Browse regulations

These Regulations (2018, effective March 2019) require competent law enforcement authorities to use UKAS-accredited forensic service providers for DNA profiling and fingerprint analysis. They establish a mandatory accreditation regime based on EN ISO/IEC 17025 or equivalency under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, with special exemptions for certain Ministry of Defence laboratories handling hazardous materials. Results from all forms of accredited providers are deemed equally reliable.

Mandatory accreditation creates an unnecessary barrier to entry in the forensic services market, driving up costs for law enforcement and taxpayers while restricting supply of providers. The UKAS monopoly on accreditation serves to protect incumbent providers rather than ensure genuine quality. This is precisely the type of EU-derived bureaucratic burden that should have been reviewed post-Brexit — the regulation was inherited wholesale without parliamentary scrutiny. Forensic quality can be ensured through market mechanisms: professional liability, reputational consequences, and adversarial testing in court are more effective and less restrictive alternatives than state-mandated accreditation that excludes competent providers who lack the right bureaucratic certification.

This Order amends the Electronic Monitoring (Responsible Persons) Order 2018 by substituting company entries for Alcohol Monitoring Systems Limited and Buddi Limited as approved responsible persons for electronic monitoring services. It came into force on 10th January 2019.

This regulation restricts which private companies may provide electronic monitoring services, creating a government-approved vendor list that limits competition and entry. Such licensing regimes raise costs by reducing competitive pressure, benefit incumbent providers through regulatory capture, and lack evidence that the designated companies are superior to potential alternatives. The market for electronic monitoring services would function without this designation; government agencies can ensure contractor quality through procurement contracts rather than statutory designation. The specific amendment merely updates names on a pre-existing restriction regime rather than creating new value.

EU Exit amendment regulation that replaces removed EU directive references with UK-specific definitions for ionising radiation safety terms (orphan source, radioactive material, radiation source, protective/remedial measures) and adds a Schedule of requirements for developing exposure management strategies. Part of the Brexit legislative tidy-up.

While this regulation continues radiation safety requirements that originated from EU law without parliamentary scrutiny, deleting it would create legal uncertainty and gaps in the regulatory framework for ionising radiation. Radiation protection is a legitimate government function addressing genuine public health risks from orphan sources and exposure situations. The definitions are necessary for the operation of the principal regulations. However, this instrument exemplifies the broader problem: EU-derived radiation safety law was absorbed wholesale without review. A future government should subject these retained requirements to full parliamentary scrutiny and cost-benefit analysis rather than maintaining them indefinitely by default.

The Child Support (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2018 make two main changes: (1) add regulation 69A to the Child Support Maintenance (Calculation) Regulations 2012, allowing the Secretary of State to consider assets exceeding £31,250 belonging to a non-resident parent when calculating maintenance; and (2) extensively amend the Child Support (Collection and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 to extend deduction order provisions to joint accounts, adding procedural protections for non-liable account-holders including notice requirements, representation periods, and review rights.

Regulation 69A creates perverse incentives for asset concealment and discourages saving by treating accumulated wealth as available for child support calculations, creating a retrospective taxation effect on savings that have already been taxed as income. The joint account provisions, while more defensible in protecting third-party account-holders, add substantial compliance complexity for financial institutions and create multi-layered procedural requirements (notice periods, representation rights, review mechanisms) that increase administrative burden without proportionate benefit to children. The fundamental approach of regulation 69A—that the state should reach into accumulated assets rather than rely on current income calculations—is paternalistic overreach that distorts rational economic behaviour.

The Offshore Installations (Safety Zones) (No. 2) Order 2018 establishes 500-metre safety zones around specified offshore petroleum installations under section 21(7) of the Petroleum Act 1987, using World Geodetic System 1984 coordinates. It also amends the 2018 Order to rename four installations (Andrew T1, Banff T5, ETAP T2, and Judy T6 Structures to CATS variants) and revokes the 2008 Safety Zones Order.

Safety zones around offshore petroleum installations serve a legitimate purpose in preventing collisions and providing emergency response space. The 500m radius is a standard maritime safety distance. Deletion would create regulatory gaps and operational confusion, as vessels would lack clear boundaries around these hazardous industrial sites. The underlying Petroleum Act power would remain, but without this exercising it for specific installations, maritime safety would be weakened without equivalent protection. While less interventionist alternatives exist (liability rules, voluntary zones), the practical safety benefit to workers and installations justifies retention.

Designates bodies listed in the Schedule for Whole of Government Accounts reporting purposes under section 10 of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000, applicable to the financial year ending 31 March 2018. Came into force 28 December 2018.

This Order pertains to a specific historical financial year (2017-18) that ended nearly a decade ago. It is entirely retrospective in nature and has been superseded by subsequent annual designation orders. The underlying designation power under s.10 of the 2000 Act remains intact for future use, but this specific instrument serves no current purpose and adds unnecessary clutter to the statute book.

Post-Brexit statutory instrument that revokes UK instruments relating to the European Network of Employment Services (EURES), defines a reference to EU Regulation (EC) No 1296/2013 (the EaSI programme), and comes into force on exit day. It severs UK participation in the EU's employment mobility network.

This regulation removes EU-derived obligations restricting labour market participation through EURES, an EU bureaucratic network. Post-Brexit, continued adherence to these instruments serves no purpose—British workers and employers cannot meaningfully participate in an EU-run network without accepting EU jurisdiction. The original regulations reflected EU mandating of employment services rather than market-driven labour mobility. Deletion eliminates retained EU law obligations while allowing the UK to develop independent, voluntary arrangements for international recruitment that serve British interests rather than EU institutional goals.

This Order amends the Hertfordshire (Electoral Changes) Order 2015 by modifying citation and commencement provisions. It removes '6, ' from paragraph (5) of article 1 and inserts new paragraph 6A establishing staggered commencement dates for Article 6: 15th October 2021 for electoral proceedings preliminary purposes, and the ordinary day of election of councillors in 2022 for all other purposes. Sealed by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England.

This is a minor administrative timing amendment to electoral boundary changes that provides necessary clarity on when provisions take effect. Without this amendment, potential confusion around commencement dates could disrupt electoral administration. Electoral timing regulations serve a legitimate function in ensuring orderly local elections, and the staggered implementation allows proper preparation for electoral proceedings. The costs of confusion and administrative disruption to electoral administration would outweigh any theoretical reduction in regulatory volume.

EU Exit statutory instrument that amends the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Regulations 2015 to adapt them for post-Brexit operation. Replaces EU directive references with UK-specific definitions (including redefining 'deposit' by reference to UK Regulations 600/2014 and 575/2013), removes provisions relating to non-UK deposit guarantee schemes and cross-border cooperation, modifies PRA determination processes for compensation scheme contributions, and adds a five-year review requirement for compensation levels with Treasury oversight.

This regulation addresses deficiencies created by Brexit that would otherwise leave the 2015 Deposit Guarantee Scheme Regulations with broken references to EU law and non-functional cross-border cooperation provisions. While deposit guarantee schemes involve moral hazard concerns, deleting this amendment would create regulatory gaps, legal uncertainty, and coordination failures with remaining international arrangements. The five-year PRA review cycle provides democratic accountability for compensation levels. This is a necessary technical fix for regulatory coherence post-Brexit, not an expansion of regulatory burden.

Brexit-related statutory instrument that amends three EU energy regulations (Gas Regulation 715/2009, REMIT 1227/2011, and Security of Gas Supply Regulation 2017/1938) to transfer regulatory powers from EU institutions (Commission, Agency) to UK national authorities (Secretary of State, Northern Ireland department). It allows creation of 'corresponding provisions' for gas network codes, permits amendment of network codes, and establishes new consultation and legislative procedures for post-Brexit energy regulation.

This regulation perpetuates the EU's prescriptive gas network code regime in domestic law, transferring authority rather than liberalizing. The Gas Regulation's network codes impose detailed operational requirements on transmission operators that were never democratically scrutinized by Parliament. Rather than using post-Brexit freedom to reduce the regulatory burden on Britain's energy sector, this regulation preserves the existing command-and-control framework while merely switching the supervisory authority from Brussels to Whitehall. The objectives specified ('non-discrimination, effective competition, efficient functioning of the market') are regulatory outcomes that market participants could achieve through contractual freedom and competition rather than mandated codes. Keeping this in place maintains barriers to entry in gas transmission and wholesale energy markets, stifling the dynamic market competition that Adam Smith's invisible hand would produce.

This Commencement Order brings into force section 44 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 on 6th April 2019, specifically for 'publication and privacy proceedings' including defamation, malicious falsehood, breach of confidence, misuse of private information, and harassment (against news publishers). It governs conditional fee agreements and success fees in these proceedings.

This Order restricts success fees in publication and privacy proceedings, effectively capping what lawyers can earn for taking on risky defamation and privacy cases. Such price controls on legal services reduce supply of legal representation, create bottlenecks in the court system, and disproportionately benefit established news publishers who face lower litigation costs. The targeted exemption for 'news publishers' suggests this is regulatory capture rather than genuine access to justice reform. Freedom of contract in legal services should determine pricing, not government-mandated fee structures that distort litigation incentives and drive parties toward settlement rather than meritorious claims.

Temporary traffic order for M4 Prince of Wales Bridge restricting speed to 50mph, prohibiting wide vehicles (>2.5m) from lanes other than the left-hand lane, and prohibiting vehicle entry in certain sections during works to remove toll booths. Contains standard exemptions for emergency services and suspends certain Motorways Traffic Regulations for hard shoulder use during the works period starting December 2018.

This is a temporary order enacted for a specific roadwork project (removal of toll booths) with a defined works period beginning 1st December 2018. The works have long since been completed, making this order obsolete. The template may be useful for future similar situations, but that specific order has served its purpose and should be removed from the statute book.

Temporary traffic order for M48 Severn Bridge (2018) restricting speed to 50mph, prohibiting wide vehicles from certain lanes, and restricting access to the first length during works to remove toll booths, resurface, and carry out associated maintenance. Order applies during works periods indicated by traffic signs, with exemptions for emergency services, special forces, and vehicles used in connection with the works.

This was a temporary order for specific roadworks (toll booth removal and resurfacing) that commenced December 2018 and ended upon completion of works. The defined 'works period' has long since expired, making this order obsolete. While similar temporary orders may be needed for future maintenance, this specific instrument should be deleted from the statute book as it serves no current purpose.

These Regulations (SI 2018/1234) revoke European Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1843, which established EU procedures for raising trade barrier concerns within EU institutions. The Regulations come into force on exit day (Brexit). In effect, they remove an obsolete EU-derived mechanism from the UK statute book as part of the post-Brexit regulatory cleanup.

This regulation removes rather than imposes. The original EU Regulation 2015/1843 established procedures for raising trade barrier concerns through EU institutions—a mechanism inherently tied to EU membership and meaningless outside that context. Post-Brexit, this EU procedure could serve no practical function for British businesses. Deleting this revocation would leave an inoperative EU regulation on the statute book, creating legal confusion without providing any实际的 benefit. The regulation achieves its stated purpose of removing obsolete EU-derived law efficiently.

EU Exit statutory instrument that amends the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002, Road Vehicles (Display of Registration Marks) Regulations 2001, Vehicles Crime (Registration of Registration Plate Suppliers) Regulations 2008, Council Regulation (EC) 2411/98, and the Motor Vehicles (International Circulation) Order 1975. The amendments replace EU law references with 'retained EU law' or 'IP completion day', substitute 'United Kingdom' for 'Community', remove direct applicability of EU regulations, and add definitions for 'business use', 'commercial vehicle', 'normal residence', 'private use', and 'private vehicle'. These changes address the legal consequences of EU exit for vehicle registration, registration plates, and excise exemption provisions.

This EU Exit SI merely substitutes legal terminology ('EU law' for 'retained EU law', 'Community' for 'United Kingdom') without reducing the actual regulatory burden on vehicle keepers, dealers, or the motor industry. It preserves the same substantive requirements under a different legal label. True regulatory reform would have streamlined the registration and plating regime rather than renaming EU-sourced rules. The regulation fails to exploit post-Brexit freedom to reduce gold-plating or simplify compliance, offering only administrative relabelling at a time when Britain should be aggressively deregulating.