That's why I loved "Yes Minister and Yes Minister," when Humphrey went into his diatribe, and it became a game for me to try and understand, and taking some pleasure in doing it but this is exactly what was happening.

M-hmmn.

Didn't Bob Rae, when he was in government, didn't he spend several million dollars hiring somebody to clarify litigation at one point?

He may very well have, though I'm afraid he was in government before I started in plain language so I don't have contact with that. Although you know it's funny because one of the things I'm finding is that, regardless of what we feel about the politics of the *current* government, I'm finding that the way that they speak directly to the consumer on TV--you know, for example the ads they have out about the education system, the newsletters that they put out--very clear and easy to understand. Very very directed towards the consumer. But I wouldn't have been surprised if Bob Rae was behind something like what you mention. It may not have lasted long enough.

I'll just say there have been some complaints about the spending for the ads of the money, but the message is clear. Whether Bob Rae did that or not, as I recall, because I do recall we did a little comedy sketch about it at the time. He came up with some sort of warm and comfy renaming of Ministries when he was in government. Instead of, you know, Solicitor General or Health Minister, it was, I dunno, I don't know what they did but it was very squishy and it wasn't very clear as the old-fashioned name for it. So I guess it went both ways under his regime.

Sandra thanks for your call. Hugh in Shelburne. Hugh?

Yes.

Hi. Who needs a lesson in plain language?

I was calling about the police, whose conversations tend to carry on like the bus you just missed. I find the way the police talk about people--like "the gentleman in question" etcetera--are so unrealistic and condescending it's incredible. I mean, the term "gentleman" would not be applied to most of the people they use it for.

Yeah. I guess "scumbag" wouldn't be appropriate.

Well no, but--"the man"--why does he have to be characterized as a gentleman? The biker who's up on charges for bombing, drug-dealing etcetera etcetera is certainly in no normal way can be construed as "gentleman." And to refer to him as such would be silly I think. And so often when they comment on the injuries suffered, I mean they go out of their way, have strange ways of describing it when plain language would do much better.