Shared Services Business Case - CCTV / Lifeline
To present the Business Case for Shared Services.
(In view of the fact that it contains information relating to an individual or which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual, the business affairs of the authority and contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with labour relation matters between the authority and employees of the authority, this report will not be for publication and will be circulated only to relevant Officers and Members of the Council. In view of this, it is anticipated that discussion of this matter will take place after the exclusion of the public).
(Report attached)
Additional documents:
Decision:
(During the consideration of this item, Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to move to exclude the press and public prior to any debate on the grounds that information would be revealed relating to an individual or which was likely to reveal the identity of an individual, the business affairs of the authority and contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with labour relations matters between the authority and employees of the authority, disclosure of which was not considered to be in the public’s best interests.)
Minutes:
A report was received that set out the business case for a shared CCTV and Lifeline service for Redditch Borough and Bromsgrove District Councils.
This had previously been identified as a medium term opportunity. There was the requirement for capital investment to establish a shared service at one site and this would in part be met through savings, including salaries. It was anticipated that there would be human resources implications in establishing a single unit based in Redditch. However, Members were reassured that the existing accommodation in Redditch was sufficient for the shared service.
(During the consideration of this item, Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to move to exclude the press and public prior to any debate on the grounds that information would be revealed relating to an individual or which was likely to reveal the identity of an individual, the business affairs of the authority and contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with labour relations matters between the authority and employees of the authority, disclosure of which was not considered to be in the public’s best interests.)