Author: Peacock Carter

Response has been provided to the Scottish Government consultation on Steps to Improve the Operational Effectiveness of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010.  Details of the consultation can be found here.

The response from REHIS indicated support for the proposals, to provide for an offence of obstruction and provisions to allow for service of fixed penalty notices, to establish a national database of dog control notices, and to clarify that dog control notices served in one local authority area can be enforced in other local authority areas.  The full REHIS response will be published along with all other responses on the Scottish Government website.  

Response has been provided to a consultation on Good practice guidance on public health action in response to detecting elevated levels of lead in drinking water. Consultation was received directly from the Scottish Health Protection Network – Environmental Public Health Group. This guidance provides best practice advice for NHS board Health Protection Teams responding to a report of an elevated level of lead in drinking water. The guidance also outlines roles and responsibilities of relevant partner agencies who may be involved in investigating and acting on elevated levels of lead in drinking water. The response from REHIS indicated that it may be beneficial to add epidemiological evidence to support the guidance, and that the information to give to members of the public and the outcome from blood tests could be written in a clearer manner within the document. A risk assessment approach to a given situation was promoted within the guidance, which was considered appropriate but that this assessment should consider other sources of lead to which the individual may be exposed. Comments are to be considered by the guidance review group and the document updated.

Five Scottish local authorities have joined together to deliver improved recycling and residual waste treatment.

East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, North Ayrshire, North Lanarkshire and Renfrewshire have signed a £700m deal with waste management company Viridor.

The contract, which is central to the 25-year Clyde Valley Residual Waste Project, will see Viridor process up to 190,000 tonnes of residual waste annually which would otherwise be sent to landfill.

The waste will be treated at a Materials Recovery Facility in Bargeddie, removing plastics and metals, to produce a refuse derived fuel. This is transported to Dunbar where it is burned at high temperatures, under carefully controlled conditions, to produce 258GWh of low carbon electricity – enough power for the equivalent of 70,656 homes.

This will help the partner councils comply with the Scottish Government Zero Waste Plan and Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012.

Robert Steenson, executive director of enterprise and communities at North Lanarkshire Council, said the project was the first of its kind in Scotland and would contribute to managing household waste more effectively.

He added: “It means that the waste, which cannot be otherwise be recycled, will now be diverted from landfill and transformed into low carbon electricity, with Dunbar Energy Recovery Facility generating enough power for the equivalent of 70,656 homes.”

Mr Steenson said the project would reduce the “overall carbon impact” of the disposal of the waste and provide community benefits such as apprenticeships, work placements and training workshops for businesses.

A number of community benefits will be delivered over the term of the contract.
Employment opportunities will be created across the partner council areas and Dunbar, particularly aimed at long-term unemployed and young people, over the 25-year contract.

Viridor will work with small and medium sized businesses to establish a Clyde Valley supply chain and ensure local companies in the partner area can bid for supply contracts.

A Clyde Valley GO4SET (science, engineering and technology) educational partnership will be set up with the Engineering Development Trust to encourage more secondary school pupils into STEM subjects.

The ASK Italian restaurant chain has been fined for misleading customers about the contents of a dish. 

The brand, owned by Azzurri Restaurants, was fined £40,000 by Swansea Magistrates after pleading guilty to selling a food with a misleading label between December 2016 and March 2019, contrary to the Food Safety Act 1990.

Swansea Council brought the case to court after a dish described as Aragosta e Gamberoni (lobster and king prawns) contained only a small amount of lobster.

The discovery was made during a routine inspection when a request to see the dish raised concerns that the meal did not resemble lobster. When the inspector asked to see the original packaging of the raw ingredients, the lobster turned out to be something called Lobster Sensations, which described itself as: "A delicious blend of real lobster and lobster flavoured seafood made with surimi, a fully cooked fish protein".

The actual lobster content of the frozen sensation is 35%, with a similar amount of white fish, and other ingredients including potato starch and soy protein.

Lee Reynolds, prosecuting on behalf of the local authority, said the issue came to light after an inspector visited Ask on Swansea 's Wind Street in March 2019.

He said: "This was being sold as lobster throughout the national chain of restaurants. We say consumers did not get what the consumer was entitled to expect when ordering the dish. They were not receiving, we say, proper lobster."

He conceded while the description had been "misleading", there was little or no risk to safety.

Reynolds added the cost of buying frozen lobster to make the dish would have been £12.60 per 100 grams, while the cost of the lobster mix was £1.40 per 100 grams. The overall cost of ingredients for the lobster and prawn dish was £2.84, of which the mixed seafood product made up 70p.

The court heard that once the council raised the issue with the company, the dish in question was removed from menus around the country.

Oliver Campbell, representing Azzurri Restaurants, said the firm apologised for, and regretted, the "error" it had made.

He said it had been a "mistake in the description given to the dish” and "strongly denied" there had been a financial motivation behind the offending.

District judge Neale Thomas believed the way the dish had been described on the menu by the firm was a "deliberate action", and that it "falsely represented" the nature of the food.

But he said he was not convinced there was "evidence of profiteering" by the company in its actions. 

Giving Azzurri Restaurants a one-third discount for its guilty plea, he fined the firm £40,000.

The district judge said Swansea Council was to be commended for uncovering the issue.

Asda and Lidl have said it will remove cartoon characters from their own-brand cereals to tackle parents being pestered into buying unhealthy choices and help combat childhood obesity

Lidl was the first to announce the move which said it was in response to nearly three-quarters of parents saying they experience pester power from their children in the supermarket, with over half believing cartoon characters on cereal packaging encourages this.

Lidl said it will rebrand eight of its own-brand Crownfield products in total and introduce new, cartoon-free branding from Spring.

Georgina Hall, the retailer's head of corporate social responsibility said: "We know pester power can cause difficult battles on the shop floor and we're hoping that removing cartoon characters from cereal packaging will alleviate some of the pressure parents are under," she said. 

Asda then followed announcing they would also remove cartoon characters from its cereals.

The move will see the rollout of 12 revised cereals and cereal bar packs including Malted Wheaties, Rice Snaps Cereal Bars and Unicorn Hoops online and in store on 24 February.

Aldi has already removed child-friendly characters from most of its breakfast products with only two variants outstanding however they have announced they will be removing the final cartoon characters from its range of breakfast cereals packaging by the end of March 2020.

Response has been provided to the Scottish Government consultation on Prohibiting Smoking Outside Hospital Buildings.  Details of the consultation can be found here.

The response from REHIS indicated support for the proposal to establish a legally enforceable no smoking 15 metre perimeter around hospital buildings and under any canopies or overhangs.  Resource to provide enforcement was raised as an area to be addressed.  The response indicated the legislation should not refer to Nicotine Vapour Products (NVPs) to limit confusion but that it is recommended NHS policies continue to exclude NVP use from hospital buildings and grounds.  The full REHIS response will be published along with all other responses on the Scottish Government website.

Norovirus is a common cause of infectious gastroenteritis that results in diarrhoea and vomiting. As it’s most common during the winter months, norovirus is sometimes known as the winter vomiting bug, but infections can occur at any time of year.

Norovirus is very easily spread from one person to another. Outbreaks of norovirus where more than two people are infected can commonly occur in places where people are in close contact with one another for long periods of time, such as hospitals, care hones, schools and cruise ships.

The best way to stop norovirus spreading is to ensure people: 

• stay at home for at least 48 hours after symptoms have stopped to avoid further spread 
• use soap and water for hand-washing as alcohol based hand rub may be ineffective against norovirus 
• wash their hands, particularly after contact with someone who is ill, after using the toilet and before preparing food

To find out more about norovirus and how to stop it spreading, visit the NHS Inform website.

In addition, norovirus campaign materials are now available with posters and leaflets being issued to boards. These materials and social media messages can also be viewed on the NHS Inform website.

New EU Official Control regulations came into force across the UK on 14 December 2019. The regulations aim to strengthen public health protection and the integrity of the food and feed chain in the UK.

The EU Official Controls Regulation (OCR) – Regulation (EU) 2017/625, is part of the EU Commission’s Smarter Rules for Safer Food initiative, which aims to modernise, simplify and strengthen official controls across the food chain, including plant and animal production, food manufacturing and supply, and processing and distribution.

The OCR will repeal and replace existing legislation which is integral to the activities of Food Standards Scotland as the national competent authority (CA) responsible for the delivery of official food and feed controls in Scotland, and other food and feed enforcement bodies such as Local Authorities.

This includes Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 regarding official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules; Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 that lays down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin (POAO) intended for human consumption and Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 that lays down rules concerning the increased level of official controls to be carried out on imports of certain feed and food of non-animal origin. 

While the OCR introduces more prescriptive controls in certain areas, greater flexibility is provided in others, and the overall impacts on the existing food and feed official control regime in Scotland are expected to be broadly policy neutral. An overview of the key elements the OCR will introduce is provided below. 

The Official Feed and Food Controls (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 will provide for the execution and enforcement of the OCR in relation to Food Standards Scotland’s areas of responsibility for food and feed law. 

The Official Controls (Agriculture etc.) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 make provision in respect of official controls and other official activities at border control posts; genetically modified organisms for the purposes of feed and food production; animal health requirements; prevention and minimisation of risks to human and animal health from animal by-products and derived products and welfare requirements for animals. 

Key elements of the OCR 

The OCR seeks to clarify and/or enhance current provisions on the performance of official controls by CAs. The current provisions remain substantially the same, but the key changes are: 

• introducing a new definition of ‘other official activities’. For example, enforcement measures and/or remedial actions following non-compliance; management of lists of registered/approved food and feed business operators or the issuance of official certificates (Article 2); 
• clarifying that CAs are required to carry out regular, risk-based official controls, directed at identifying fraudulent and deceptive practices (Article 9); 
• providing for greater transparency and accountability by CAs through the publication of information about the organisation and performance of official controls (Article 11); 
• requiring CAs to provide FBOs with copies of reports where non-compliance has been detected as well as where compliance has been achieved (Article 13); 
• introducing new provisions to regulate the delegation by CAs of tasks relating to ‘other official activities’ and the conditions to be met for delegating, with the exception of enforcement measures and/or remedial actions following non-compliance (Articles 28 – 33); 
• clarifying that sampling of animals and goods ordered on-line by the CA without identifying themselves can be validly used for the purposes of an official control. CAs must inform the food or feed business operator that such a sample has been taken and, where appropriate, is being analysed in the context of an official control (Articles 35 and 36); 
• introducing harmonised rules for official controls at borders across the different commodities (Articles 47 – 55); 
• amalgamating existing entry documents, such as the Common Entry Document (CED) for high-risk Food Not of Animal Origin (FNAO) and the Common Veterinary Entry Document (CVED) for POAO, as Common Health Entry Documents (CHEDs) (Articles 56 – 58); 
• Border Control Posts (BCPs) will replace Border Inspection Posts (BIPs), Designated Points of Entry (DPEs) and First Points of Introduction (FPIs). All existing approvals will be withdrawn and re-designated as BCPs in accordance with Article 59 provided that the minimum requirements referred to in Article 64 (i.e. facilities, equipment, etc.) are complied with (Article 61); 
• establishing IMSOC the Information Management System for official controls to link all existing and future IT systems managed by the Commission (e.g. TRACES, RASFF and Europhyt) to enable and efficient exchange of information (Articles 131 – 136). 
• ensuring that the penalties associated with fraud convictions must represent the economic advantage gained by the perpetrator as a result of that fraudulent action (Article 139).

Labelling food and drinks with how much walking or running is needed to burn them off could help tackle the obesity crisis, researchers say.

While pre-packaged food must display certain nutritional information, such as calorie content, there is limited evidence that the approach changes what people buy or eat. 

Researchers involved in a new study have suggested converting calories into the amount of exercise needed to burn them off – for example, labels explaining that you would need to run for:

·       13 minutes after drinking a 330ml can of fizzy drink

·       22 minutes after eating a standard size chocolate bar

·       42 minutes after eating a shop-bought chicken and bacon sandwich 

The team say the approach puts calories in context and may help people to avoid overeating, or spur them to move about more in a bid to burn off the energy they have consumed. They also suggest it might encourage food producers to make products with less calories.

“We think there is a clear signal that it might be useful,” said Prof Amanda Daley of Loughborough University, first author of the research. “We are not saying get rid of current labelling, we’d say add this to it.”

Daley said a simple approach is important since it is thought we only spend about six seconds looking at food before deciding whether to buy it.

“In that [time] we’ve got to have something that you can easily understand and make sense of without having to have a PhD in mathematics to work out what [eating] a quarter of a pizza actually means,” she said.

“If I tell you something is going to take you 60 minutes of walking to burn, I think most people understand that and know that 60 minutes of walking is a long way.”

The study was carried out by researchers from Loughborough University, Birmingham Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Birmingham. It was funded by Loughborough University and the National Institute of Health Research and published in the peer-reviewed BMJ Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health on an open-access basis, so it's free to read online here.

This study summarised the results of 14 previous trials of exercise labelling (called PACE, for physical activity calorie equivalent) compared to no labelling or other nutritional labelling. 

However, the research has limitations: most of the studies were based on hypothetical situations or laboratory-based work, and there was a limited number of them.

The studies also varied considerably in how they explored the impact of exercise-based labelling.

Overall, the summary found people selected less calories and ate less calories when their food choice included PACE labelling. However, the results varied a lot between studies and some of the methods used were unclear, meaning we have to be cautious about accepting the results.

Duncan Stephenson, deputy chief executive of the Royal Society for Public Health, welcomed the research, saying the charity’s own work showed such exercise-based labelling both made consumers think twice about their purchases, and motivated them to think about exercising.

But, he said, “real-life” studies are now needed to test the system’s impact in supermarkets and restaurants.

Nearly one in three foodborne outbreaks in the EU in 2018 were caused by Salmonella. This is one of the main findings of the annual report on trends and sources of zoonoses published by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).

In 2018, EU Member States reported 5,146 foodborne outbreaks affecting 48,365 people.

Slovakia, Spain and Poland accounted for 67% of the 1,581 Salmonella outbreaks. These outbreaks were mainly linked to eggs.

Salmonellosis was the second most commonly reported gastrointestinal infection in humans in the EU (91,857 cases reported), after campylobacteriosis (246,571).

By far the highest increase in 2018 was in the number of West Nile virus infections.

Cases of West Nile virus, a mosquito-borne zoonotic disease, were seven times higher than in 2017 (1,605 versus 212) and exceeded all cases reported between 2011 and 2017.

Most locally acquired West Nile virus infections were reported by Italy (610), Greece (315) and Romania (277). Czechia and Slovenia reported their first cases since 2013.

Italy and Hungary have also registered an increasing number of West Nile virus outbreaks in horses and other equine species in recent years.

Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) has become the third most common cause of foodborne zoonotic disease with 8,161 reported cases – replacing yersiniosis with a 37% increase compared to 2017. This may be partly explained by the growing use of new laboratory technologies, making the detection of sporadic cases easier.

The number of people affected by listeriosis in 2018 is similar to 2017 (2,549 in 2018 against 2,480 the previous year). However, the trend has been upward over the past ten years.

Of the zoonotic diseases covered by the report, listeriosis accounts for the highest proportion of hospitalised cases (97%) and highest number of deaths (229), making it one of the most serious foodborne diseases.

The Scottish Government are seeking views on a range of issues which may improve the operational effectiveness of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010.

In February 2011, the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 (“the 2010 Act”) came into force.  This legislation was a Members’ Bill brought forward by Christine Grahame MSP which gave powers to local authorities to help control dogs within communities.  In particular, powers were granted to local authorities to be able to impose dog control notices (DCNs) on dog owners who allowed their dogs to be out of control.  A DCN contains a number of conditions aimed at requiring dog owners to take more responsibility for their dogs.

The regime introduced by the 2010 Act was intended to be preventative in that its aim was to help identify out of control dogs before they became dangerous so that the behaviour of the dog and the dog owner can be encouraged to change to help avoid future dog attacks occurring.

The use of this legislation has come under scrutiny since it was introduced.  As local authorities have become more used to using their powers under the 2010 Act, a number of issues have been raised about the operation of the legislation and this consultation is looking at how the operational enforcement of the 2010 Act may be improved.  

The areas covered within this consultation have all been raised over a period of time as being potential areas where changes may help local authorities and, where relevant, other enforcement agencies in helping keep communities safe from out of control dogs.

There are wider changes to dog control law which will also be considered in the longer-term in a separate review in 2020.  The focus of this consultation is on practical measures that may improve the operational effectiveness of the operation of the 2010 Act with some, though not all, capable of being progressed without new legislation.

In summary, the Scottish Government is committed to seeking to explore the necessary steps to allow local authorities deliver effective enforcement of the 2010 Act and help the 2010 Act legislative regime deliver on its intended purpose of helping prevent future dog attacks by enabling action to be taken against irresponsible dog owners before their dogs become dangerous.

The consultation will close on 15th January and can be found here.