Talk:Statutory instrument (UK)

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

This article is wildly misleading in its opening statements. Not all subordinate legislation is found in statutory instruments, they are a particular kind of legislative instrument. The article appears to completely miss that point. Francis Davey 12:42, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the headnote so that it defines what an SI actually is. It might be useful to mention the statutory instruments reference committee and the Joint committe on SI's etc. Francis Davey 23:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparisons

It might be helpful if this article included some comparisons (or at least cross-references) to analogous delegated law-making processes in other legal systems, such as Presidential decrees in many countries, and rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act in the United States. 121a0012 20:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think any such comparison (and I agree one is needed) would be betetr placed in the delegated legislation article. Dmvward (talk) 12:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Verification

This is actually a very well written article and is higly accurate. The sources provided at the bottom of the page confirm most of the information on the page itself. I don't understand why there is a notice at the top of the page asking for verification? Captainj 09:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The template was added some time ago because the lead section was thought to be misleading. I have amended it as requested and removed the template. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section was misleading, although you have done a very good job in making it less so (well done). What this article needs to do is say what makes an SI different from other kinds of secondary legislation, so that it is clear that regulations made under an act and/or orders may be SI's but do not have to be. The paragraph beginning "the most frequent use..." is rubbish; would anyone mind if I removed it? Francis Davey 10:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'do not have to be' Examples? Esthameian 07:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

International

Given that, as the Article itself admits, not just the UK has Statutory Instruments shouldn't it be either be more generalised or renamed to Statutory Instrument (United Kingdom). Caveat lector 17:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that might be a good idea. An article on Statutory Instruments in Great Britain might be sensible. Northern Ireland does not have statutory instruments, maybe a UK article could include statutory rules in NI. Unfortunately I know nothing about SI's in other countries so we might need input there. Francis Davey 18:58, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major rewrite

I have done a major rewrite of this article with the aim of improving both content and structure. Dmvward (talk) 12:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Box

Why does the box list 2011 twice? and why can't it be edited?andycjp (talk) 10:47, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the link (it should have been 2010) in the template {{British legislation lists}}, but I don't know if such a template should have an integral edit link, or how to add one. Does anybody else? DavidWard ^talk

Move

Could someone revert the move to Statutory Instrument (Great Britain)? This is wildly confusing as. UK SI's are almost always produced by the UK Parliament and will often have UK wide scope. There may be a case for A Great Britain specific page, but this isn't it and I doubt it. The move was not discussed at all. Francis Davey (talk) 16:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Statutory instrument (UK). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060321194653/http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2005-June/078935.html to http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/2005-June/078935.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:04, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]