Talk:Statutory instrument (UK)

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 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)
thread_title:  Comparisons 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: 'do not have to be'  Examples? Esthameian 07:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Verification

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  International 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Major rewrite 

message: 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)
thread_title: Move

message: 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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:04, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified