SPRING 2014
FMI
*
IGF JOURNAL
17
Where the gobbledygook flows naturally
Roger Collier
A friend of mine who works for
the federal government often asks
me for help when writing a report.
Why wouldn’t she? I am, after all, a
professional arranger of words and an
expert on even the most obscure rules of
English grammar. (Example: “i” before
“e” except after Labour Day.)
Our discussions sometimes get
heated. I love short, clear sentences.
There is beauty in simplicity. But my
friend tends to favour longer sentences.
She also likes to generously sprinkle in
acronyms and jargon. Of course, it’s not
really her fault.
You write what you read. After years
in the public service, the “sound” of
terrible government writing is lodged in
her brain. It is only natural that similar
gobbledygook flows from her fingers.
Several years back, when I worked
for the federal government, the thing
I noticed most about documents was
the redundancy. Words were repeated
many times within sentences. Sentences
repeated content from previous
paragraphs. So much redundancy. So.
Much. Redundancy.
When my superiors learned of my
ability to place nouns and verbs in semi-
coherent order, I was asked to edit a
manual of office procedures. Oh, what
fun. Every sentence a 50-word monster
in need of major pruning. Every page a
bloated mess that could be summed up
in a paragraph.
To illustrate, let’s play a game of Spot
the Repeating Word in Public Sector
Prose (SRWPSP).
From National Defence: “Although
there are some areas where the military
justice system and the grievance system
can benefit from improvements, overall
the system is operating well.”
Which system, exactly, is operating
well? The first system? The second
system? Both systems? We need a
system to systematically systematize all
these systems.
In fairness, that sentence isn’t half-bad.
I perused other government websites
and found absolute monstrosities.
Consider this eye-glazer from the
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:
“The IT modernization strategy calls
for the standardization and consolidation
of administrative IT systems in the back
office across the Government of Canada
as the principal means of freeing up
existing departmental IT resources
so that these may be redirected to
the renewal of departmental aging
mission-critical systems, consistent with
departmental plans.”
Wow. Where to begin? It’s too long
(52 words). It has a repeating word
(“departmental”). It has an acronym
(“IT,” also repeated three times). It has
ridiculous buzzwords (“modernization,”
“standardization”) and the hilarious
phrase “departmental aging mission-
critical systems.”
Now take a look at this beast,
courtesy of Environment Canada:
“Having identified energy efficiency
as a key priority, the Energy Sector
Sustainability Table (ESST) established
the Energy Efficiency Working Group
(EEWG) to provide expert advice and
recommendations on how governments,
working with other key players, could
transform the market so that Canada
could become a leader in energy
efficiency.”
Maybe several other “key players”
should form another “working group” to
identify sentence “efficiency” as a “key
priority.” At very least, some irrelevant
players in a non-working group could
identify unimportant priorities.
Then there are sentences free of
acronyms and triplicated words but so
vague they leave you baffled. Like this
one from Industry Canada:
“The firm may be contemplating
stakeholder engagement to better
understand its impacts, to help
articulate its values, mission, strategy,
commitments and implementation, to
facilitate a regulatory approvals process,
to participate in measurement and
reporting, to avert or solve a crisis, or to
proactively improve relationships.”
Ever wonder how to say nothing in
only 45 words? See above.
Writing in the government has
actually improved a lot, my friend tells
me. The higher-ups insist that reports
be written in plain language. That
language, apparently, is Klingon.
I offer two practical suggestions to help
bureaucrats present information in a way
that is easier to understand and more
likely to be retained. Run everything
you write through a readability test.
Your word processor probably has one.
If not, use a free online test. It will give
you various readability metrics, and your
goal is to lower those numbers.
The average number of words
per sentence in this column (minus
government bunkum): 10. Reading
grade level: 8.
The average number of words per
sentence in the body text of “Report
Material reprinted with the express
permission of: Ottawa Citizen, a
division of Postmedia Network Inc.
