Takeaways more likely to fail in parts of England that are poor in terms of hygiene | inequality

Takeaways in poorer parts of England are twice as likely to need improved food hygiene than those in wealthier regions, with one in five in some parts of the UK falling below required standards, according to Guardian analysis.

Almost one in 10 takeaways in England’s poorest boroughs were not satisfactorily compliant with food hygiene standards, compared to just one in 24 in the wealthiest, according to an analysis of nearly 600,000 inspection reports at the start of December, 64,000 of them takeaways.

Data from the Food Standards Agency shows that one in 16 ready meals across the UK fell below legally required standards at the start of December.

In England, the worst records were in the most deprived local authorities, including Halton in Cheshire, where one in five takeaways had a rating of two or less – meaning they did not satisfactorily meet food hygiene standards at the time of the last inspection, while it was near of this level in the north London boroughs of Enfield (18.4%) and Waltham Forest (17.7%).

One in five takeaways from Aberdeen fell below equivalent Scottish standards, as did one in six in Edinburgh.

a map

In total, around 16,700 catering providers across the UK require improvements, including nearly 4,000 takeaways, 4,500 restaurants and 1,200 pubs.

The data also revealed 530 care settings that did not meet the requirements, including 300 childcare providers, including nurseries, playgroups, breakfast clubs, primary schools and other educational settings.

Institutions providing care for the elderly and vulnerable were also among those deemed unsafe by the inspectors, including 180 nursing homes and at least 15 hospitals.

The Food Standards Agency rates all establishments where the public can buy or eat food from zero to five. Zero means urgent upgrades are needed, while two or less means some improvements are needed. A business with a satisfactory score of three or higher is in compliance with the law.

Food consultant James Miller said takeaways faced greater challenges when it came to meeting food hygiene standards.

“They handle more demand than restaurants and tend to have fewer staff, who are also busier and less trained in documenting cleanliness. This makes it more difficult for them to keep up with the dozens of daily records required.

The takeaway is likely to have a language barrier, Miller said, making it more difficult to understand the requirements. They were also facing greater challenges in the food industry.

There is a delay in inspections due to covid. Brexit has had an impact on the recruitment of overseas workers, and now the cost of living crisis. “But companies should not forget that a good hygiene rating will lead to more customers.”

The public seems to agree: A survey of 2,000 adults conducted by the Food Standards Agency in 2020 found that 82% of respondents would not consider buying food from a company with a score of less than a three or four.

Public sentiment is also affecting takeout and delivery companies, which display food safety ratings for takeaways with greater prominence and penalize those who do not comply with standards.

Since 2019, the Just Eat platform has refused to host fast food that received a zero rating at its last check, and has reportedly invested £1m to support restaurants with a score of less than three – the minimum pass on food hygiene standards.

Its main competitors, Deliveroo and Uber Eats, appear to have followed suit: An immediate scan of zero-rated restaurants turned up no results on either site.

Experts say these kinds of innovations, plus requiring restaurants to display their latest food standards rating on premises, are making a difference, as customers are getting smarter.

In response to the finding that Enfield had the second lowest compliance rate in England, council leader Nessel Callikan said the local authority would take appropriate action and prosecute where necessary.

Edinburgh City Council’s environmental coordinator, Scott Arthur, said ratings in the city had improved, with the “pass rate currently at 89%” in November for all types of organisations.

He said, “Working with the ‘required improvement’ situation is not necessarily a public health risk.” “Environmental health personnel take appropriate enforcement action, including closing food venues, where there is an imminent risk to public health.”

“All food companies are able to achieve the highest rating of ‘five – very good’ by doing what is required by the food law,” said Jesse Williams, Head of Food Hygiene Ratings at the Food Standards Agency.

The criteria for classification are the same in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, but Scotland uses a different system, which ranks caterers who do not meet hygiene requirements with a degree of ‘improvement required’.

A spokesperson for Food Standards Scotland said: “The ‘success’ standard is set to represent a single level of compliance that is satisfactory in terms of consumer expectations and also the result of enforcement.”

Each local authority is responsible for arranging food establishments and planning inspections in their areas. The time between inspections can vary from six months for those higher risk businesses to two years or more for low or very low risk businesses. In between inspections, local authorities may monitor businesses in various ways.

Leave a Comment