Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi
What are the implications - if any- on accredited bodies helping local authoritys to inspect food standards as the Lord Young report recently recommended? Is this a good and if so why?
All opinion welcome!
Many thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I forgot to add, my opinion is that essentially I feel it will assist the process as public expense is cut, but am unsure if it will carry any positive or negative baggage from the busines's point of view.
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Is the external body acting on its own intiative or under contract for the local authority. If working for the local authority it remains the local authority who is doing the inspection, just using a contractor to do the work on its behalf. A simple way of the local authority not having to have someone on its books all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
bob shillabeer wrote:Is the external body acting on its own intiative or under contract for the local authority. If working for the local authority it remains the local authority who is doing the inspection, just using a contractor to do the work on its
behalf. A simple way of the local authority not having to have someone on its books all the time. Hi Bob, Thanks. This initiative is purely a recommendation in Lord Young's recent review, and as such, may or may not happen. If this recommendation materialised, I'm interested if there would be implications, if so, what would they be?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Been happening for years - I have dealt with many safety enforcers working in a consultancy / contracted capacity for LA's - as Bob says it keeps them off the books and they can hire and fire as required.
Its still an LA inspection no different - on another note its not good for building relationships with the authority. They never seem to last long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The consultant is likely to do a more comprehensive inspection as the LA can rely on "diagnostic" inspection as a means of protection against litigation etc.
Means likely to put up the costs, both for the LA and the inspected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Interesting. Splitting hairs I know but if inspections currently take place with "contractors" on behalf of LAs, the difference with this is that inspections will be legally carried out by these accredited bodies in addition to LAs. Good point about the application of inspection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
First off, why is there such extensive discussion of food hygiene and food safety in a Report entitled
"A report by Lord Young of Graffham to the Prime Minister following a Whitehall‑wide review of the operation of health and safety laws and the growth of the compensation culture" is beyond me.
I guess that's old ground, very well covered already.
The basis of LY's recommendation is based essentially exclusively on costs, but nowhere is there an explanation or justification of that. These "contractors" surely have no enforcement power and the implications for dealing with potential enforcement issues arising is surely adding befuddlement?
I note the May 2011 Milestone target date for "Presentation to Food Standards Agency Board of proposals for opening delivery of food safety inspections to accredited certification bodies" has passed. Has any such presentation taken place or is one still planned I wonder. Is there in fact ANY ongoing engagement with FSA on the LY Report recommendations?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.