The Commission's work generated considerable positive publicity in the general media and even more debate in the legal press. Much of the publicity in the general media focused on various demonstration rewrites that the Commission included in its reports—the classic:

• "before" draft in traditional legal language; and

• "after" draft in clear language that makes sense.

Those sorts of rewrites make good radio.

As the debate flowed on (it never really raged), clients started asking the Law Reform Commission to rewrite legal documents in plain language. At that stage, I had been working at the Commission as a research solicitor for nearly a year. I ended up running a small—very small—business for the Commission that provided document-rewriting services for clients: mainly financial services organizations. (Self-funding law reform we liked to call it.)

At about the same time, some of the legislative drafting offices in Australia began moving forward on the plain-language front. Some of them have done wonderful things, as we'll see later in this paper.

5.5 Some plain-language developments around the world

There's much happening with plain language internationally—for example:

• In the US, plain language has long had a high profile in law schools— many of them offer a legal writing subject that, at least in part, focuses on clear communication. A great deal of the early research on clear written communication was done in the US by the Document Design Centre in Washington DC, much of it under the direction of Dr Janice "Ginny" Redish. But the highlight so far has been President Clinton's Memorandum on Plain Language directing all Executive Departments and Agencies to use plain language. The President's Memorandum was issued on June 1 1998—a red-letter day for plain language everywhere.¹³