⁵⁰Ibid , p 1. 32 developments in the drafting and presentation of legislation in other jurisdictions. 57 There  are  a  number  of  differences  between  the  Bill  recommended  by  the  Law Commission and the Act. For example the Act did not, as the Law Commission had recommended, reverse the statutory presumption that the Crown is not bound by Acts of Parliament. The Act is longer and more detailed than the proposed Bill. The new Act has removed anomalies and inconsistencies in the earlier statute and, in restating many of the provisions in that statute in simpler and plainer language, it was  designed  to  lead  the  way.  Because  interpretation  legislation  contains  the legislature’s  own directions to readers of legislation and to the courts as to how legislation is to be interpreted, it ought to be the most accessible of all the statutes. 58 In  its  report  The  Format  of  Legislation,  the  Law  Commission  recommended  a fundamental  redesign  of  the  New  Zealand  statute  book.  As  the  Commission observed in its report: Good,  functional  typography  and  design  are  invisible.  G ood   design   allows  readers  to concentrate their energy on substance rather than be distracted by form at. Good design can also facilitate the very drafting of legislation because it can make the task more logical. The nature of the message will of course influence the appea rance of the text: the design m ust be appropriate to the substance, and to the reader. But bad design remains bad design, even though it may be redeemed to some extent by familiarity.⁵⁰ 59 A  number  of  factors  were  identified  as  influencing  the  need  for  change.  They included, echoing Tacitus,  the increasing complexity and volume of legislation, the need for legislators to spend more time dealing with legislative policy and not trying to  ascertain  meaning,  the  need  for  administrators  to  understand  the  law  they administer, the need for lawyers to ascertain the law more easily, economic savings,