Browse regulations

Amends Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001 to exclude Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme compensation payments from calculation of earnings for National Insurance contributions purposes. Targets individuals with quashed convictions, cautions, alternatives to prosecution, or unconvicted prosecutions related to the Post Office Horizon scandal.

This regulation corrects a specific historical injustice by ensuring wrongfully convicted sub-postmasters receive full compensation without NIC deductions reducing their redress. The Horizon scandal represents a catastrophic state failure causing immeasurable harm to victims. These are not earnings from labour but restitution for wrongful prosecution—a narrow, targeted fix for a discrete group. Deleting this would further harm those already wronged, reducing their compensation through NIC liability on payments already determined inadequate.

Amendment Rules to the Court of Protection Rules 2017 making procedural changes to contempt proceedings, including: removing reference to writs of sequestration; adding adverse inferences provision for self-incrimination; introducing media notification requirements via Press Association for identity non-disclosure orders; requiring defendant naming in committal orders; and mandating transcription and website publication of committal judgments.

These Rules impose procedural complexity without clear economic or free-market justification. The new media notification requirements via Press Association add bureaucratic burden and risk attracting media interference into sensitive Court of Protection matters involving vulnerable individuals. The mandatory transcription and website publication of committal judgments creates unnecessary compliance costs and may chill legitimate participation in contempt proceedings. The adverse inferences provision merely codifies existing common law, adding no value. Since the Court of Protection handles vulnerable persons' affairs rather than commercial disputes, these procedural additions serve no discernible economic purpose and impose costs on court administration and parties without corresponding benefits to Britons' economic liberty or market dynamism.

These regulations amend the Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme Fixed Sum Award tax exemption regulations to expand eligibility for tax relief (income tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax) to additional categories of Horizon system victims including those whose convictions were quashed by court, those who received cautions, and those who were prosecuted but not convicted. They also provide income tax exemption for payments under the Grenfell Support (Restorative Justice) programme. Tax exemptions apply to payments received on or after 3rd June 2025 for expanded categories, and 5th June 2024 for Grenfell payments.

Tax exemptions on restitution payments are appropriate because taxing compensation that makes victims whole would be punitive and compound the original injustice. The Horizon scandal involved wrongful state-backed prosecutions and the Grenfell tragedy involved regulatory failures - in both cases victims should not face tax on their redress. Without these exemptions, victims would be worse off as the value of their compensation would be reduced by taxation, defeating the purpose of restitution.

The Solihull (Electoral Changes) Order 2025 abolishes existing wards of Solihull and replaces them with 17 new wards, each returning 3 councillors. It establishes staggered election timelines where all councillors are elected simultaneously in 2026, then retire in rotation (2027, 2028, and 2030). The Order also abolishes and reconstitutes parish wards for Bickenhill & Marston Green, Kingshurst, and Smith's Wood parishes. It includes provisions for determining councillor retirement order by vote count, lot-drawing in cases of ties or uncontested elections, and defines boundary interpretation rules.

This is a necessary administrative framework that defines electoral structures, ward boundaries, and election schedules for Solihull's local government. Deleting it would create legal chaos and uncertainty about how elections should be conducted, ward boundaries should be defined, and councillor terms should operate. While some aspects could be locally determined, some formal boundary and electoral framework is essential for democratic governance to function. The regulation imposes no economic burden, trade restriction, or market distortion — it is purely technical administrative law governing electoral mechanics.

The Mona Offshore Wind Farm Order 2025 is a Development Consent Order (DCO) made under the Planning Act 2008 granting development consent for the Mona Offshore Wind Farm, an offshore wind energy project comprising wind turbine generators, offshore substation platforms, inter-array and interconnector cables, and associated onshore works including a substation at Bodelwyddan. It grants a deemed marine licence under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, authorises ancillary works, confers compulsory purchase powers, provides exemptions from various statutory requirements (water byelaws, Land Drainage Act provisions, statutory nuisance claims, noise control consents), and allows transfer of rights to other persons. The Order contains 38 numbered works, extensive definitions, procedural provisions, and requirements (Schedule 2) governing construction and operation.

This Order exemplifies the crony capitalist model of politically-directed infrastructure approval rather than market discovery. It grants Mona Offshore Wind Limited exclusive development rights through a quasi-judicial political process rather than competitive allocation, conferring £billions in value at the expense of consumers and competitors. The compulsory purchase powers authorise forcible acquisition of private land for private benefit. The exemptions from water byelaws, drainage statutes, and statutory nuisance liability transfer value from the public to the developer without compensation. Most fundamentally, concentrating infrastructure approval in the Secretary of State rather than allowing property rights and contracts to coordinate development distorts incentives, suppresses alternatives, and perpetuates the planning regime that has produced Britain's housing crisis. While the environmental requirements in Schedule 2 impose costs, the primary harm is theOrder itself as an instrument of discretionary political control over private investment.

This Order amends the Football Spectators (Prescription) Order 2022 to update terminology for regulated football matches and organisations, changing references from older league names (Football Association Women's Championship, Football Conference, etc.) to current names (Women's Super League 2, National League). It adds Women's Super League Football Limited as a regulated organisation. The Order provides the legal basis for designating which football matches and bodies fall under football disorder control measures.

This regulation perpetuates a regime that restricts football supporters' freedom based on historical violence that is now decades old. The disorder control framework (bans, exclusion orders, monitoring) treats all fans of designated matches as potential criminals rather than addressing individual wrongdoing. General public order and criminal law already cover violence and disorder. The specific naming updates reflect current league structures but the underlying premise of collectively punishing a entire category of sports fans is paternalistic and disproportionate. A free society should not need government prescription to determine which football matches require special supervision.

Commencement regulations bringing into force provisions of the Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Act 2025 on 16th July 2025, including sections on recapitalisation payments, reporting requirements, parliamentary notification, reimbursement mechanisms, codes of practice, and amendments to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and Banking Act 2009.

Commencement regulations are purely procedural machinery that merely activate dates for existing legislation. They add no independent regulatory burden or benefit — their only function is technical timing. The substantive policy questions belong to the underlying Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Act 2025 itself. Deleting these commencement regulations would leave the underlying Act intact while removing unnecessary procedural overhead, and Parliament can always bring provisions into force through alternative means if needed.

Commencement regulation bringing into force provisions of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 that revoke various EU-derived financial services regulations on staggered dates (July 2025, November 2025, January 2026). Includes saving provisions for existing equivalence directions, regulatory decisions, and applications, plus transitional arrangements preserving the effect of certain PRA permissions granted under the Capital Requirements Regulation.

This instrument advances Better Britain's mission by removing retained EU financial services law from the statute book. The staggered commencement dates and saving provisions demonstrate appropriate transitional handling that prevents regulatory discontinuity while achieving the ultimate goal of excising EU-derived law. Revoking the Capital Requirements Regulation's detailed prudential requirements (Articles 25-491) frees the City from EU-imposed capital buffers and reporting burdens, enhancing competitiveness against New York, Singapore, and Dubai. The regulation correctly targets Brussels-derived rules rather than establishing new domestic restrictions, consistent with restoring Britain's status as the world's pre-eminent free-trading financial centre.

The Protection and Disclosure of Personal Information (Amendment) Regulations 2025 amend the Companies (Disclosure of Address) Regulations 2009 and related legislation to expand the scope of personal information individuals can apply to have removed from public inspection on the Companies House register. Key changes include: allowing applications to hide directors' dates of birth, signatures, and business occupations; strengthening address protection mechanisms; expanding the categories of partnerships (Scottish, limited) covered by the regime; and updating the application process with new requirements such as email addresses and service addresses. The regulations apply to companies, LLPs, and unregistered companies across the UK.

While any regulation imposes some compliance cost, the core purpose—allowing directors and officers to protect personal information from public inspection—serves legitimate interests. Directors facing harassment, identity theft risk, or domestic abuse concerns benefit from address and personal data protection. The information remains available to credit reference agencies and competent authorities under appropriate safeguards. Removing this would reduce corporate transparency only marginally while potentially deterring individuals from serving as directors due to privacy concerns—a net harm to corporate governance quality.

This Order extends the duration of non-jury trial provisions (originally introduced under the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007, which itself extended the temporary 'Diplock court' provisions first introduced in 1973) to a further period. These provisions allow certain serious offences in Northern Ireland to be tried by a judge alone without a jury, ostensibly due to concerns about witness or juror intimidation in terrorism-related cases.

Non-jury trials represent a fundamental departure from the centuries-old British tradition of trial by jury - a cornerstone of liberty that concentrates judicial power in a single judge rather than peers. These provisions, first enacted as temporary emergency measures in 1973, have now been extended for over 50 years, revealing that what was meant to be exceptional has become a permanent feature of Northern Ireland's justice system. The extension mechanism itself removes democratic accountability, as Parliament is merely ratifying indefinite continuation rather than genuinely reviewing necessity. A free Britain should trust its citizens with the right to be judged by a jury of their peers - the very right that Magna Carta and centuries of common law have secured.

A technical amendment order that updates league name references in the Football (Offences) (Designation of Football Matches) Order 2004, changing 'Football Conference' to 'National League', 'Football Association Women's Super League' to 'Women's Super League', 'Football Association Women's Championship' to 'Women'Super League 2', and 'Welsh Premier League' to 'Cymru Premier'.

This is a purely administrative nomenclature update reflecting current official league names. No new regulatory burdens, restrictions, or market distortions are introduced—the underlying designated match regime remains unchanged. Deleting this amendment would simply leave the 2004 Order referencing leagues by names that no longer exist, creating confusion without any libertarian benefit.

Amends section 339A of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to raise threshold amounts from £1,000 to £3,000 for money laundering disclosure requirements. This reduces the frequency of reporting obligations for smaller transactions, extending to England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.

Britons would be worse off if this were deleted because reverting to the lower £1,000 threshold would impose greater compliance burdens on businesses, increase administrative costs, and subject more small-value transactions to cumbersome reporting requirements — without meaningful anti-money laundering benefit, since laundering proceeds through very small transactions is already impractical for criminal actors.

Amends retained EU aviation safety regulations (EU 1178/2011, EU 965/2012, EU 2018/395) concerning pilot licensing, medical certification, training organisations, and air operations. Key changes include: reducing PPL(A) flight time requirements from 45 to 40 hours (35 with approved course); introducing clearer cost-shared flights framework allowing private individuals to share direct flight costs; creating an electric propulsion exception for SEP class ratings; restricting LAPL(A) issuance after October 2025; and providing flexibility for training aircraft used in non-commercial owner-flown training. Extends to all UK jurisdictions.

While this is retained EU law, it actually liberalises several aspects of aviation regulation: reduces PPL(A) hour requirements, enables cost-sharing that expands private flying access, permits electric propulsion aircraft under SEP rating, and provides proportionate flexibility for owner-flown training aircraft. Deleting it would create regulatory uncertainty without improving the underlying framework. The regulation makes targeted improvements to inherited rules while maintaining essential safety standards, aligning with the goal of a dynamic aviation sector rather than wholesale deregulation of safety-critical areas.

This Order amends multiple Combined Authority Orders (2018-2024) to add a new adult education function (section 100(1B) regarding financial resources for technical education qualifications) while explicitly excluding apprenticeship training from functions (a) and (b), and excluding persons under 19 or under 25 with EHC Plans from the new function. It also substitutes 'Combined Authority' for 'Secretary of State' in relevant provisions across Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, West of England, West Midlands, Tees Valley, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, Sheffield City Region, West Yorkshire, and North East Combined Authorities.

While I generally favour reducing state intervention, this amendment actually constrains government education functions rather than expanding them. It removes apprenticeship training from certain devolved functions (a beneficial restriction), narrows the new function by excluding under-19s and EHC Plan holders under 25, and decentralises authority from Secretary of State to Combined Authorities. Deletion would revert to the prior state where apprenticeship training WAS included and the Secretary of State retained control—a net expansion of central government scope. The exclusions protect vulnerable groups (under-19s, EHC Plan holders) from the new function's scope, which is a humanitarian safeguard that aligns with avoiding harm to individuals.

These regulations amend multiple social security benefit schemes (Universal Credit, Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance, State Pension Credit, Housing Benefit, Employment and Support Allowance) to create a temporary provision allowing British nationals evacuated from abroad during government advisories or organized evacuations to continue receiving benefits while abroad for up to 26 weeks (6 months for Universal Credit). The amendments add new categories of persons treated as being in Great Britain during temporary absences when His Majesty's Government has advised British nationals to leave a country or arranged their evacuation.

Without these regulations, British nationals caught in foreign emergencies—who were following government advice to evacuate—would lose essential benefit entitlements they have contributed to and depend upon. The provision is strictly time-limited (26 weeks/6 months), requires the person to have been present before the advisory, mandates they have legal UK residence status, and includes a reasonableness test before benefits continue. Deleting this would harm some of the most vulnerable British citizens while saving relatively little given the narrow eligibility criteria and time bounds.