View report page

51
The inspection of food undertakings continued and the food prepared, manufactured,
stored or sold was subject to routine inspection and sampling.
With certain exceptions the standard of hygiene, both in relation to food
premises and food handling, is improving. An increasing number of those responsible
for food undertakings have responded to the requirements of the Food Hygiene
Regulations and seek to comply voluntarily not only with the Regulations but to
maintain standards higher than those which can be enforced by statute. The
Inspectors, when inspecting food premises, endeavour to bring home to the management
and assistants not only the requirements of the Regulations but the reason why
such Regulations were made. The talks on the spot are appreciated in the majority
of cases and are supplemented by pamphlets and other helpful printed material at the
time of the Inspector's visit.
There are of course others who are not so co-operative and whose standards
fall far short of the Regulation requirements. Prosecutions have had to be taken
and in one case the Magistrate visited the premises on two occasions before giving
his decision. A temporary improvement resulted but was not maintained. It was,
therefore, necessary to issue further summonses. Owing to the deplorable conditions
existing at this address an Order disqualifying the proprietor from using the premises
for six months was obtained, in addition to a number of convictions in relation to
other offences. The proprietor appealed against the foregoing decisions but his
appeal was dismissed.
In another case information was received in respect of premises used for the
sale of meat and possibly for illicit slaughtering and it was necessary for two
Inspectors to keep the premises under observation from about midnight until 6 a.m.
The proprietor, upon being interviewed, afforded the Inspectors every facility and
apart from the fact that meat had been seen stored on benches in the open yard at
the rear and one or two contraventions of the Food Hygiene Regulations were found,
there was nothing to which exception could be taken. These particular premises
were being used temporarily and their use was discontinued shortly afterwards.
An interesting case occurred during the year when a general practitioner in the
Borough reported on the breakage of a fluorescent lighting tube in a canteen kitchen
at a local works and enquired as to the possible harmful contamination of exposed
food. The food preparation room concerned was thoroughly cleansed and none of
the works personnel suffered any ill effects from consumption of food which may
have been affected. Enquiries were made, however, of leading electrical manufacturers
regarding the possible presence of deleterious materials in fluorescent elements
and information was obtained that beryllium has not been used in the manufacture
of such elements since 1947. In a 5 ft. 80 watt tube there would be approximately
5 grammes of powder made up mainly of calcium halophosphate with about 1%
antimony as an activator. The opinion was expressed that the danger from a broken
tube would not lie in the chemicals released but in the fragments of broken glass.
The danger from chemicals used would be at its highest at the place of manufacture,
or at the site where faulty tubes are destroyed ; even this risk, however, was stated
to be extremely small.
When persons were seen to be smoking whilst engaged in a food room where
there is open food the Inspector gave a verbal warning of the contravention. These
warnings were followed up by written confirmation. The persons concerned
expressed regret in each case and from subsequent observations the warnings appear
to have the desired effect.