Too often troubled by impenetrable government communications, PoO was surprised to learn the statute books contains a law called the Plain Language Act.
Its purpose is to promote the use of plain language among public service agencies and Crown agents to improve the accessibility of public documents.
We had not been paying attention when this bill was passed in 2022, apparently.
We were even more surprised, however, to learn the government is promoting a bill to repeal the Plain Language Act.
But if the Maori Party has its way – according to our reading of Hansard – all government documents will be doubled in size, one half in English and one half in te reo.
Maybe a half of all parliamentary debates will be conducted in te reo, too, and before each vote is counted, a robust haka will be compulsory.
But, more immediately, will repeal of the Plain Language Act promote economic growth – the government’s over-riding policy priority?
And will it curb government spending – another policy objective?
Unlikely, according to the consensus of opinion at PoO before we read the record of the first reading debate in Hansard.
But the government has mustered an argument that money will be saved by getting rid of plain language enforcers.
We learned of the repeal from the IHC, which says this will mark a major step backwards for people with intellectual disability to easily access important information.
In its submission to the Governance and Administration Committee, IHC says that people with intellectual disability benefit from plain language, as they are among those most likely to be assessed as having low literacy in reading and writing.
In this Act, plain language means language that is appropriate to the intended audience; and clear, concise, and well organised.
Dr Nicolina Newcombe, IHC’s Inclusion Advisor, says the use of plain language helps people with intellectual disability to understand complex information.
We were even more surprised, however, to learn the government is promoting a bill to repeal the Plain Language Act.
But if the Maori Party has its way – according to our reading of Hansard – all government documents will be doubled in size, one half in English and one half in te reo.
Maybe a half of all parliamentary debates will be conducted in te reo, too, and before each vote is counted, a robust haka will be compulsory.
But, more immediately, will repeal of the Plain Language Act promote economic growth – the government’s over-riding policy priority?
And will it curb government spending – another policy objective?
Unlikely, according to the consensus of opinion at PoO before we read the record of the first reading debate in Hansard.
But the government has mustered an argument that money will be saved by getting rid of plain language enforcers.
We learned of the repeal from the IHC, which says this will mark a major step backwards for people with intellectual disability to easily access important information.
In its submission to the Governance and Administration Committee, IHC says that people with intellectual disability benefit from plain language, as they are among those most likely to be assessed as having low literacy in reading and writing.
In this Act, plain language means language that is appropriate to the intended audience; and clear, concise, and well organised.
Dr Nicolina Newcombe, IHC’s Inclusion Advisor, says the use of plain language helps people with intellectual disability to understand complex information.
“Plain language also saves time and money. Since the Act was introduced, many agencies have taken positive steps to improve the quality of government communication. To repeal the Act now risks the undoing of all the gains. Experience shows that in a fiscally constrained environment, anything not mandated is at risk of being de-prioritised. If necessary, the Act could be revised, to increase its practical impact.”
Penny Simmonds, on behalf of Public Service Minister Judith Collins, introduced the Plain Language Repeal Bill early in April. Paradoxically, she demonstrated a talent for speaking in plain language:
I move, That the Plain Language Act Repeal Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Governance and Administration Committee to consider the bill.
This bill repeals the Plain Language Act 2022. The purpose of the bill is threefold. It repeals an ineffective Act, it removes an unnecessary compliance burden on Public Service agencies, and it ensures Government resources can be used more efficiently.
PoO imagines very few of our readers will struggle to work out what she said.
Simmonds went on:
Clear communication with the public is important, so let me be very clear; put it in plain language if you will. We are calling on an Act implemented by the Labour Government in 2022 that created a problem where there wasn’t one. It is yet another example of wasteful spending on bureaucracy that Labour is so fond of, but that this Government has no time for. Time is money, and at a time when many people are doing it tough, we want to make sure that taxpayer money is spent on the things that actually matter, things that grow our economy. Appointing plain language officers, as this Act requires, grows nothing but bureaucracy.
It is an example of Government overreach. You cannot legislate for or against something that is subjective in nature and open to interpretation. That’s why we would never know whether the Plain Language Act 2022 resulted in a meaningful improvement in communication. The only clear outcome is that it placed an unnecessary administrative constraint on Public Service, and it created a box-ticking exercise for agencies. Government agencies should always communicate in an easy-to-understand language, and it is the Government’s expectation that agencies always strive for and uphold the highest standards of communication.
But it is a mistake to think that laws can fix every problem. As much as we would like people to make good choices, it is not something you can achieve with legislation. Plain language is achieved through clear thinking, commitment, and common sense. It is the responsibility of every public servant to communicate using clear, easy-to-comprehend language. It doesn’t take a plain language officer to know that gobbledygook and word salads mean nothing to anyone.
And:
The Plain Language Act 2022 cannot make these things happen. The Act has not fixed a problem, it has created a problem. The Public Service has better things to do than appointing plain language officers, producing guidance documents, and reporting to someone on something that is unclear. The Government is determined to spend taxpayer money more efficiently. The Plain Language Act 2022 has created unnecessary activity, unnecessary compliance, and an unnecessary use of resources. Repealing this Act cuts red tape and will allow the Public Service to get on with what really matters: delivering services for the people of New Zealand.
Labour’s Camilla Bellich retorted that the Government should focus on the things that New Zealanders really care about: jobs, health, homes, and the cost of living
No matter what the other side says, it does not impose a lot of red tape. One of the criticisms is that there’s no legislative enforcement in a court of law, but still this petty, small-minded Government chooses to repeal it, when they could easily be focused on the things that matter.
Speaking for the Maori Party, Hana Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke pitched her thinking about plain language to the small percentage of people who speak te reo.
She said:
Tēnā rā koe e te Pika, otirā tēnā rā tātou e te Whare. E tū ana ahau ki te waha i ngā kōrero mō Te Pāti Māori i te rangi nei mō tēnei o ngā Pire arā ko te Plain Language Repeal Bill. Engari i roto i tōku ake reo, in my first language, ka kōrero katoatia au i roto i te reo Māori nā i runga anō i tēnei mea kua tino kite au i ngā tāmitanga o tēnei kāwana ki tōku ake reo. Kua kite ahau i ngā mea e tāmitia i tōku ake reo, nā reira he āhua uaua ki te kite i tēnei momo mea te Plain Language Repeal Bill nā runga anō i te mea ko tēnei momo Pire kua kite i roto i te kotahi rau rā o tēnei kāwanatanga.
Kua kite i ngā kupu kua whakaparahakotia, kua hāmene, nō reira, āe, he āhua uaua ki a au. Nā runga anō i te mea, ko tōku reo tuatahi ko te reo Māori. Nō reira ko taku whakareanga, ko te nuinga o tō tātou reanga, ko tō mātou reo tuatahi ko te reo Māori. Nō reira, āe, te plain language i roto i tō koutou reo, engari pēwhea mō tōku ake reo. Koirā te tino pātai e pātaitia nei e au. Āe, mō tō koutou reo, engari pēwhea mō tōku reo Mō tōku reo, mō ngā reanga? Tahi miriona o tātou kei te haramai, ko te manako ia ka tae mai ētehi atu o taku reanga ki roto i tēnei Whare.
Engari, me te mea anō hoki, mōhio ana au ehara tēnei kaupapa i te kaupapa tino hohonu. Engari, ko taku whaea, karani, ko Hana Te Hemara tērā, i kawea mai te petihana reo Māori ki tēnei ake whare i roto i te tau tahi mano, iwa rau, whitu tekau mā rua. Ko tana petihana ko te whakaū i te reo Māori hei reo tūturu mō tēnei whenua. Nō reira, koirā tā māua whakaaro mō tēnei pire. Āe, mōhio pū ana ahau ehara i te mea me tino, kāore au i te mōhio ki te tino kupu, enagri he aha te kupu Māori mō te bureaucrat? Aua. Engari mō ngā kupu, me kī ao mātauranga nei, āe e tautokotia ana i tērā. Me mārama te katoa, mē mārama te katoa, āe, me whakatairanga i te reo, i ngā kupu e mārama ana i tō mātou reanga, i tō mātou ahurea engari me mana ōrite ngā mea e rua. Mēnā ko te reo Māori te reo tūturu o tēnei whenua me mana ōrite. Kāore anō au kua tino kite i tēnei reo e kaha kite ana i roto i tēnei pire. Nō reira koirā taku āwangawanga ki tēnei—
Those 452 words have been translated in the Hansard record to 388 English words:
Greetings to you Mr Speaker, greetings to all in the House. I stand to voice the position of the Māori Party today about this bill, the Plain Language Repeal Bill. But I will do so in my language, in my first language, I will speak only te reo Māori as I have witnessed the oppression by this Government of my language. I have seen the things that oppress my language, so I find it difficult seeing things like the Plain Language Repeal Bill, as I have seen this type of bill within the first 100 days of this Government.
I have seen the words that are offensive and penalising, so therefore, yes this is difficult for me. Due to the fact that my first language is the Māori language. My generation, for most of us the Māori language is our first language. So, plain language, in your language, but how about in my language? This is the genuine question I am asking. Yes, in your language it is fine, but what about my language? My language for my generation? There will be one million of my generation soon, and the hope is that some will enter this House.
I know that this issue may seem mundane and not too profound, but it was my grand aunt Hana Te Hemara who carried the Māori language petition to this house in 1972. Her petition’s aim was to affirm the Māori language as an authentic language of this land. Therefore, that is our opinion with respect to this bill. I am conscious that there may not be a pressing—what is the correct word, in the language for bureaucrat? I am unsure, but in terms of the words, of the academic world, I support that. Everyone should understand what is being said and that the language should be promoted, and the use of words that my generation understands, our culture, but that it should be equitable with respect to both languages. The Māori language is the authentic language and should be treated equally. I am still not seeing this language in this bill. That is my concern—
Where is the bill about equality for the Māori language? This is our stance and our position with respect to this bill. Yes, everyone but my generation understands the Plain Language Repeal Bill.
So – twice as much documentation, if equality for the Maori language means what we suspect it does. And twice as much cost.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
4 comments:
Penny Simmonds says, "You cannot legislate for or against something that is subjective in nature and open to interpretation".
You can in some instances. How about repealing the Treaty of Waitangi Act and Bill of Rights Act? The government could also repeal legislation behind the Human Rights Commission and all the arts funders who cancel Shakespeare and instead give money to Tama Iti and Samoan poets who fantasize about stabbing white people.
If one did a cost/benefit analysis of having TPM in Parliament the conclusion would be a resounding "why the hell bother?" It is a complete waste of time, effort and money for a nil return!
Not only twice as many words, but twice as much flim-flam and pointless emotional outpouring. How the double use of English and maori will help makes no sense when hardly anyone uses or understands maori (or even wants to) and everyone (plus millions elsewhere in the world) use English. This is grandstanding by a minority who, if they want their language preserved, then need to do it themselves, as the Greeks did when under Turkish hegemony.
A Maori lexicon of about 500 words, a short alphabet , a previously unwritten language, and they are going to keep fabricating new words, grammar, punctuation to reflect the modern world ?
Get real !!!
And to make it the primary language and signage is just stunningly daft.
For example, creating new words to replace a sign currently saying
" Escalator to Platform 3" in te reo, making it larger than the English version. Then PA announcements in fabricated Maori, addressing virtually nobody who understands these words.
Ludicrous virtue signaling that should have left the room with Comrade Ardern.
More bloody appeasement and feel good for the people we appointed ( and the non elected Maori they appointed ).
I despair at the naivety of them, the massive problems they are deliberately creating for this generation and all subsequent ones.
Do they read Breaking Views ?
or are they waiting for a te reo version ?
Post a Comment