New food hygiene rating scheme to be launched in Purbeck
A national food hygiene rating scheme is aiming to help consumers make an informed choice about where they eat or shop for food in Purbeck.
Purbeck District Council’s Public Health team has signed up to the Food Standards Agency scheme, which goes live in the district from 1 May. The national Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) will enable ratings to be published reflecting the hygiene standards of food businesses found during inspections by the council.
Each food business will be given a rating on a scale from 0 to 5 when it is inspected by a council food safety officer. The top rating is ‘5’ – which means the hygiene standards are very good. The bottom is ‘0’ – which indicates urgent improvement is required. On 1 May, nearly 100 of the 340 businesses included in the scheme will be rated ‘5’.
Susan Eady, Public Health Manager, said: “The new scheme will enable food businesses to manage risks well by helping them understand how they can comply with the law and continually improve their hygiene standards.
“It will also help consumers make informed decisions about where they eat or shop for food. Look for a sticker like the one illustrated, showing you the food hygiene rating for that business. You might find it displayed in the window, on the door, or as a certificate. If you can’t see a sticker or certificate - ask where it is!
“You can search online from 1 May atwww.food.gov.uk/ratings to check how well businesses have scored before you decide where to shop or eat.
“The Public Health team is delighted that so many of our food business have already managed to get a ‘5’ rating - we have very few low rated premises, and aim to keep things that way.
“As this scheme is new, not all local businesses are included yet. We hope to get all the current lower risk businesses on board by next year.
Purbeck District Council is joining an expected 94 per cent of local authorities by signing up to the scheme. They are launching the FHRS at the same time as the majority of other Dorset authorities.
Further details for consumers and businesses can be found at www.food.gov.uk/ratings from 1 May 2012. Ratings for premises in Purbeck will start to appear from 1 May. Information for consumers will also be available in the District Council offices, Worgret Road, Wareham; the Discover Purbeck information centre, South Street, Wareham; and at Swanage Information Centre, Shore Road, Swanage.
Posts
78 comments:
Great so anyone opening a tin of baked beans and serving them on toast is bound to get a five; but will this discourage caterers from selling rare steaks, making pâtés, dealing with local fish and game, cutting sashimi, serving unpasteurised cheese etc?
well said nick, then you have premises that have been open for years and can't get a 5 star. Its all Bull :)
Yes like two seemingly identical restaurants side by side. One restaurateur buys everything boil-in-the -bag, with frozen desserts and starters. He is rarely inspected and proudly displays his five rating. Next door everything is made from scratch, the Health Inspector shows up as often as OFSTED and new customers are put off because he only displays a rating of 4 because somebody forgot to an record a fridge temperature because they couldn't get to work in the blizzard.
again well said 602pm its a farce. conidering 100 out of 300+ plus will aledgedly get a 5 star funny how ms. eadys staff dont say the same.
As a customer I find it reassuring to see how the inspector has rated a particular restaurant. Those with low or no scores on the door wont get custom.
I, for one, would seek out a restaurant that offered 'rare steaks, local fish and game, sashimi, and unpasteurised cheese' over one that gets a 5 star rating from these jobs-lots.
Simple way to do this really is let the customer see the kitchen. They do say that if you do this 85% of people would not eat at a restaurant due to the state of the kitchen. There are some places that do this a few I used to work in when I lived in Scotland. And they hygiene laws are a bit more strigent than down in England.
Though when working in France no one gave a toss and some of the food was some of the best I have ever worked with and tasted. Everything these days is to clean and some chefs now have become office chefs due to the amount of paper work that has to be done for health and safety. Which takes away what they really want to do and that is cooking and preparing.
Stop whingeing and keep the place clean! I do not believe it's an insuperable burden to ensure that you don't have cockroaches or mice in your kitchens.
The legislation is all about wall to wall soap dispensers and hand basins not about whether they are used or not. You can polish the outside of your fridges 'till you can see your face in them but if inside the raw chicken is dripping in the trifle it makes little difference.
On subjects like this where it is complicated and people need to be trained and skilled in the work carried out, people who make comments like "just clean" have no idea, yet they feel like putting comments on sites like this ergo the moron comment it was neither constructive informed or proffesional. bitter and uniformed comments can have far reaching affects, as others have stated its not as simple as it looks. I know nothing of the new school in swanage, and it has not a lot to do with me ergo I make no comments.As do many other subjects. 26/4 602pm sums it up nicely, ask them what it all means.
This is a summary of the requirements:
The food safety officer inspecting a business checks how well the business is meeting the law by looking at:
* how hygienically the food is handled – how it is prepared, cooked, re-heated, cooled and stored
* the condition of the structure of the buildings – the cleanliness, layout, lighting, ventilation and other facilities
* how the business manages and records what it does to make sure food is safe
At the end of the inspection, the business is given one of the six ratings. The top rating of ‘5’ means that the business was found to have ‘very good’ hygiene standards. Any business should be able to reach this top rating.
Perhaps all those complaining could explain to us which of the above they find so tiresome? And we'll eat elsewhere!
"Any business should be able to reach this top rating"
I should have made clear that this statement is a direct quote from the Food Standards Agency website:
http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/webpage/moreabouten
It was not my comment.
well then its wrong certain establishements due to varying circumstances cannot!! I never said that PDC did!!!!!!!!!
There doesn't seem to be an obligation for businesses to display their certificate. So it seems obvious that any business with a poor rating just won't put theirs up. What worries me is that if a premises has not yet been inspected people may conclude they have a poor rating. Perhaps there's a need for a poster that says 'inspection pending'.
If you cannot prepare and serve fresh ingredients without achieving the same standard of hygiene as someone doing beans on toast I suspect the public would be better protected if you changed your occupation. Food poisoning can be extremely serious. KFC have just had to find several million Australian dollars to compensate someone they poisoned so badly they were paralysed.
Half of you on here have probably never worked in the catering trade , really what do you know? People in the catering trade , anything to do with food actually work hard enough as it is without a penpushing idiot telling us how to do our job. I tell ya what everything is bad for you so just eat lettuce. Though make sure you wash it properly as it might give you a tummy bug:)
If you cannot prepare and serve fresh ingredients without achieving the same standard of hygiene as someone doing beans on toast I suspect the public would be better protected if you changed your occupation. Food poisoning can be extremely serious. KFC have just had to find several million Australian dollars to compensate someone they poisoned so badly they were paralysed.
Again a misinformed opinion and totally without even a basic knowledge of what is required, and someof you wonder why I use the term moron. I well say it slowly for you. a kitchen can be spotless, if other factors are not correct it is impossible to get a 5 star rating, ie the building layout and other factors. and yes you can go to a 4 star if you forget a fridge temp or probing. or happen to have a cracked FFFFF tile. and if you only handle baked beans it is a lot easier.
If you cannot handle a more difficult task leave it to someone who can. In what way is this "misinformed"? I would rather eat soomewhere that has a high score on an imperfect measure of food hygiene than somewhere that is run by someone arrogant enough to think they should be exempted from the whole issue.
It comes down to trust for the individual caterer. People are prepared to take risks when they eat. Raw shellfish have the potential to be full of viruses, the health man will tell you never to eat a steak unless the internal temperature has reached 70C (50C for rare), are you all still eating your eggs hard boiled à la Ewina? Any caterer serving say oysters, fillet steak tartare, or spaghetti carbonara (traditionally with a raw egg yolk) CANNOT (in my understanding of this) be given a score of 5. For invalids the very young and old this could be helpful. It makes a legislative mess for the rest and in my view is simply a way to get entry level restaurants and ethnic takeaways to participate in the food hygiene regulations with more gusto. Kebabs I love them. But a lump of raw meat spinning around a gas flame is a recipe for disaster. The skilled lads who work in Swanage do a stella job, but potentially one heavy handed cut will expose raw meat. Can they ever achieve a 5?
Well said Nick , I think have become a right clean nation now. To a point where it still to clean. Hospital do they bit , but still virus travel about. A bit of germs I think don't do you any harm. I have eaten steaks blue since I was 10 , still make mayonnaise at home , so raw eggs are used. Steak tartare is my one of my fav's , though leaving a good cheese out of the fridge for a few days to mature is lovely. To be honest would love to try that cheese from Italy the one that has the maggots through it. Can't remember it's name.
"Any caterer serving say oysters, fillet steak tartare, or spaghetti carbonara (traditionally with a raw egg yolk) CANNOT (in my understanding of this) be given a score of 5."
Is this view shared by the people who will have to decide the score? It is your view but is it substantiated? What is the experience in places that have this type of system?
Presumably the whole thing will be a farce because the hygiene officers will be forced to turn a blind eye to such traditional dishes and practices.
All a bit scary, this hygiene rating stuff,but I don't think I will give up my dodgy kebab after 5 pints just yet!
The National Food Hygene Rating Scheme is up and running in other parts of the Country. Generally it reinforces my own views about catering establishments. For instance one pub in Yarmouth,Isle of Wight, which already had adverse comments on the Beer in the Evening website has a 2 star rating, whereas the other pubs and cafes have a five star rating. I was pleased to see that my mother's rest home in Eastbourne had a five star rating but I already knew it was an excellent rest home. It was interesting to notice that none of the supermarket cafes I looked up had a five star rating and a Help the Aged cafe had a two star rating. It will be interesting to see how the Swanage Railway, the Corfe Castle National Trust tea room and all the other pubs, restaurants and rest homes in Purbeck do.
How would this work with a roadkill menu? Quite popular in some rural areas , and quite a wide range of foods. Also with certain foods gathered from the land aswell.
Presumably the whole thing will be a farce because the hygiene officers will be forced to turn a blind eye to such traditional dishes and practices.
What does that even mean?
Anyway is there any point to this scheme if a)the place in question don't have to display a rating and b) somewhere getting a 0 or 1 don't have to close down temporarily until they get themsleves in order?
All a bit scary, this hygiene rating stuff,but I don't think I will give up my dodgy kebab after 5 pints just yet
Well that's a stupid comment. Just because somewhere sells unhealthy food doesn't mean they are unhygenic.
29/4 5.15pm - Stupid ? Aah! But you haven't seen where the dodgy kebab comes from.
Robin - what's the name of the Eastbourne rest home? I might need it if the dodgy kebab gets me...
It is the Saffrons Rest Home. I would not advise going to a rest home until you have to. It costs £32,000 a year to stay there and my mother is going to have to sell her house to pay for it. 2nd attempt at proving I am not a robot.
A place that I worked in was told to 'make the potato store have readily cleanable surfaces' to store dirty potatoes! How will that help. Another place was marked down because we had no probe thermometer and I had an argument with the inspector. I told him that I have been cooking for 30 years, so I kind of know when food is cooked and hot!
That's an interesting anecdote because when during my first inspection some 35 years ago I was using a probe to demonstrate to the nice young man recently passed out of university how we checked the core temperatures of the products we had for sale, he said: " I wish we had one of those".
Don't all rush to the site giving the local listings because Purbeck isn't even mentioned yet.
12:03 on 1st May and still no ratings for Purbeck. Looks like I am going to have a late lunch if I want to eat somewhere with a five star rating.
Oh dear Court Hill wines and Gee Whites on the Quay come in with just 1 out of 5.
http://ratings.food.gov.uk/search/en-GB?q=swanage&refla=KAyU340FkI8%3d&sm=1&pi=0
Well done Chilled Red, Fortes, Butter fingers, Haymans,LaiHo.Planters,Putlake, Crows Nest, P. Deli, Wessex Belle and others with a 5
Wow . one place gets a 5 (when ambulance called out after eating there) and a another gets a 3 when I have eaten there dozens of times a year. Blow me.
As a consumer, I find these ratings most helpful.
I also find the ratings very useful. They support the comments in the beer in the evening website. The Swanage Railway has done well with the Birds Nest Buffet and the Wessex Belle. The Railway has always paid particular attention to hygiene because a few people are very hostile to the Railway and we do not want to give them any ammunition to close it down. There was a best kept kitchen competition in Corfe Castle which the National Trust Cafe and the Model Village came top. The Dragon's Bakery needs to improve and the pubs did not do very well. Many of the pubs failed to achieve very good markings. The Crows Nest at Swanage and the Old Granary were exceptions. Where was the Black Swan? The Conservative Clubs at Swanage and Wareham did well. Sainsbury and Spa at Wareham and Costcutters at Swanage got five stars whereas the Co-op and Budgeons at Swanage only received three stars. Our main supermarkets need to get their acts together. The Youth Hostel, the Rugby Club, lots of schools, the Swanage Hospital and care homes did very well. The rating should serve as a wake up call to the places with 1 and 2 stars. I will still get my wine from the Court Hill Wine Shop as they have a good selection of wine.
How can an off license get 1 out of 5?
Perhaps the mice are nibbling the peanuts?
So once again Robin has provided us with his opinion of all subjects. Robin did not the railway just spend 90k on the birds nest, thus being brand new and spik and span? And if you had one iota of common sense you will realise that not all establishments will be on the site yet those on a 2 year cycle that were only inspected in January will probably not be on there yet! And I find you very hypocritcal when you will still use the same of licence that only got a 1 when you beat on about other places. taht you feel did not do well enough.
Money at bet fred says this post will be deleted by 1700 hrs because robin/ MH (the sameperson) dont like it. yet my election leaflet says you dont mind other opinions.
Money does not buy hygiene. Seventhwave is brand new but has o got a four star rating wheras the Birds Nest and Wessex Belle have got five stsrs. I am still using the Court Hill wine shop because it is difficult to mess up storing wine and selling it. I am also still using the Co-op because I think it is cheaper and has a greater variety of food than Arkwrights although Arkwrights has a higher food hygiene rating. I would think twice about using the Co-op delicatessen counter even if I ever got served there. I sometimes wonder if I am invisible. It is to the credit of small businesses that they are able to outperform the Grand Hotel, the pubs in Corfe Castle and the main supermarkets in Swanage.I have been a regular reader of the Good Beer Guide since 1984,a regular viewer of the beer in the evening web site and a regular customer of many of the businesses in Swanage so I have got some idea of what I am talking about.
.I have been a regular reader of the Good Beer Guide since 1984,a regular viewer of the beer in the evening web site and a regular customer of many of the businesses in Swanage so I have got some idea of what I am talking about.
I go to the doctors on aregular basis, does it make me a GP. I put oil in the car am I a mechanic? NO.
Of course you can shop where you want, thats called freedom. Can you also confirm what I said about the birds nest. Also do you not think that if a palce has just had millions spent on it and recently opened it should not obtain a 5 star.
Questian to Food Standards Agency via e-mail:
"Can you answer our query as to whether an establishment selling raw meat (say fillet Tartare), raw egg (eggnog), live oysters and other such potentially risky food products could ever achieve full marks of five?"
Answer:
"Any business should be able to reach this top rating’ (of 5 – Very Good), so the places you have mentioned should be able to achieve the top rating."
I stand corrected.
What about pink hamburgers I wonder?
"Any business should be able to reach this top rating’ (of 5 – Very Good), so the places you have mentioned should be able to achieve the top rating."
Well someone is lying! quote from PDC EHO older style buildings will have extreme diffuculty in obtaing a 5 star rating due to layout lighting structure and appearance. you can have all the polished surfaces you want etc etc but if the building/structure its self is problematic "even at no fault of the owner" it is virtually imposible to obtain a 5. Further thought for some of you if you read the list some premises on there have recently (within a couple of years) been built or refurbished yet a lot only obtaines a 4 and some even a 3.
PS robin does your surane begin with a B?
Pity we can't have a Weatherspoons to smarten up the place. They always seem to get a 5 star rating and prices are good too. Robin and everyone else would be very happy.
If you run your business in a shanty gummed together with total disregard of planning you can scarcely be surprised at getting a low score. The howls of horror are no surprise. Better get on and put the new building up. Whats the delay?
9.15 Who are you? To whom do you refer? What "howls of horror"?
Just take a stroll to the bottom of the High Street and you will see our local one star establishment cheerily operating under its pretend thatch held up by assorted sticks. Read the comments in this thread and ask yourself who is in effect saying the rules other places follow should not apply here or to them.
The Riverside Restaurant, West Bay, amd The Hive Beach Cafe near Bridport both get five, both offering fresh seafood. This is deeply confusing. How can they manage it if the local establishment shows up so poorly?
The Hive Beach Cafe near Bridport I have been to and is great given that it operates out of a Marquee without any mock thatch. The answer to "Better get on and put the new building up" is probably that the owner prefers not to spend £100,000's fixing something which isn't broke.
But it is. They have been told to remove the improvised bouldings that lack planning permission and have pp for what amounts to a new building. We can all see what a highly successful business this is and the investment would be well worth making.
Not really because the Environment Agency recken the area will be regualrly under water in a few years.
Nonsense. You are confusing rare flood events, i.e. a combination of exceptional easterly gales with freakishly high tides, and average sea level. The requirement for the adjacent Pierhead is a one metre high plinth and this is regarded as enough for the next 100 years.
If you go to the council site and read the flood risk assessment that accompanies the PH application you will find the podium must be set at 4.4m above datum, making the top of the plinth about 2m above the road.
Sorry, yes, two metres of plinth, not one. That is a somewhat pedantic point as it is not quite the same thing as being permanently submerged, or even "regularly under water". At the moment an easterly and spring tide brings the sea a little past the Vic and this will increase by a small amount each year. This must give the bars problems but a building on a plinth should be OK.
Ref: 3/5/12 5:10 PM – Gee Whites. I was on holiday in Swanage on the date (28/02/12) of the “inspection” of Gee Whites and as I recall it was shut and being refurbished, so I’m not surprised it only got 1 star!
so who was this ridiculous inspector who gave a 1 star when the business was closed, a name please so we can him/her sacked
How do you know this was the only inspection? This is a strange assertion, do you have any evidence that there was not a proper inspection on another date?
One look at the place is enough for you to see that there is nothing to prevent faeces from vermin in the thatch falling on food preparation surfaces. How do you keep a place like that clean? The rating is no surprise.
The inspector would have left a list of the improvements needed. Perhaps Gee Whites could put it on here so we can reach a judgement on whether the changes asked for are reasonable.
There must be a story in this. An imaginary vendor of seafood, lets call him Unhygienix after the fishmonger in the Asterix stories moves to Swanage and discovers that none of the rules governing businesses in other places apply to him. He builds his premises out of whatever bits and pieces come to hand and opens for trade. Alas for Unhygienix, he fails his hygienne test, but wait, a smolescreen is called for, he loudly proclaims that of course, it does not apply to him, the test is meaningless, impossible for seafood vendors to pass, and that indeed, it never even took place. His friends, real or imaginary, rally to his aid, convinced that microbes will respect his exemption from all the other rules. The ritual sacrifice of the inspector is demanded. Meanwhile, seafood vendors in other places quietly chuckle as they put up the notices telling customers thay have five stars.
What will happen next? Who knows. I already have a title for this, "Passport to Swanage". Is Ealing studio still available for shooting the film? Will there be a happy ending? I suspect the whole thing would be turned down as being far too implausible.
How can an inspection be held when the premises are not open and if the score reflects an earlier inspection surely that date should be used or the rating system is completely pointless.
I would have thought Swanage should be supporting a food establishment which is a little different and popular with the public/holidaymakers.
Swanage exceptionalism again. Different in what respect? Being exempted from hygiene standards? Being exempt from planning? There seems to be a general attitude in the Lower High Street that the rules that apply to the rest of the nation should not apply there, as we have seen in the threads about late night disturbances and the Pierhead and of course when we discussed the fake thatch on the kiosks aka oyster bar. Where does it end? Perhaps the person who pinched the £700 mentioned in another thread thought the rules about stealing should not apply to them.
Regarding the earlier inspection. What improvements were demanded and why have they not been put into place? If they had been made a re-inspection would have been arranged and we would not be having this discussion. Do we have to make a foi request to find out? We seem to be being subjected to a steady drizzle of "anon" comments on behalf of Gee Whites. Perhaps one of these anons has the answer to this question.
.....and quite a few "anon" comments against Gee Whites!
Do we take it that the existing premises are incapable of being made acceptable to the inspector? Looks like it. Are the "public/holidaymakers" with whom it is popular made aware of this? Silly question.
The "public/holidaymakers" can check the ratings, as we have done and then make a choice. Or is that not allowed in Swanage?
Will they be displayed at Gee Whites?
I will start by saying I have no interest in Gee whites and dont give a damn if they are there or not. But I find it ironic that people on here can openly slate a local busines and I have my post deleted because I used the word Pikey. again libdem censorship. If it was my business I think i would be chatting to my solicitor.
The reputational damage to Gee Whites was done when the inspection rating was published. It is there for all to see. It may be an imperfect system but it is all we have. Despite my invitations to tell us what is being done to get a better rating we have had nothing beyond unconvincing attempts to rubbish the whole exercise. My own view is that for this system to work it should be mandatory for catering establishments to display their rating. They already have to put up no smoking signs so it would not be a problem. Unlike the previous poster I do care whether Gee Whites continues but the only way forward is for it to come into compliance with food hygiene and planning requirements. Havinf seen the effects of food poisoning Y would rather see risks minimised. We are not talking about the odd stomache ypset. We are talking about something that can kill.
Havinf seen the effects of food poisoning Y would rather see risks minimised. We are not talking about the odd stomache ypset. We are talking about something that can kill.
And for my partner and I who got the same from a premise that now display a 5 I think your arguement is invalid. Did you have intro fluids and have to give stool samples?
In that case we need a higher level of invigilation of catering premises rather than less. Do you not understand this is about reducing risks. How else can this be achieved? Please don't say by trusting the caterers as there would never be a problem to begin with if they were all trustworthy.
According to Mr. Storer, to whom I spoke this morning, a re-visit last week from the local authority when they were fully open resulted in a score of 4/5 for Gee Whites on the Quay. This should be reflected on the website shortly. Well done Gee Whites despite the structure of the building precluding a 5.
So he has been proved wrong to a great extent. Lets hope he goes ahead and puts up the new building he has pp for.
This should be reflected on the website shortly. Well done Gee Whites despite the structure of the building precluding a 5.
Exactly what I have been saying the misimformed and trouble makers on here take note.
Very very nice post.....Food Hygiene Certificate
Interesting!! Food Hygenic is one of the most important factors. Food hygiene is to avoid cases of food poisoning , stomach aching like different problems.
Post a Comment