Policy writing | Peter Bridgman

Small errors can lead to big misunderstandings Chris Davis, who was sacked as assistant minister by Campbell Newman for speaking out on doctor’s contracts, political donations and changes to the Crime and Corruption Commission, wrote a piece in the Sydney Morning Herald asking “Can Cardinal Pell be judged by 21st century standards?” He tells a personal story of his education, intended to illustrate the effect of changing times and changing circumstances, autres temps, autres mœurs as he says. He wrote: My boys’ only school was a place of great good, thanks to some exceptional teachers. I stumbled. Who are his boys, and what is it about their school relevant to George Pell’s conduct? I stopped reading. An errant apostrophe had distracted me from Davis’ message. The distracting power of errors This is a good example of how a tiny grammatical error can distract your reader from the...

Just an opinion … Adjectives and adverbs in policy writing If the adjective and adverb count is high, what you are reading is more likely to be opinion than analysis. Policy officers certainly have to write a lot: it is a core skill. There are reports exploring issues and options; submissions and memos; formal policy statements; manuals and handbooks; Acts, regulations and codes; handouts and brochures. Policy writing is usually factual, not the writer’s opinion, and the use (and overuse) of adjectives and adverbs points to opinion. These two parts of speech perform an important function in English writing: they modify other words, adding colour, light and shade. We need adjectives and adverbs to convey meaning properly, to engage our readers, and to state facts accurately. But modifying words are frail.[1] They cannot carry the weight of meaning, only modify it. Meaning lies in the...