I oppose repealing the Plain Language Act.
Here’s an abridged version of my submission on the proposed repeal of the Plain Language Act.
I wanted to highlight how small the so-called ‘administrative burden’ really is—and how large the benefits of plain language are for government, staff, and the public. The Act sends a powerful signal about the value of clear, accessible communication in public service.
I oppose repealing the Plain Language Act.
The thinking behind the repeal is that the Act places an administrative burden on government agencies. That burden is small, but the benefit of plain language is huge, so I encourage you to keep the Act.
I think the Act is a wonderful statement to government workers of the value of accessible, clear communication.
What's the administrative burden?
Each agency has a plain language officer. This is such a small 'administrative burden' that not a single agency employed a person to be a plain language officer. Every officer was already an employee and got the title of plain language officer as an add-on to their job. So clearly it's less than one full-time employee per agency.
The officer has to report to the public service commissioner. But this only happens once a year. They have to keep track of any complaints from the public. Again, this is such a small administrative burden that it's barely a ripple in the overall government bureaucracy.
What's the benefit of plain language in a government context?
It helps government workers clarify their thinking as they clarify their writing. It makes their work better.
It aligns beautifully with the idea of public service. Giving people information they can easily read, understand, and act on is a respectful and sensible way to serve the public.
It allows more citizens to access the information they need to understand their rights, entitlements, and responsibilities.
It saves government workers time (and therefore money) in the publication process overall: writing, reviewing, and sign-off. An agreed definition of 'good writing', which the Act provides, speeds up writing, reviewing, and publication.
It saves government workers time (and money!) in dealing with confused citizens. Information in plain language means fewer phone calls and emails from people who need help accessing information or services. This is not a minor point. In a project where they measured the time and money saved, a NZ government agency used plain language to rewrite just one frequently used form that had a 100% failure rate. The new form saved 50,000 staff hours, which at the time meant saving $1.5 million a year in salaries.
What benefit is there to having this Act?
The Act adds social pressure.
As a voice from the coal face, I can assure you that knowing how to write clearly doesn't mean people do it. Knowing why to write clearly doesn't achieve lasting change either.
People seeing change happen around them and feeling social pressure to join in is what creates a lasting organisational change in writing style.
Having the Act helps government workers feel more comfortable joining in with that change. The Act is a mandate to let go of the heavy writing style workers see around them.
#PlainLanguage
