Related News
MPs say "officialese" should be grounds for complaint
Source: Agencies |
November 30, 2009, Monday
|
Online Edition
Online Edition
PEOPLE should be encouraged to complain about confusing and misleading government language, especially when it hinders access to public services, members of parliament said today.
The Public Administration Committee said one study had found that difficulty in completing forms was one of the main reasons why pensioners did not apply for benefits available to them.
"Long, complex official forms, officious letters and confusing requests for information can all deter individuals from attempting to deal with public authorities," it said.
It cited a letter from HM Revenue and Customs as an example of baffling government syntax:
"Thank you for your Tax Returns ... which we received on 20th December. I will treat your Tax Return for all purposes as though you sent it in response to a notice from us which required you to deliver it to us by the day we received it."
Despite frequent criticism of incomprehensible "officialese", the committee said there was no obvious way for people to highlight examples of it.
"The use of inaccurate, confusing or misleading official language which results in tangible harm, such as preventing individuals from receiving benefits or public services, should be regarded as maladministration," it said.
It said people should be encouraged to complain directly to the public body concerned, which should take the issue seriously. Failure to do so would provide grounds for people to complain to the relevant ombudsman.
"Good government requires good language," the committee said. "Bad language is a sign of poor government."
The Public Administration Committee said one study had found that difficulty in completing forms was one of the main reasons why pensioners did not apply for benefits available to them.
"Long, complex official forms, officious letters and confusing requests for information can all deter individuals from attempting to deal with public authorities," it said.
It cited a letter from HM Revenue and Customs as an example of baffling government syntax:
"Thank you for your Tax Returns ... which we received on 20th December. I will treat your Tax Return for all purposes as though you sent it in response to a notice from us which required you to deliver it to us by the day we received it."
Despite frequent criticism of incomprehensible "officialese", the committee said there was no obvious way for people to highlight examples of it.
"The use of inaccurate, confusing or misleading official language which results in tangible harm, such as preventing individuals from receiving benefits or public services, should be regarded as maladministration," it said.
It said people should be encouraged to complain directly to the public body concerned, which should take the issue seriously. Failure to do so would provide grounds for people to complain to the relevant ombudsman.
"Good government requires good language," the committee said. "Bad language is a sign of poor government."
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
