View report page

23
From time to time applications are made to use basement kitchens as bakehouses in contravention
of the above Act. These invariably have to be refused as the Act permits no discretion to the local
authority. In the case of a basement kitchen which is properly constructed with adequate lighting and
ventilation it is not possible to justify such a decision on the grounds of hygiene or working
conditions. This anomaly gave rise to serious difficulties during the year when it became necessary
to refuse permission to use as a bakehouse a kitchen in an important new development which,
apart from being underground, was well constructed and hygienic in all respects.
The controlling legislation was first enacted in 1901, strengthened by the Act of 1937, when
quinquennial surveys were introduced with the intention of expediting the elimination of remaining
basement bakehouses, and subsequently re-enacted without modification in the consolidation
Act of 1961. It is certain, therefore, that as recently as 1961 there was no intention to relax the
restriction for basement bakehouses but one cannot help reaching the conclusion that with
advanced techniques in construction, working conditions would not now reflect the unsatisfactory
position of the late nineteenth century and that a serious re-appraisal of the rigid provisions of this
Section of the Act could perhaps lead to the local authority being allowed to exercise its discretion
in the matter.
Food and Catering Premises—Inspection
The estimated number of food and catering premises in Westminster on 31st December, 1967
was 6,779, categorised as shewn in Table 25, page 76.
During the year 11,894 (10,783) visits were made by the Public Health Inspectors, and 550 (543)
informal notices were served in respect of matters requiring remedial attention.
The work of the section throughout the year continued to be heavy and sustained. Some 581
complaints were received concerning general food matters, conditions at premises, noise, smells,
dirty crockery, personal clothing of staff and alleged presence of vermin. Appropriate action was
taken in each instance.
It is not perhaps generally realised that catering and the sale of food in its various forms are
considered to comprise the largest industry in Westminster. In consequence the application of
current legislation to each individual premises is a mammoth task. One can sympathise with those
responsible for premises where catering and the retail sale of food is conducted when faced with
the complexities of the many statutory enactments with which they must comply. It is small wonder
that the Inspector so often finds himself in the role of a willing adviser and consultant, in addition
to that of an enforcement officer.
Unprotected Food
This is a matter calling for constant vigilance by Inspectors of the Department. It is difficult to
understand why those who are constantly engaged in the handling of food are not more alive
to the necessity for its protection from possible contamination.
Instances still occur where bread and pastries are left on doorsteps early in the morning, open to
contamination from dust, dirt and animals. Not infrequently the package nestles in close proximity
to a dustbin which has been emptied by the night staff of the Cleansing Department. These
obviously unsatisfactory conditions must be apparent to the person delivering the food, and also
to the management of the retail premises who permit such an arrangement.
The Food Hygiene (Markets, Stalls and Delivery Vehicles) Regulations, 1966, which came into
force on the 1st January, 1967, prohibit the use of land for the storage of food in such a manner
as to expose the food to risk of contamination (the term "land" includes any open space surrounding
or adjoining any premises). A proprietor of a food business who permits this to take place is
contravening the Regulations. The Food Hygiene (General) Regulations, 1960, require a person
who engages in the handling of food, i.e., a roundsman delivering bread, not to place the food so
as to involve any risk of contamination. If all concerned were mindful of these provisions, the
present position would not call for comment.
There are of course difficulties associated with deliveries of food in Central London, and it is
often only in the comparatively early hours of the morning that this can be done, but this Department
cannot countenance the disregard for the specific intention of the Regulations which is to protect
food from risk of contamination. It should not be beyond the capabilities of management to provide
some suitable container to enclose the foods or alternatively arrange for someone to receive the
goods pending their arrival.
During the past year the attention of owners of catering establishments has been drawn to the
necessity for providing adequate protection from contamination of food on display on counters.
The tendency is so often for unprotected food—and mostly this is of the "cream cake" variety—to