1
Minutes of the Meeting of the Epsom and Ewell
BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP PANEL held on 8 January 2002
___________________________________
PRESENT
Councillors:
Keith Mann (Chairman), Michael Arthur, Mike Pellatt and Alan Winkworth
Business Representatives Dierk Geen, Sara Jones, Terry Maggs, Ken Patterson, Franco Pedace
and Steve Whiteway.
In Attendance: David Smith, Eileen Thomas, Martin Kempsell and Louise Punter
Apologies: Councillors Lesley Danbury and Don Tricker; Colin Peel.
___________________________________
MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 8 November 2001 were
confirmed as a true accord and signed by the Chairman.
4.
THE FUTURE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY AND THE
BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP WITHIN EPSOM AND EWELL. The Chairman explained that
the Agenda for the meeting built upon the discussions at the workshop sessions held on 20
December 2001 in seeking the Panel’s agreement to the aims and objectives and the priority
areas for the economic development service and a structure for the delivery of that service. The
notes of the working sessions were circulated with the Agenda as a reminder and basis for
discussion.
5.
Louise Punter, for the Chamber of Commerce, outlined the Chamber’s proposals for the delivery
of the service. Under these, the Business Partnership would contract with the Chamber for the
delivery of an economic development service which would be specified in terms of functional
outputs and achievement of targets rather than inputs in the form of numbers of staff and their
respective roles. It was envisaged that the service would be delivered through three people, a
Markets Co-ordinator, Marketing Executive and Business Support Assistant working wholly or
in part for the Partnership under the general control of the Chamber’s Regional Manager. Other
specialised advice or assistance would be obtained on a consultancy basis as required. The
Council’s Director of Corporate Policy would act as Client Officer on behalf of the Partnership.
The Panel agreed in principle to these proposals for the structure and delivery of the economic
development service but were concerned that a number of issues should be taken account of in
the final arrangements. In particular, it was emphasised that, as those delivering the service
would not necessarily be working exclusively for the Partnership, the outputs expected in terms
of the Partnership’s aims and objectives should be clearly specified in the contract and
differentiated from the work done by and for the Chamber. The inputs and resources provided
by the Chamber and the Council respectively should also be clearly defined. The Panel noted
that the proposed arrangement could be funded within the currently agreed financial framework
which runs to April 2003 with a similar balance of spending between salaries and projects.
Additional funding would be sought to self fund other activities beyond the core work of the
Partnership.
2
In terms of aims and objectives, it was agreed that these must be achievable and have clearly
defined and measurable targets to enable the Panel to monitor and review the performance of the
contract. These would be set out in an annual strategy and action plan which would identify the
priority areas for action. The first of these should be prepared in time to come into effect from 1
April 2002.
It was agreed that the following work should be undertaken and the results reported back to the
next meeting of the Panel:
Eileen Thomas and Louise Punter, with input as necessary from David Smith, to
prepare a revised contract taking into account the points raised at the meeting

Chamber of Commerce, through Louise Punter in consultation with other Panel
members, to develop a revised Action Plan, with objectives and targets reflecting
those discussed at the meeting and the previous workshops.

Composition of Panel to be as current in terms of numbers and representatives but
business side to be able to nominate a “pool” of nine representatives, of which only
six could vote at any one meeting, to provide continuity in the event of substitutes.

To avoid confusion and to clarify roles, Council to be asked to agree that the joint
meetings be termed the “Business Partnership Board”. The business only
organisation in turn to refer to itself as the “Business Forum” and avoid use of the
term “partnership”.
To provide for monitoring and review of the Action Plan during the year, it was agreed that the
Panel/Board should meet on a bi-monthly basis. The next meeting to which the outstanding
issues above would be brought, was confirmed as 12th March and a schedule of future dates
would be reported to that meeting.
The meeting concluded at 7.10pm.
KEITH MANN
Chairman