 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
   |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Plain English ManualChapter 5 - Aids to understandingSTRUCTURE Arranging the provisions 102. Even when the words and sentences in a Bill are clear, it’s more difficult to understand if the provisions aren’t properly arranged. Arrange your Bill so that the relationship between provisions is as clear as possible. If the reader can see a pattern in the provisions, the details are easier to understand. 103. These are some ways of improving the arrangement of a Bill:
Grouped amendments 104. An amending Bill can be made easier to understand by grouping the amendments according to subject matter, instead of just following the order of the sections in the Principal Act. If the same provision is being amended for different purposes and the amendments commence on the same day, make them commence in sequence, one immediately after the other. Specifying the topics 105. Research has shown that text is easier to understand if the overall topic is specified at the beginning. If the reader has a mental picture of the whole proposition, it’s easier to see the significance of the parts and the way they relate to each other, and it’s easier to concentrate on the details. 106. On the other hand, without a topic specifier, the reader has to construct a mental picture by absorbing details one at a time and fitting them together. This makes it much harder to understand the significance of the details before the whole picture is in mind. It’s like doing a jigsaw puzzle when you don’t have the picture on the box. 107. Headings are excellent topic specifiers. You can increase the number of headings in several ways:
Avoid slabs of unbroken text 108. Large slabs of unbroken text are particularly daunting to the reader. A rough guide is the “5 line rule” : don’t have a slab of unbroken text more than 5 lines long, unless you feel you can’t avoid it. 109. The traditional style allowed only one sentence in each subsection or undivided section. This often resulted in very long sentences. Consider using 2 or even 3 sentences when appropriate, but don’t use more than 3 unless you have a very good reason. Multiple sentences can raise problems with cross references. 110. It’s usually better to break a slab of text into separate subsections, each containing only one sentence. This results in short subsections, each expressing a single idea. It also helps in cross referencing. If you use the “narrative” style (see “Back references in Associated Provisions”, paragraphs 88 91), separate subsections don’t add much to the total number of words. 111. On the other hand, a single complex proposition expressed in a string of short sentences or subsections can sometimes be more difficult to understand if the reader has to reconstruct the whole proposition before it makes sense. If the reader must carry several ideas in mind at once in order to grasp a single proposition, consider saying it in a single sentence, with appropriate paragraphing to make the structure clear. Limiting the number of subsections in a section 112. A page full of subsections without headings to break them up is very daunting to the reader. On the other hand, a page broken up into several sections, each with a heading, is more friendly and reassuring to the reader. The sections are easier to find, and the headings help to show what they’re about. 113. It’s impracticable to lay down a rule as to the maximum number of subsections for a section. As a rough guide, try to have at least 2 section headings on each page. Subsection headings 114. If you keep sections short, you shouldn’t need subsection headings. However, consider using them when you’re amending a very long section or when the structure of an existing Act forces you to insert a very long section. 115. Subsection headings should be in italics (not bolded) so that they look different from section headings, and they shouldn’t be enclosed in brackets. 116. If you use subsection headings, keep to these rules:
Paragraphing 117. Dividing a long provision into paragraphs (or subparagraphs, in the case of a paragraph) is a useful way to make the grammatical structure of the provision easy to see at first glance. The reader can concentrate on its meaning without having to decipher its grammatical structure at the same time. 118. Paragraphing is a particularly useful way of dealing with a long list of conditions, exceptions, etc qualifying the main proposition. 119. However, don’t overdo it. Often a provision is divided into a long or complex series of paragraphs just to be able to avoid repeating a few common words that apply to each case. If the paragraphing is too elaborate, consider dividing the provision into separate subsections and repeating the common words in each subsection. The result will be longer, but easier to understand. 120. If a provision with paragraphs is long and complicated, consider moving some of the introductory words into each paragraph, to help the reader see how the paragraphs fit into the structure of the provision. 121. Don’t let your paragraphs result in “shredding”, ie unnecessarily interrupting the normal flow of the sentence. This is a logical way to express the idea “if a or b, and c or d, then e ...”. But it’s bad in the example because the paragraphs are so short that they’re not really necessary. On the other hand, a structure like this with long paragraphs is very hard to understand. Try to avoid it, or at least reduce its length, by putting each group of paragraphs in a separate section or subsection. 122. Try to avoid subparagraphs. Try extra hard to avoid sub subparagraphs. Use another subsection and start again. 123. When paragraphing, try to treat all the elements of the sentence in the same way. This is bad because paragraph (a) mixes a relative clause applying to the person with another applying to the licence. Both versions would be improved by treating all the elements as “if” clauses. 124. Try to ensure that all the paragraphs in a provision have similar grammatical construction. Tables 125. If you’re drafting a provision that has a lot of alternatives in it, consider doing it in the form of a table. 126. The traditional way of showing whether paragraphs are cumulative or alternative is to put “and” or “or” at the end of the second last paragraph. However, this means that, with very long provisions, the reader has to turn one or more pages to find out whether the paragraphs are cumulative or alternative. Also, untrained readers don’t always know that the “and” or “or” at the end of the second last paragraph applies to all the earlier paragraphs. 127. If you need to show whether paragraphs are cumulative or alternative, put “and” or “or” at the end of each one (but don’t mix “ands” and “ors” in the same string of paragraphs). 128. If there are a lot of short paragraphs, the “ands” or “ors” can look awkward. You can avoid using them altogether by dealing with the matter in the introductory words. 129. Sometimes it’s unnecessary to show whether the paragraphs are alternative or cumulative. The sense makes it clear, or it doesn’t matter which way they’re read. However if there’s any chance of confusion, make the meaning clear as described above. 130. Definitions are obviously independent, so there’s no need to include “ands” or “ors” at the ends. LAYOUT AND DOCUMENT DESIGN 131. Text is harder to understand if it’s hard to read. The printed format developed by the Office and the Government Printer is intended to make text easy to read by using different fonts, spacing between provisions, etc. Suggestions for improvement are welcome, but for reasons of uniformity, make your suggestions to First Parliamentary Counsel so that they can be adopted by the whole Office. CALCULATIONS AND PROCEDURES User friendly algebraic formulae 132. If a formula is relatively simple, it’s usually better to express the variables in words rather than symbols. The variables should be in bold type, with the first letter of the first word of each variable capitalised. 133. By using words this way you may not need to define the variables. If you have to define them, put the definitions in quotes, and use the word “means” rather than “is”. This gives greater consistency with the form for ordinary definitions, and also tells the Government Printer which words should be in bold type. 134. If the formula is so long or complicated that the variables (or some of them) can’t be expressed in words, use letters as symbols for the variables, but choose the initial letters of key words in the variables. This makes them easier to remember than the traditional “a, b, c” symbols. 135. However, if you use letters, make their significance clear by including in the definition of each variable, immediately after the letters concerned, the relevant words in parentheses. 136. When you insert new definitions of variables in a formula provision of an existing Act:
Calculations in steps 137. The traditional style expressed a calculation by describing it as a single proposition, eg “the sum of ... and ... less the amount by which so much of ... as exceeds ... is less than ...”. In more recent legislation it’s often expressed in an algebraic formula. However, you can sometimes express a complicated calculation more clearly by telling the reader to take a series of steps. The text is longer, but it’s usually easier to follow than the traditional method. Procedures in steps 138. Sometimes it’s clearer to describe a procedure in narrative form. DEFINITIONS Where to put them 139. As a general rule, put all definitions in the early clauses. Don’t put them in Parts unless you have a special reason to do so. Even when you amend an existing Part that contains definitions, use your discretion before adding further definitions to the Part. 140. If you have a lot of definitions, consider using an index of defined terms. 141. Definitions for a single clause can go in that clause. As a general rule, put them at the end. However, if the clause uses concepts that are meaningless without the definitions, put them at the beginning. 142. Sometimes in traditional drafting a clause defines a term for 2 neighbouring clauses only, eg “in sections 22 and 23, ‘X’ means ‘Y’.”. Avoid this if you can. Sign posts 143. If you put definitions in separate sub clauses of the definitions clause, or in separate provisions, put sign posts in to show where they are. 144. The “labels” of all defined terms should be printed in bold type when they’re first defined. This draws attention to the fact that they exist and makes them easier to find. 145. A definition should not be bold if it is merely referred to by way of a cross reference. 146. If a definition is bold, its quotes should also be bold. When you insert a new definition, the extra quotes at the beginning should not be bold. 147. It’s helpful to the reader to draw attention to the fact that some terms have been defined. Various ways have been suggested, including marking the terms wherever they appear in the text. So far we haven’t found a way of marking them without distracting the eye from the main text or causing other problems. Until we do, consider alerting the reader to the most important definitions by putting notes beneath the relevant provisions. Section headings: “Definitions” or “Interpretation”? 148. In Commonwealth traditional drafting there was some curious learning about sections containing definitions. If they had only “quotes” definitions, we had to call them “Definitions”. If they also had referential definitions, we had to call them “Interpretation”. Later we struck a blow for simplicity by calling them all “Interpretation”. However, “Definitions” is easier to understand. 149. If a whole section is devoted to defining a single term, it’s helpful to include the word “definition” in the section heading. Definitions within the sentence 150. The traditional form of internal definition is “(in this section referred to as ‘X’)”. You can shorten this by just saying “(‘X’)”. However, if this is ambiguous (eg when you’re using the same word with different meanings in different subsections of the same section), say “(in this subsection called ‘X’)”. Referential definitions 151. The traditional style expressed many definitions in the referential form eg (“a reference to X shall be read/construed as including a reference to Y”). This was done to catch grammatical variations of the defined word or phrase. Section 18A of the Acts Interpretation Act now makes this unnecessary in most cases. Where possible, use “quotes” definitions, because they’re much easier to find. 152. If you must use a referential definition, use the short form. 153. The traditional style of referential definition uses the introductory words “For the purposes of this (Act, section, etc)”. This is unnecessarily long. READABILITY AIDS Objects clauses 154. An objects clause that covers a whole new (ie non amending) Bill is usually too general to help in interpreting detailed provisions, but it’s still worth doing. It gives the reader a bird’s eye view of the Bill, and helps to show how the detailed provisions hang together. It therefore does more than the modern “long title”, which usually says as little as possible. 155. An objects clause for a whole amending Bill can do a valuable service for members of Parliament by giving them a general idea of what the Bill is trying to do. Textual amendments on their own give very little clue to their purpose. Whenever practicable, include an objects clause at the beginning of an amending Bill unless it’s divided into Parts. 156. An objects clause for a Part or Division is more useful than one for a whole Bill, because it can be more specific. Do this in new Bills whenever you can. Do it also in amending Bills divided into Parts. Road maps and summaries 157. In a long or complicated Bill, it’s useful to include one or more clauses telling the reader how the Bill works or where to find provisions, or outlining key provisions. 158. Consider using these clauses at the start of the Bill and also at the start of each Chapter or Part. Examples 159. Examples are an excellent way of illustrating the meaning of complex provisions. With the picture of the example in mind, the reader can return to the text and better understand the details and how they hang together. Examples can take many forms. 160. It’s not practicable to make rules on the cases when you should or shouldn’t use examples: use your discretion. However, remember that they’re not a substitute for clear text. Even if you use them, try to make the text as simple and clear as if there were no examples. Examples don’t define the rule, they merely illustrate it. Using examples to define the rule would result in a “wilderness of single instances”. 161. Examples must have the same effect as the text they illustrate. Also, when you amend a provision that has an example, check whether the example should be altered. 162. Section 15AD of the Acts Interpretation Act provides: 163. When you use examples, try not to disrupt the text. In the Social Security Act, they were put in the body of the text for special reasons. These included the great length of the Act and the fact that it was designed in self contained units, each to be read by people with particular needs in mind. As a general rule, put examples in a Schedule unless they’re short enough to be unobtrusive. If they’re in the Schedule, put a note in the text directing the reader to the Schedule. Graphics 164. Consider using graphics to illustrate complex ideas, even when they’re not examples in the strict sense. They can take many forms. Notes 165. You can put notes in the text to help understanding, by drawing attention to other provisions, definitions, etc. Use small type, so that you don’t disrupt the text. 166. Don’t make statements of law in notes. They should only provide information or explanations. Statements of law should be made only in the ordinary provisions of a Bill. Section headings in question form 167. It looks friendly to put the occasional section heading in the form of a question. However, it can be overdone. The question form can be irritating, because it narrows the scope of the headings. On the other hand, the non question form can use a key word or phrase that is capable of answering a variety of questions. Readers’ guides 168. If you’re drafting a very long or complex Bill, consider using a “Reader’s Guide” as in the Social Security Act 1991 or the Sales Tax Assessment Act 1992. Alphabetical indexes 169. If you’re drafting a long Bill, consider adding an alphabetical index at the end, identifying key concepts. |
| Copyright | Privacy | Disclaimer | Contact Us | Feedback | Search | Top |