On Air Now
Early Breakfast with Jenni Falconer 4am - 6:30am
13 February 2015, 12:00 | Updated: 13 February 2015, 12:01
A study has named Enfield in north London as the worst place in the UK for food hygiene.
According to consumer group Which?, just 54% of medium and high-risk businesses there meet hygiene requirements.
The City of Edinburgh ranked only just above Enfield in the table while five other London councils - Lewisham, Ealing, Harrow, Camden and Brent - are also in the bottom 10.
Cherwell District Council in north Oxfordshire was rated the best performing local authority for the second year running.
Compared to last year, Newark and Sherwood is the most improved local authority for food hygiene while Fylde Borough Council deteriorated the most.
The consumer group compiled its ranking after looking at the latest data submitted by 398 UK local authorities to the Food Standards Agency.
It looked at three criteria - the proportion of premises ranked as high or medium risk in a local authority that were compliant with food hygiene requirements, the percentage of premises that had been rated for risk, and the proportion of inspections and other follow ups that were carried out by local authority inspectors.
A business should be given a risk rating when it opens from A, or high risk, to E, or low risk, which is determined by factors such as the type of establishment, how many people it serves and the competence of the management.
The rating determines how often the premises are inspected, with highest-risk premises visited every six months and those considered the lowest risk visited every five years.
Businesses are ultimately responsible for complying with hygiene rules but local authorities are tasked with enforcing compliance.
A survey by the watchdog to coincide with the study found 96% of people think it is important that local authorities ensure compliance with food hygiene rules.
Which? executive director Richard Lloyd said: "Our research reveals a shocking postcode lottery on food hygiene where in some places you may as well toss a coin before deciding which restaurant to trust with your health.
"Consumers expect local authorities to check that food businesses in their area comply with hygiene standards and rigorously enforce the rules.
"Local authorities should do more to make the best use of limited resources, respond effectively to risks across the food supply chain and ensure consumers are adequately protected wherever they live."
Enfield Council's Cabinet member for environment and community safety, Chris Bond, said the Which? findings were incorrect and the conclusions "nonsense".
He said: "It is ludicrous to suggest, as Which? are, for example, that local authorities which identify the most shortcomings in their local food businesses are the ones which are failing residents when the reverse is quite clearly true. Under the Which? assessment criteria, the more businesses you close or prosecute for hygiene failings, the worse the job you are doing. That is clearly a ridiculous suggestion.
"We know that our dedicated inspection teams inspect hundreds of premises each year, follow the Food Standards Agency inspection guidelines for food business to the letter and are incredibly tough on businesses which are not compliant with food hygiene law.
"We think that is the right way to protect the public from poor hygiene in food businesses and we will continue to pursue this strategy.
"As such we do not recognise the legitimacy of these league tables which actually hold light-touch inspection regimes up as best practice. Unfortunately such regimes are far less likely to challenge the poor practice and hygiene failings in food businesses that are likely to endanger the public by causing food poisoning.
"This research is so fundamentally flawed that I would not wrap my chips in the paper it is printed on. We think there are better ways of measuring the performance of food safety teams."