John Hill spoke about significant dates so far, including the original five borough partnership and the cabinet approval.  John also spoke about meeting the financial challenge, and delivering the service in a new and improved way.  The shared service is currently in its third month is already proving to be successful with opportunities already emerging for more efficient and resilient ways of working..

John explained that in June 2013  the decision was taken that Merton would be the host authority, Merton having a good track record  of delivering a shared service eg  HR and Legal shared services both of which involve Merton and Richmond.  However, this collaboration was different in that it is for front line services.  John also pointed out that other boroughs would be very interested in seeing how the collaboration worked, as it was a new initiative in London.

A project manager was appointed in the autumn of 2013 to work with the Shared Services Management Board to implement phase one of the project which involved the  development of a new management structure and to focus on savings and changes in working practices.

In April 2014 Paul Foster was appointed as the Head of The Regulatory Services Partnership, and over the summer a series of interviews was held to create the management structure.  This has led to the number of managers reducing from 12 to 7.  The initial assessment is that the new management structure is working well. 

The management board would benefit from the members’ input into direction of travel before phase 2 in the delivery of the shared service.  There will be more impact on frontline staff in phase 2.

Jon Freer spoke of how the shared services should be managed and how the management board and members might work together, on whether there are efficiencies to be had and how to go forward.  The collaborative agreement dated 1^st August set up the structure for this.

It was thought that other boroughs might join at a later date, but ‘bedding’ in time was needed to establish the services first.

The chair requested the terms of reference be brought to the next meeting, and advice on regulations.  Members need to know what is going on to develop a strong partnership.  Also required is advice on the budget and whether this is separated by council or joined. 

Jon Freer went on to talk about coming together in different ways, and what to deliver.  Trading Standards and Environmental Health services were delivered with little income, so it would be possible to look at what the statutory minimum standards are for delivery and what can be bought over and above this. 

In response to a question about maintaining the standard of services, Chris Lee responded that the partnership  would need to satisfy members that they are maintained.  There would be opportunities to share and spread best practice.  Both boroughs had common ground, wanting the same outcomes, but these were delivered in different ways.  It would be important to maintain, achieve and deliver excellence.  There might be choices for members in the approach that is adopted, and change might be uncomfortable, but would result in improved efficiency and effectiveness.  The services were ‘people’ services so efficiencies would be made through use of information technology and training.

In response to a question from a member, Paul Chadwick explained that Croydon had withdrawn from the collaboration for political reasons. John Hill confirmed that the withdrawal of LB Croydon was not in any way connected with concerns regarding the RSP .