Part 1: Emergency Services Collaboration Chapter 1: Collaboration Agreements Section 3: Collaboration agreements: specific restrictions
This section sets out a number of specific restrictions to the application of the duty to collaborate.
	The duty to collaborate will only require an emergency service to collaborate where the collaboration agreement would be in the interests of its efficiency or effectiveness, holding all else equal. As described above, subsection (1) sets aside the duty to enter into a particular collaboration agreement if that agreement would negatively impact on public safety or otherwise be detrimental to efficiency or effectiveness. For example, where a collaborative project would save money but lead to an increase in response times, the emergency services would not be required to give effect to that collaboration. An emergency service's consideration of the impact of a collaboration on its effectiveness is expected to include consideration of the impact on public safety; however, Part 1 makes explicit that where there is a negative impact on public safety alone (regardless of the overall assessment of effectiveness) the duty would not apply.
	Subsection (2) provides that an ambulance trust is not required to enter into a collaboration agreement if the collaboration would, in its view, have a negative impact on its other wider functions, or the NHS in England more generally, even if the collaboration would improve the efficiency or effectiveness of the delivery of its emergency functions. Ambulance trusts have multiple functions and only one of these functions relates to emergency provision. For instance, ambulance services could provide other services such as non-emergency patient transport and NHS 111, which are separate from responding to 999 calls. This does not prevent the ambulance trust from voluntarily entering into a collaboration agreement in such a scenario, but it would not be required to do so.
	Subsections (4) and (5) provide that an ambulance trust is required to consider the effect a collaboration proposal would have on the exercise of its other non-emergency functions or the wider NHS when considering whether it would be in the interests of its efficiency or effectiveness under the duty at section 2.
	Subsection (3) provides that the duty to collaborate only applies to an ambulance trust in England insofar as it provides an emergency ambulance service. Ambulance trusts can still enter into collaboration agreements in regards to their non-emergency functions should they choose but they are not required to do so.
	Where there is an elected mayor of a combined authority, such as the proposed plans for Greater Manchester, an order made by the Secretary of State may enable either the Mayor or the combined authority to exercise the functions of an FRA. Subsections (7) and (8) provide that the mayor or the combined authority may only enter into a collaboration agreement where they are entitled to exercise the particular fire and rescue functions by virtue of such an order. Subsection (9) makes similar provision where PCC functions have been transferred to a Mayor. There is no corresponding provision for PCC functions to be exercised by a combined authority.
	Subsection (10) provides that a chief officer of police (as defined in section 5(8)) can only enter into a collaboration if the local policing body (a PCC, MOPAC and the Common Council of the City of London or a combined authority mayor exercising PCC functions– see section 5(9)) is also party to the agreement. This restricts a chief constable or the metropolitan police commissioner from entering into a collaboration without the involvement of the PCC (or a combined authority mayor exercising those functions), or MOPAC respectively. Subsection (11) provides that a local policing body must (unless they are a party to the agreement) consult the chief constable before entering into a collaboration agreement. This preserves the important notion of operational independence. Local policing bodies are expected to have regard to any operational objections raised by the chief constable, and under the provisions of the Policing Protocol Order 2011, they must not fetter the operational independence of the police force and the chief constable who leads it.