Plain language proponents would have us believe that the adoption of plain language legislative drafting would result in legislation which would be clear and understandable to all who set eyes on it. Martin Cutts decision to incorporate a "Citizen's Summary" into his Clearer Timeshare Act³⁵ is significant. Could it possibly be interpreted as an admission that the nirvana of plain language legislation does not function as they would have us believe?³⁶

5. The Real Alternative to Plain Language in Legislative Drafting

The Function of Legislation
The calls for the adoption of plain language in legislative drafting arise from the contention that legislation is not entirely intelligible to ordinary readers. Francis Bennion³⁷ acknowledges that terms of art, references to legal rules and doctrines cannot be fully understood by non-experts in law, but likewise, he says, medical language cannot be fully understood by non-experts in medicine. A medical expert is more likely to refer to the "gastroscope" rather than the "tiny video camera". When a person is unfortunate enough to encounter a medical problem, she or he will invariably visit an expert in this field - a medical doctor. When a person encounters a difficulty involving a statute, what is so wrong with him/her taking it to an expert in the field - a lawyer? In Bennion's opinion, the primary audience of our laws are the lawyers and he says "Unless they are clear about the nature and characteristics of legislative texts there is not much chance that anyone else will be".³⁸ He goes on to suggest that we should not become overly concerned with adopting a plain language approach, rather we should be striving to make the law easier for lawyers to use.