My Submission on the Plain Language Act Repeal Bill

13 May 2025

I strongly oppose repealing the Plain Language Act 2022. Here’s why.

Let’s not go backward on communication

​I am a self-employed technical writer, and I train people how to write clearly so anyone can understand what they read. The best way to do this is to teach people how to use plain language. I understand first-hand the value of writing clear, accessible communication. It’s what I do for my job, and it inspired my work in local government years ago – writing clear information so people could understand what the council was doing, and then have their say.

​The Plain Language Act helps us build a more inclusive and efficient country

Requiring plain language in government ensures:

• Everyone can understand what their government is doing
• People have the tools to participate and be heard
• Services run more smoothly
• Time and money aren’t wasted on fixing unclear messages

Repealing the Plain Language Act sends the wrong message

Let’s do better, not less.

Like our elected officials, plain language is about serving people. That means everyone, not only the confident or the well-connected. It’s basic respect, not red tape or a burden.

Rather than amend the Plain Language Act to address what they perceive as administrative “burdens”, the government proposes to repeal the Act entirely.

Repealing the Act tells people that it’s okay for government information to be confusing. That being inclusive is optional. That clarity and transparency don’t matter.
​
That’s not the New Zealand I want.

​The Plain Language Act ensures communication is easy for everyone to understand

​The Plain Language Act gives government agencies a clear, practical duty – communication must be easy to understand the first time people read it. The compliance requirements in the Act keep agencies accountable for clear communication with all New Zealanders. Without accountability, there’s no incentive for agencies to make plain language a priority.

​Plain language improves participation, inclusion, and trust

Participation

• People understand what’s going on
• They can act on it (or get help if they need it)
• They don’t feel left out, confused, or overwhelmed

​When people understand what the government is saying, they’re more likely to take part and share their views. That’s how we get better, fairer decisions.

When I was a council planner, clear communication lead to more people making submissions and attending meetings and hearings. Not only the usual few. People who wouldn’t normally speak up did, because they understood the information.

Inclusion
Plain language helps everyone understand information more easily, and especially people:

• With disabilities
• With lower literacy
• Who are not native English speakers
• Under pressure – dealing with stress, trauma, bureaucracy, or big life changes

 
Trust
If the government wants to build public trust, using plain language is critical. It’s one of the simplest and most effective ways to do it. Trust in government doesn’t come from slogans. It comes from everyday actions that show respect, transparency, and fairness. One of the most immediate and visible ways to do that is through the language government uses to speak to people. Using plain language tells people: you matter, and we want you to understand what’s going on.

​Transparency and clarity are the foundations of good government

Despite the clear benefits to using plain language, the repeal bill argues the Plain Language Act compliance requirements create unnecessary administrative burdens.

I disagree.

The idea that clarity and transparency create an unnecessary burden misunderstands the role of public service. Clear, accessible communication is not a “nice to have.” It’s a core part of how government earns trust, delivers services, and supports democracy.

Accountability is critical for better communication
Without clear compliance requirements, government agencies will revert to jargon and complex language. This will leave more citizens confused and disengaged.

The Act’s compliance requirements encourages agencies to reflect on how they communicate. This greatly benefits the public because it:

• Leads to continuous improvement in clarity and accessibility
• Saves taxpayers’ money by reducing misunderstandings
• Ensures government decisions are based on clear, easy to understand information

​
The Act keeps agencies accountable through reporting
The Act requires agencies to have one Plain Language Officer to report to the government once a year, and to keep track of complaints. The agencies’ Plain Language Officers were already employees who added the plain language officer tasks to their existing roles. This can hardly be considered an administrative burden for the agencies.

​Plain language saves time and money

Plain language saves time and money because agencies write less, better.

I’ve seen it. I’ve done it as a council planner and in private business. When writing is clear and concise, things get done faster and better.

• Fewer mistakes
• Fewer edits
• Fewer emails back and forth
• Fewer support calls
• Less time fixing confusion

​The research backs it up

Dr Jan Feld (Victoria University), Corinna Lines (Write Group Ltd), and Libby Ross (Write Group Ltd) found that using plain language helps everyone understand what they read. Their research highlights that professors, students, and the general public all understand things better when it’s written plainly. Read about their research here: 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268123004225

The Plain Language Act helps us build a more inclusive and efficient country

• Everyone can understand what their government is doing
• People have the tools to participate and be heard
• Services run more smoothly
• Time and money aren’t wasted on fixing unclear messages

​I want to make the following recommendations

1. Do not repeal the Plain Language Act 2022. Clarity and transparency is central to how governments should work. If it is repealed, all the savings based on faster writing, fewer mistakes, and less time fixing confusion will be lost. If it is repealed, it will be harder for people with disabilities, lower literacy, and limited English to understand government information. This will make it harder for them to access services, make decisions, or participate in government processes.
2. Carry out meaningful public consultation before repealing the Act. Specifically include the marginalised communities who rely on accessible language the most.
3. Require government agencies to use plain language, if the Act is repealed. There must be clear accountability built into the requirement, to ensure the public receives the clear and transparent communication they are entitled to.