Council’s warnings to 789 firms over hygiene
ALMOST 800 businesses in Stockport have been handed written warnings for hygiene breaches over the past year.
The warnings were given out for problems such as cleanliness, contamination and separation of foods. However, the council has defended its performance, saying overall hygiene standards are good.
Data from the Food Standards Agency (FSA) shows the results of food hygiene intervention inspections in the local authority over the 12 months to April.
The businesses inspected are mostly restaurants, but include any establishment which handles unpacked food, including farms and catering companies.
Inspectors assessed 2,097 businesses and handed out 789 written warnings in total in Stockport.
Breaches include problems with cleanliness, training of staff, record keeping, washing facilities and separation of cooked and raw foods.
As well as the written warnings, in Stockport there were four voluntary closures of premises.
High risk scores were given to five businesses. This means they need to be inspected again within six months to check that standards of hygiene have improved.
Coun Sheila Bailey, cabinet member for communities and housing at Stockport council, said: “The figures reported are classed as written warnings but will include any breach of legislation that is found on an inspection, including very minor ones. A written warning doesn’t automatically imply there are serious or significant concerns in a premises.
“In Stockport’s case, the number of such warnings is consistent with others in the Greater Manchester area.
“This demonstrates that officers are vigilant and are out and about inspecting food premises and dealing with problems when they occur.
“In the most recent figures available, 94 per cent of food premises in Stockport were rated three or above, which is a good indication of the very high levels of food safety in Stockport.”
Nina Purcell, director of regulatory delivery at the FSA, added: “It’s encouraging that local authorities have made improvements in the percentage of interventions achieved and are continuing to target their activities at food businesses where food safety risks are the highest or where food fraud is more likely.”