The hon. Gentleman's intervention is timely, as I was just going to refer to Scores on the Doors, which has been described as a national food hygiene rating scheme. I downloaded material on it from the internet earlier today, which made it clear that Scores on the Doors is a commercial organisation, describing itself as"““the No. 1 national food hygiene rating scheme””,"
enabling official local authority hygiene ratings for food businesses to be found.
Scores on the Doors is the largest such scheme in the world, but it does not cover all local authorities. According to the internet site, there are 124 contributing councils, but interestingly not all the London councils are included in that number. It does not include the London borough of Wandsworth, which I had the privilege to lead some years ago. I am immediately alerted to the fact that even the Scores on the Doors scheme is not universally accepted by London boroughs, let alone by councils more widely across the country.
Someone wishing to search for one of the premises listed on the internet will find that there are 145,931 of them. That is the number of premises that will be affected by legislation second-guessing the Food Standards Agency and introducing a national requirement, subject to criminal penalties for non-compliance. I looked for a reference to a restaurant in my area, but to gain further access to the website I had to accept a general disclaimer. The disclaimer is quite interesting, because it shows that even Scores on the Doors is by no means a panacea:"““The information on the food premises listed here is held by us on behalf of our member local authorities. By accepting this disclaimer, you are submitting a request… to the relevant local authority for the disclosure of summary inspection reports under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.””"
It also states:"““The information… has been gathered by authorised Environmental Health Officers””."
However, it goes on to say:"““The hygiene rating given to premises on this web site has been based on the latest Primary Inspection carried out and as such represents the situation as found by the officer on the day of that inspection. Therefore the score may not be representative of the ""overall, long-term food hygiene standards of the business and should not be relied upon as a guide to food safety or food quality.””"
Yet the London boroughs are seeking not only to encourage but to require premises to put up signs which are meaningless. If they do not do so, they will be subject to penalties up to scale 3. If they deface the signs—perhaps by adding material from the internet, such as the extract that I have just read out—they may be subject to a penalty on scale 5.
The situation is ludicrous. I am sorry that my hon. Friend the Member for Finchley and Golders Green did not have a chance to go into more detail, because if he had done so even more people would be saying that the Bill goes far too far, and that it would be best to make a fresh start.
London Local Authorities Bill [Lords] (By Order)
Proceeding contribution from
Christopher Chope
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 13 October 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on London Local Authorities Bill [Lords] (By Order).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
516 c393-4 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:09:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_668160
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_668160
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_668160