Browse regulations

Special Development Order granting temporary planning permission to the Home Secretary to use former RAF Airfield Wethersfield in Essex for asylum-seeker accommodation until April 2027, with reinstatement obligations until October 2027. The Order grants permission for material change of use, building operations, and decommissioning/reinstatement works, subject to 28 conditions covering environmental management, contamination/ordnance risks, operational management plans, Multi-Agency Forum, and Secretary of State oversight.

This Order does not restrict liberty or economic activity—it grants planning permission to overcome NIMBY planning obstacles for a specific government policy purpose. Far from the EU-derived regulatory burden Better Britain opposes, this is a domestic Order actually streamlining development. The 3-year sunset clause demonstrates regulatory self-limitation. Deleting it would not free Britons from bureaucracy; it would simply prevent the authorized development from occurring. The accommodation of asylum-seekers is a recognized government function under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, and this Order provides the planning permission necessary for that function. The extensive conditions (28 in Schedule 3) address legitimate concerns including environmental protection and community impact.

A Special Development Order granting temporary planning permission for converting former RAF Scampton military base into asylum-seeker accommodation (specifically adult males without dependants). The Order suspends normal permitted development rights from April 2024 to October 2027, requires extensive conditions including environmental management plans, contamination/ordnance risk assessments, heritage asset protection, Multi-Agency Forum establishment, and sets sunset clauses for cessation of development by April 2027 and reinstatement by October 2027.

This Order exemplifies the planning pathology it should remedy. Rather than reforming Britain's dysfunctional planning system, it exploits that dysfunction through targeted exemption for a politically convenient project. It suspends permitted development rights and imposes 27+ conditions requiring Secretary of State approval for every operational plan — creating precisely the regulatory burden that has produced Britain's housing crisis. If former RAF Scampton can be developed for housing under these conditions, the planning regime itself is the problem. The Order perpetuates NIMBYism by allowing politically disfavored development (general housing) to remain restricted while granting exception for this specific project. This cronyism deters private investment in housing supply and validates the interventionist model that strangles construction. Britons would be better served by systematic planning liberalisation than by executive orders picking winners for favored uses.

Amendment Regulations 2024 that update references in Article 9 of retained EU Regulation 2018/1139 to newer ICAO environmental protection standard amendments: Volume I from Amendment 13 to Amendment 14, Volume II from Amendment 10 to Amendment 11, and Volume III from Amendment 1 to Amendment 2.

This regulation is purely a citation update with no independent regulatory effect. The substantive environmental requirements derive from the base Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 and ICAO international standards, which exist regardless of which amendment version is cited. Deleting this would leave outdated amendment references in force, creating legal inconsistency and confusion without reducing any actual regulatory requirements. This is administrative housekeeping, not substantive rulemaking.

The South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (Election of Mayor and Transfer of Police and Crime Commissioner Functions) Order 2024 moves the mayoral election from 2026 to 2024 (with subsequent elections every 4 years), abolishes the separate Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) role for South Yorkshire, and transfers all PCC functions, property, rights, liabilities, and staff to the Mayor and Combined Authority effective 7th May 2024. It modifies various audit, account, and election requirements to facilitate the transition and applies PCC enactments to the Mayor with specified modifications.

This Order consolidates two previously separate elected offices (Mayor and Police and Crime Commissioner) into a single elected position, reducing democratic accountability for policing decisions. The elimination of the dedicated PCC role removes a direct electoral check on policing governance, concentrating power in the Mayor without a corresponding benefit that could not be achieved through alternative arrangements such as improved inter-agency cooperation or voluntary collaboration agreements. The transfer of PCC functions to an already-powerful combined authority represents institutional consolidation rather than liberalisation, reducing the pluralism of democratic oversight that Britons benefit from.

The Parochial Fees Order 2024 prescribes maximum fees for Church of England parochial services (baptisms, weddings, funerals, etc.) for 2025-2026, payable to diocesan boards of finance and parochial church councils. Fees are adjusted annually via a CPI-linked formula capped at 5%, rounded to the nearest pound.

This regulation perpetuates administratively-capped fees for Church of England services, maintaining a quasi-monopoly position for ecclesiastical ceremonies that suppresses competitive alternatives. The CPI cap mechanism is a price control that prevents market-clearing prices and creates artificial scarcity of choice for Britons seeking life-event ceremonies. Rather than allowing genuine market competition that would drive quality and innovation, this Order codifies a system where the established church's fees are state-managed, preventing alternative secular and nonconformist providers from competing freely. Deleting this Order would allow parochial fees to be set competitively, encourage private celebrants and other religious bodies to offer services, and restore the dynamic market in ceremonial services that existed before state regulation of the Church of England's pricing.

These Regulations amend EU Delegated Regulation 2019/1012 to modify rules on designating border control posts (BCPs) in England. They expand the criteria for 'geographical constraints' that justify locating BCPs away from immediate vicinity of points of entry, add risk management requirements for BCP operators, and introduce eight additional factors competent authorities must consider when designating BCPs (including distance, transit time, land availability, environmental impact, infrastructure, costs, and economic impacts). The Regulations apply only to England.

These Regulations compound regulatory burden without justification. While post-Brexit border control rationalization is welcome, this instrument merely rearranges existing EU-derived constraints rather than reducing them. The eight new 'consideration' factors in paragraph 5 add procedural requirements that will slow decision-making and create opportunities for legal challenge, with costs ultimately borne by importers and consumers. The extensive list of acceptable 'geographical constraints' (including floods, cliffs, rail transport, land availability, and environmental conservation) provides a near-exhaustive catalog that restricts flexibility rather than enabling efficient border management. A principles-based approach allowing competent authorities to designate BCPs based on cost-effectiveness and operational need would better serve Britain's competitive interests as a trading nation.

These Regulations establish minimum service levels (MSLs) for fire and rescue services in England during strikes, as enabled by sections 234B-234C of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. They define 'relevant services' as fire and rescue services provided by English fire and rescue authorities (FRAs) and their contractors, excluding volunteer services. The Regulations specify three categories of minimum service: (1) control room services - all calls must be answered and assessed normally; (2) emergency incident responses - 73% of FRA appliances/vehicles and all national resilience assets must be deployable; (3) fire safety services - must be provided as normal where no reasonable alternative exists. Work notices can be issued to require employees to work during strikes to meet these levels.

This regulation is not a market regulation but a labor restriction that props up government-imposed wage bargaining at the expense of firefighters' collective action rights. The 73% staffing mandate during strikes acts as a de facto cap on strike effectiveness, reducing workers' leverage in wage negotiations and potentially suppressing compensation below market rates. Minimum service levels risk provoking more frequent or prolonged industrial action by removing the incentive for management to negotiate reasonably, and by making strikes less effective workers may resort to more extreme measures. While framed as protecting public safety, the regulation fundamentally restricts voluntary labor arrangements between willing parties. A genuinely free labor market would allow fire authorities and unions to negotiate emergency coverage voluntarily without government mandate.

Consequential amendments to extend existing regulatory frameworks to newly established combined county authorities created under the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023. Specifically: (1) allows combined county authorities to set eligibility rules for education institution awards under the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009, referencing Schedule 1 categories; (2-3) amends Local Audit and Accounts & Audit regulations to include combined county authorities in local authority provisions for auditor panels and political balance requirements; (4) amends NHS Counter Fraud Authority Order to include combined county authorities. All amendments are purely administrative in nature, ensuring new authorities integrate into existing governance structures.

These are purely technical consequential amendments required to operationalise the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023's new combined county authorities. They impose no new regulatory burdens on businesses, create no new restrictions on competition, and impose no additional costs on private actors. Deleting these amendments would leave new governance structures non-functional, creating administrative chaos without any free market benefit. The amendments merely ensure combined county authorities are treated equivalently to existing combined authorities under established frameworks.

These Regulations amend the Electricity Supplier Obligations (Amendment & Excluded Electricity) Regulations 2015 by: replacing references to 'in difficulty' with 'insolvent' using a two-part legal definition; tightening Energy Intensive Industry (EII) certificate criteria to require applicants are not insolvent or likely to become insolvent; empowering the Secretary of State to refuse EII certificates where information is insufficient or incompatible with international subsidy control obligations; and omitting regulation 13ZB. The amendments extend subsidy control compliance requirements and remove certain procedural provisions.

This is retained EU law (the 2015 Regulations implementing EU state aid principles) that was never subject to proper democratic scrutiny post-Brexit. The amendments actually tighten, rather than loosen, the certificate regime by replacing the broader 'in difficulty' test with the stricter 'insolvent' definition. While the regulations claim to address subsidy control, they perpetuate a government-controlled subsidy framework for energy-intensive industries that distorts market signals, creates competitive advantages for politically-favoured sectors, and entangles Britain in international subsidy regimes that limit its regulatory freedom. The Secretary of State's expanded refusal powers further entrench state discretion over energy markets. None of these changes represent genuine deregulation or restore Britain's free-trading heritage.

The Single Source Contract (Amendment) Regulations 2024 amend the Single Source Contract Regulations 2014, which govern non-competitive (single-source) defense procurement contracts. The amendments introduce new definitions (including 'component', 'contract pricing method', 'default pricing method', 'alternative pricing method'), modify rules around contract pricing methods, add provisions for group sub-contract profit deductions, adjust final price adjustment calculations, and make various technical changes to the regulatory framework for qualifying defense contracts.

This regulation exemplifies the problems with government price-setting regimes. It imposes 'allowable costs' concepts, profit rate controls, and mandated pricing formulas on defense procurement—a classic example of bureaucratic干预 in contract pricing that Merry Britain should shed. While intended to prevent overcharging on non-competitive contracts, it creates massive compliance burdens, distorts incentives by treating profit as suspect rather than as the reward for efficiency, and substitutes government formulas for commercial negotiation. The new 'component' framework adds further complexity without addressing the fundamental flaw: forcing defense contractors into regulatory pricing straitjackets rather than allowing market competition to discipline prices. The retained EU-derived nature of this regime makes it a priority for deletion post-Brexit.

Amends section 15 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 to add the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) to the list of relevant authorities with whom agencies must cooperate under the domestic abuse Commissioner framework. Extends to England and Wales, in force 16th April 2024.

This is a minor institutional coordination amendment that adds police oversight accountability to domestic abuse protections. Unlike economic regulations that distort markets, this simply ensures the IOPC—an existing oversight body—is included in cooperation duties. Deleting it would create accountability gaps in police conduct oversight for domestic abuse cases, potentially harming victims by allowing misconduct to go unchallenged. No economic burden or market distortion is created.

Amendment to the Finance (No. 2) Act 2017 digital reporting and record-keeping regulations, changing the appointed day from 2024 to 2026 — a two-year administrative postponement of an existing compliance deadline.

This is a procedural date-change amendment with no substantive regulatory burden. Deleting it would create administrative confusion by reverting to an already-passed deadline (2024) and leave the underlying digital reporting framework in limbo. While the underlying digital reporting requirements merit separate scrutiny, this particular SI merely adjusts a timeline and imposes no new costs.

This Order indexation-adjusts tax relief amounts for qualifying care relief under the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005. For tax year 2024-25 onwards, it increases: the fixed amount in s.808(2) to £19,360; the weekly amount for adults in s.811(1A) to £485; the weekly amount for children under 11 in s.811(2)(a) to £405; and the weekly amount for older children in s.811(2)(b) to £485. These are routine inflation adjustments to prevent fiscal drag on care providers.

Without indexation, these relief amounts would erode in real terms due to inflation, effectively increasing the tax burden on care providers (foster carers, shared lives carers) and reducing the net compensation for those undertaking vital care work. This would likely reduce the supply of care provision over time. If the State has chosen to provide this relief, allowing it to be progressively undermined by inflation through non-indexation imposes compounding unseen costs on the care sector and those who rely on it.

These Regulations amend the Customs Tariff (Preferential Trade Arrangements) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 to incorporate the UK's accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) into the preferential tariff framework. They add CPTPP to the Table of applicable trade agreements, referencing CPTPP Preferential Tariff v1.1 and CPTPP Origin Reference Document v1.1, both dated 30th September 2024. The Regulations require the Secretary of State to publish notice of when the Accession Protocol enters into force for the UK.

These Regulations implement the UK's accession to CPTPP, a free trade agreement that reduces tariffs on British exports to 11 Pacific nations (Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam). Deletion would mean British exporters face higher tariffs in these markets, UK consumers pay more for imported goods, and the UK's post-Brexit trade diversification strategy would be thwarted. Unlike EU single market rules, CPTPP is a traditional preferential trade arrangement based on comparative advantage rather than regulatory harmonisation.

This Order amends the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (References to Financial Investigators) (England and Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2021 to expand the list of public bodies and должностных уровней authorized to act as accredited financial investigators. It adds new departments (Cabinet Office, Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology) and agencies (Environment Agency, Food Standards Agency, Security Industry Authority) to various tables governing confiscation, search and seizure, civil recovery, cryptoasset forfeiture, and money laundering powers. The Order also corrects a cross-reference error in Table 2 (section 216(3)(c)).

While this regulation expands the list of agencies with financial investigation powers, deleting it would hamper legitimate crime-fighting efforts. The changes primarily reflect machinery of government changes (new departments created since the 2021 Order) and add agencies with clear law enforcement roles (Security Industry Authority, Food Standards Agency, Environment Agency). The Proceeds of Crime Act framework is fundamental to recovering criminal assets and tackling serious crime including terrorism and organized crime. Without these amendments, newly restructured departments would lack statutory authority to conduct financial investigations, creating gaps in enforcement that could benefit criminals. The cryptoasset provisions represent necessary updates to address modern crimefighting needs rather than unwarranted regulatory expansion.