Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE

TOO INVOLVED FOR LAYMEN. i [SPECIAL TO "STAR.”] WELLINGTON, November 11. It is a constant source of mystery that the legislation of New Zealand should be couched in the most obscure language lexicographers can provide. The result almost invariably is that the task of interpretation is a harassing problem to the lay mind, particularly when, for newspaper purposes, two hours are available for a construction for a preparation of which the trained legal mind would demand at least a day. From time to time efforts have been made to induce Governments to insist upon simp,l6l' and more readily understandable method of expression, but nothing has come of them. From the terms of a reply Mr Forbes gave in the House yesterday, it would appear that the same fate is ahead of a suggestion by Mr Fraser, that it might be possible to get away from the orthodox archaic phraseology of measures presented to the House. Mr Frasei* inquired whether the provisions of the National Expenditure Adjustment Amendment Bill were couched in simpler language than the terms of those in the main act. “It is legal language,” replied the Prime Minister. “I don’t know whether you would term that simple.”

Mr Fraser: No, not in my most rash moments.

He pointed out that when the principal act was before the House, the Minister of Finance had stated he did not know the meaning of one clause. The result of the obscurity of the legislation had been that hundreds of people had not been aware they were entitled to relief under the legislation. Even solicitors had been puzzled by some of the terms of the Act, which had provided a rich harvest for the legal profession. Mr Forbes said the intricate provisions of legislation were difficult for the layman to understand, but he claimed they had been ably handled by the law draftsmen. It had to be remembered that this particular legislation broke entirely fresh ground, introducing new principles of law. The draftsmen were able men, and lawyers, and other had considered they had made a wonderful success of their difficult tusk.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GEST19321112.2.19

Bibliographic details

Greymouth Evening Star, 12 November 1932, Page 5

Word Count
352

PARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE Greymouth Evening Star, 12 November 1932, Page 5

PARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE Greymouth Evening Star, 12 November 1932, Page 5