 90% of normal weekly earnings (whichever is lower), prescribe eligibility conditions including 26 weeks of continuous employment, notice requirements (28 days advance notice), a 56-week claim window from date of death, and provisions for COVID-19 furloughed employees.

These regulations impose mandatory employer liabilities that distort labor markets, particularly harming smaller businesses which face disproportionate compliance costs relative to larger enterprises. The mandated benefit of two weeks' paid leave for bereaved parents crowds out private contractual arrangements that employees and employers might prefer, discourages hiring workers with higher perceived bereavement risk, and creates administrative burdens around continuous employment verification, notice periods, and documentation. While the goal of supporting bereaved families is compassionate, coercion via statute rather than voluntary contractual provision generates efficiency losses, reduces labor market flexibility, and may paradoxically reduce employer willingness to offer more generous private arrangements. The COVID-19 provisions further illustrate how regulatory complexity compounds when governments intervene in employment relationships.

The Guaranteed Minimum Pensions Increase Order 2020 sets the statutory percentage increase (1.7%) for guaranteed minimum pensions (GMPs) attributable to earnings factors for relevant tax years. GMPs are minimum pension benefits earned by workers who were contracted out of the State Second Pension. This Order exercises the Secretary of State's power under section 109(2) and (3) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 to prescribe the annual increase rate.

This regulation perpetuates the contracted-out pension system—a historically created distortion that fragments Britain's pension landscape into competing tiers (basic state pension, S2P, occupational pensions, GMPs). The 1.7% figure is arbitrary government pricing imposed on private arrangements. While GMPs represent earned benefits, the solution to this government-created complexity is not endless regulatory修补 (regulatory patching), but abolition of the contracted-out system and simplification. The administrative compliance burden of annual GMP increases and calculations imposes costs on pension schemes and ultimately scheme members. Once the underlying contracted-out structure is reformed, such annual price-fixing regulations become unnecessary.

Adds COVID-19 to Schedule 1 (Notifiable Diseases) and SARS-CoV-2 to Schedule 2 (Causative Agents) of the Health Protection (Notification) Regulations 2010, making reporting of confirmed cases mandatory for healthcare professionals and laboratories in England.

While notification requirements impose administrative compliance costs, the public health surveillance infrastructure these regulations establish is essential for detecting and responding to disease outbreaks. Without mandatory reporting, health authorities would lose visibility into disease spread, making coordinated responses impossible. The harm from deleting this would be immediate and severe — outbreaks would go undetected, vulnerable populations would be exposed without warning, and the healthcare system would be unable to calibrate its response. The notification framework itself is a long-established public health tool with demonstrated utility.

Amends the Social Security Contributions (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999 to insert references to 'statutory parental bereavement pay' alongside existing references to 'statutory adoption pay' in regulations 3(3), 4(1)(a), 11(7) and 12(2)(b).

This is a procedural amendment that extends the existing appeals framework to cover statutory parental bereavement pay. While the underlying policy may be legitimate, these Regulations merely add cross-references to an existing scheme without independent justification. The principal 1999 Regulations already establish an extensive appeals bureaucracy for social security contributions decisions; this amendment merely ensures the new bereavement pay category is captured within that system. The seen costs include maintaining administrative machinery for appeals that may rarely be used for this specific payment type. The unseen costs include perpetuating a system of regulatory paternalism where individuals must navigate state appeals processes for minor contribution disputes rather than resolving matters through simpler mechanisms.

Technical amendment to Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001 adding statutory parental bereavement pay to provisions governing earnings periods, reporting requirements, and administration for SMP, SPP, SAP, ShPP, SSP and SPBP. Introduces corresponding reporting obligations in Schedules 4, 4A and 4B for real-time returns and additional information about employer payments.

This regulation is purely administrative machinery that adapts the existing contributions framework to accommodate statutory parental bereavement pay. Without these amendments, ambiguity would arise regarding contribution calculations and reporting obligations for this statutory payment. Deleting this instrument would create compliance uncertainty and potential underpayment/overpayment of national insurance contributions. The regulation does not create the policy itself but merely ensures the existing administrative infrastructure functions correctly with the new statutory payment type. Any objection to statutory parental bereavement pay itself would require primary legislation to repeal the underlying entitlement, not this technical amendment.

Amends three regulations (Electronic Communications 2002, PAYE 2003, Construction Industry Scheme 2005) to add statutory parental bereavement pay to the list of statutory payments that can be administered electronically through existing PAYE systems and administrative frameworks.

These are purely technical administrative amendments that enable the proper functioning of Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay through existing electronic systems. Without these amendments, the scheme Parliament has enacted could not function effectively. The regulation imposes no new restrictions on businesses—merely ensures employers can use the same efficient electronic systems already used for statutory sick pay, adoption pay, and other statutory payments. Deleting this would create administrative dysfunction, not freedom.

Amends the Recovery of Costs (Remand to Youth Detention Accommodation) Regulations 2013 to update cost recovery rates effective 1st April 2020, inserting rates of £321 (para 4), £453 (para 5), and £762 (para 6) for different categories of youth detention accommodation.

This regulation perpetuates a state-managed pricing mechanism for youth detention that removes services from market competition. By setting cost recovery rates via statutory instrument, it creates price floors that may discourage innovation and community-based alternatives to detention. The underlying system of youth detention accommodation should be subject to market forces and competitive pricing rather than government-mandated cost recovery schedules. The rates (£321, £453, £762) reflect bureaucratic determination rather than market efficiency, and the amendment merely inflates these figures without addressing the fundamental problem of supply restriction in youth justice provision.

Amends the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) (Payment of Claims) Regulations 1988 to increase payment amounts for victims of pneumoconiosis and related occupational diseases. Updates various lump sum payment figures (e.g., £3,250 to £3,305 for minimum dependant payments) and replaces compensation tables to reflect updated values based on age and disability percentage assessment.

While I generally favour removing regulations that distort markets or burden business, this regulation is different in character: it adjusts inflation uplifts for an existing no-fault workers' compensation scheme for terminal occupational diseases like mesothelioma and pneumoconiosis. Deleting it would freeze compensation at 1988 levels, leaving victims of industrial diseases (often miners, construction workers, and their widows) with wholly inadequate real-terms payments. Unlike regulatory interventions that distort incentives or create monopolies, this scheme addresses a genuine market failure — information asymmetry and impracticality of individual litigation for diseases manifesting decades after exposure — by providing efficient collective compensation. Without this mechanism, vulnerable workers disabled by occupationally-contracted diseases would bear costs they had no means to anticipate or avoid.

Amends the Mesothelioma Lump Sum Payments (Conditions and Amounts) Regulations 2008 to update payment tables for victims of diffuse mesothelioma and their dependants. The regulation increases lump sum payments effective 1st April 2020, with different amounts based on age at diagnosis (for victims) or age at death (for dependants). Applies prospectively to new diagnoses and claims made on or after that date.

This is a government compensation scheme, not a market regulation imposing burden on business. These payments provide no-fault compensation to mesothelioma victims and their families — people suffering from a terminal cancer caused by historical asbestos exposure. Deleting this would leave victims with no recourse, shift costs to the NHS and social services, and remove a functioning social safety net that cannot be replicated through market mechanisms. The regulation does not restrict trade, competition, or supply — it transfers funds to individuals who suffered harm from industrial disease.

This Order modifies Schedule 2 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, which lists birds that may be legally killed or taken outside the close season. It removes the Greenland White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons flavirostris) from the list of gameable birds in England only, while maintaining the general White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons) on the list. Wales is unaffected.

This regulation restricts the rights of landowners and hunters to manage wildlife on their property, replacing market incentives with bureaucratic prescription. The differentiation between subspecies ( Greenland vs. regular White-fronted) creates inconsistent rules across borders that will confuse enforcement and drive activity to Wales. Such species management decisions should be devolved to local wildlife trusts and landowners rather than imposed by central government diktat. The original 1981 Act's blanket approach to 'game' birds was itself a concession to agricultural interests, and variations like this merely layer complexity without addressing underlying habitat and migration dynamics through market mechanisms.

These Regulations establish the administrative framework for Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay (SPBP) under Part 12ZD of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. They govern: employer reimbursement mechanisms (92% standard rate, 100% for small employers qualifying for relief); procedures for employers to claim advance funding from HMRC or deduct SPBP from other tax payments; record-keeping requirements for employers maintaining three-year records of SPBP payments; Revenue and Customs powers to inspect employer records and recover misused funds; and procedures for employees to challenge employer liability decisions. The Regulations apply to Great Britain and came into force on 6th April 2020.

While this regulation imposes administrative burdens on employers, deleting it would create worse outcomes. The statutory right to parental bereavement pay exists in law; removing the administrative framework would leave employers unable to claim statutory reimbursements, create chaos in benefit delivery, and leave employees with unenforceable rights. The 92-100% reimbursement rate already shifts the fiscal burden to the state. However, the inspection and recovery provisions should be streamlined to minimize compliance costs, and consideration should be given to moving SPBP administration entirely to HMRC rather than using employers as de facto welfare agents.

Amendment to Marketing of Fruit Plant Regulations 2017 adding: (1) transitional provision 28ZA allowing sale of CAC material with non-compliant label colors until July 2021 if documents were pre-April 2020 and reference the relevant EU Directive; (2) new Schedule 2 paragraph 8A mandating that supplier documents on CAC material labels must be yellow; (3) removal of paragraphs (ix) and (x) from paragraph 8(b).

Mandating a specific label colour (yellow) for supplier documents on CAC material is quintessential gold-plating that adds compliance cost with zero corresponding benefit to consumers or plant quality. The transitional provision itself reveals the regulation's flaw—businesses had existing compliant stock suddenly rendered non-compliant, requiring a grace period. Such prescriptive technical requirements for document colours serve no market function and merely impede the free movement of goods. Post-Brexit, Britain should not retain such unnecessary EU-derived bureaucratic prescriptions that drive up costs for horticultural suppliers.

The Parental Bereavement Leave Regulations 2020 provide employees who lose a child with a statutory right to 1-2 weeks of leave (which need not be consecutive) within 56 weeks of the child's death. Eligible persons include parents, adopters, intended parents, foster parents, and partners of parents. The regulations establish notice requirements to employers, preserve employment terms during leave (excluding remuneration), protect against detriment and unfair dismissal, and allow employees to combine statutory and contractual bereavement leave rights.

While addressing a genuine human need, this regulation imposes statutory mandates where voluntary contracting between employers and employees would suffice. The complex definitions of eligible relationships, detailed notice requirements, and administrative compliance burdens disproportionately affect small businesses. Employment protections against dismissal for bereavement already exist under general law. The 56-week window for taking leave and intricate rules governing consecutive statutory leave periods add layers of bureaucracy without proportional benefit. A truly free labor market would allow employers to compete for talent by offering bereavement policies suited to their workforce, and employees could negotiate terms reflecting their circumstances.