Some public sector jargon is so confusing that its victims should have the right to have those responsible investigated for maladministration, MPs said today.
An influential Commons committee said Government gobbledygook was so bad that people were suffering "tangible harm" such as missing out on benefits.
Anyone affected should make formal complaints to watchdogs if their concerns were not taken seriou
sly, the public administration select committee said.
The call for impenetrable language to be taken seriously as well as mocked followed an investigation of the lack of plain English used by politicians and civil servants.
The committee also warned that the use of euphemisms such as "extraordinary rendition" and "collateral damage" to hide unpleasant realities was fuelling public cynicism with politics.
"Long, complex official forms, officious letters and confusing requests for information can all deter individuals from attempting to deal with public authorities," the committee concluded.
"This is particularly worrying when it prevents people from getting the benefits or services to which they are entitled.
"We believe that the use of inaccurate, confusing or misleading official language which results in tangible harm, such as preventing individuals from receiving benefits or public services, should be regarded as maladministration."
Former Home Secretary David Blunkett mocked some of the language used by his civil servants. "They have wonderful phrases like 'stand ready'
which actually means 'we're doing nothing about this unless we're absolutely forced to do so'," he told the committee in evidence.
