States members voted unanimously to pass the amendment, but there was much discussion in the House over whether ‘right-sizing’ was even the correct term and whether it meant anything at all.

The P&R-led amendment, proposed by Deputy Heidi Soulsby and seconded by Deputy Peter Ferbrache, sought to modify their GWP policy letter and emphasise that “the four main priorities of government at this time are: responding to the Covid-19 pandemic; managing the effects of Brexit; delivering the recovery actions; and right-sizing government.” 

Several Deputies gave their opinion that others would understand ‘right-sizing’ to mean whatever they wanted it to mean. 

Deputy Sasha Kazantseva-Miller said she was concerned that ‘right-sizing’ did not mean anything. “What is a right-sized government?” she asked, and she urged the Assembly to use a better choice of words. 

Deputy Roffey added: “Why will we not vote for ‘right-sizing’ when the opposite must ‘wrong-sizing’? I think we will have a unanimous vote for this, and I don’t think it will mean a damn thing.” 

Pictured: Deputy Peter Roffey predicted the unanimous vote, while Deputy De Sausmarez said there was ambiguity over the terminology.

There was support for Deputy Soulsby’s amendment from Deputy Ferbrache who explained that he felt the term “would not be slash and burn, it’s a rebalancing”. 

After Deputy Neil Inder admitted he did not know what ‘right-sizing’ meant, while Deputy Lindsay De Sausmarez agreed that there was “ambiguity over the terminology”. 

“Without a clearly defined terminology it can mean all things to all people,” she said. 

Deputy Lester Queripel said he was “all for right-sizing, so long as it doesn’t mean front-line workers losing their jobs, while line managers kept theirs.” The term was just the start of a conversation, said Deputy Neil Inder. “Right-sizing is better than ‘down-sizing’,” he added. 

Deputy Soulsby conceded that “re-setting” may have been a more acceptable term, and added that it will be up to the Assembly to decide what it means, in a debate that concluded with the same level of ambiguity that it started with. 

Pictured top: Deputy Heidi Soulsby’s amendment was carried, but with plenty of discussion over what it actually meant.