The Food Act report 2015
Keeping Victorian food safe
To receive this publication in an accessible format phone <1300 364 352> using the National Relay Service 13 36 77 if required, or email
Authorised and published by the Victorian Government, 1 Treasury Place, Melbourne. © State of Victoria, Department of Health and Human Services January 2017. ISSN 2200-1239 (online) Available at
Message from the Secretary
The Department of Health and Human Services’ regulators are a vital part of the Victorian Government’s efforts to ensure the best health and wellbeing for all Victorians. The government and the department are committed to advancing quality, safety and innovation, and food safety is fundamental to Victoria’s regulatory framework by:
• ensuring public safety, • supporting Victorian food businesses and manufacturers to maintain the highest quality assurance standards, and • upholding Victoria’s reputation as the food capital of Australia. The department’s role is to protect the community from food-related harm, to support public health through strategic regulatory development and to influence thinking, policy and programs to achieve a healthier community. To ensure food for sale in Victoria is safe and suitable for human consumption, we are resourced with a multi-disciplinary team with expertise in food microbiology, food technology, toxicology, chemistry, nutrition and dietetics, environmental health and social, health and regulatory policy. This team’s work under the regulatory framework of the Food Act 1984 extends from product recalls to coordinated surveillance surveys, from analysing the results of food samples to contributing to national food policy development. The department also operates Streatrader – a statewide database used by local councils, businesses and community groups to register and manage 63,820 mobile and temporary food businesses. Responding to the Auditor-General’s 2015 report ‘Managing Regulator Performance in the Health Portfolio’, the department has: • undertaken a broad program of work to improve our food safety systems and the quality of regulation in Victoria by streamlining regulatory processes; • developed more risk-based and targeted approaches to our work to manage risks, incidents and emergencies in a way that is proportionate and effective, with the goal of reducing the regulatory burden and costs on food businesses; and, • continued to maintain a leading role at the national level to promote good and consistent regulatory practices. Throughout 2015, the department sought to improve and protect the health of Victorians by building and maintaining close working relationships with all relevant stakeholders at the local, state and national levels. The Food Safety Unit supports food regulators and improves regulation through education, training and the development of guides, templates and handbooks, which clarify and formalise approaches to mandated standards, procedures and auditing. I commend The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe to you, and hope that you will find the information and data contained in it informative.
Kym Peake Secretary Department of Health and Human Services Contents
Message from the Secretary ...... 3
About us ...... 6 The Food Safety Unit, Department of Health and Human Services ...... 6 What we do ...... 6 Our priorities for 2014-2016 ...... 7 The national scene ...... 7
Looking at the evidence ...... 9 Victorian food safety surveillance and surveys ...... 9 Investing in diagnostic capability for detecting viral pathogens in food ...... 10
Developing systems and programs ...... 12 Food premises compliance assessment guide and supporting materials project ...... 12 Partnering with Environmental Health Professionals Australia – the 2015 symposium ...... 12 Sous vide training program ...... 13 Streatrader update ...... 14 Fixed, temporary and mobile food premises (class 1-4) ...... 15
Regulation and incident management ...... 17 Mandatory reporting of food-related illness, injury or death under Australian consumer law ...... 17 Food recalls 2015 ...... 17 Responding to the frozen berries linked to hepatitis A ...... 19 Notifiable microorganisms in food ...... 20 Temporary closures, suspensions and revoked registrations ...... 21 Food complaint response ...... 22 Convictions under the Act ...... 24
Communication...... 25 International cooperation ...... 25 Stakeholder engagement and communication ...... 26 Food safety hotline and email box ...... 26 Summer food safety campaign ...... 27 Websites ...... 27
Appendix 1: Data sources, specifications and limitations ...... 28 Table 1.1: Fixed food premises (class 1-3) ...... 28 Table 1.2: Temporary and mobile food premises (class 2–4) ...... 30 Table 1.3: All food premises types (fixed, temporary and mobile) – common specifications...... 32
Appendix 2: Functions, governance and legislation ...... 35 Food regulation system ...... 35 Food Act 1984 ...... 35 Roles ...... 36 Councils ...... 36 Primary producer regulators ...... 37 Minister for Health...... 37 FSU, Department of Health and Human Services ...... 37 Chief Health Officer ...... 38 Legislation administered by the FSU ...... 38
Appendix 3: Class 1-3 fixed food premises registrations by class, region and municipality, Victoria 2015* ...... 39
Appendix 4: Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises registrations/notifications by class, region and municipality in which their principal councils were located, Victoria 2015* ...... 42
Appendix 5: Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises registrations/notifications by proprietor type, class and municipality, Victoria 2015* ...... 47
Appendix 6: New class 4 temporary and mobile food premises notifications by principal council, Victoria 2015* ...... 52
Appendix 7: Compliance checks conducted at class 1–3 fixed food premises by class, municipality and region, Victoria 2015* ...... 55
Appendix 8: Compliance checks conducted at class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises* ...... 58
Appendix 9: Enforcement action by councils for offences in relation to class 1–3 food fixed premises by class and municipality, Victoria 2015* ...... 61
Appendix 10: Offences under the Act that resulted in a conviction, by type of offence, Victoria, 2015 ...... 66
Appendix 11: Major food safety related committees 2015 ...... 69
Appendix 12: Resources, publications and presentations ...... 76
Appendix 13: Glossary of terms ...... 78
About us
The Food Safety Unit, Department of Health and Human Services The Department of Health and Human Service’s (the department) Food Safety Unit (the FSU) is part of the Health Protection Branch in the Regulation, Health Protection and Emergency Management Division. The FSU has statutory functions as outlined in the Victorian Food Act 1984 (the Act). These functions include promoting the objectives1 and the consistent administration of the Act through the provision of information and guidance to local government, including supporting council environmental health officers (EHOs), the registering of food safety auditors, and basic food handling education for food businesses and the general community. The FSU also supports public health through regulatory policy development and participation and collaboration on a range of food safety working groups and committees (see appendix 12) with the aim of influencing thinking, policy and programs to achieve a healthier community. What we do
The FSU:
• Supports the Minister for Health in her role as Victoria’s lead minister on the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation (the Forum), including intra- and inter-departmental coordination to provide a whole-of-government response to national food regulation issues (see figure 1). • Leads inter-jurisdictional policy and project work on Victoria’s behalf. • Is a member of the Food Regulation Standing Committee (FRSC), its subcommittee, the Implementation Subcommittee for Food Regulation (ISFR), and other national committees under the Intergovernmental Food Regulation Agreement. • Undertakes food safety risk assessments, incident investigations and response where there are regional, statewide or national food safety incidents. This includes food recalls and representation on the national Food Safety Network and Food Incident Response Working Group. • Undertakes complaint investigations regarding possible breaches of the Act and the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code), for example, food and beverage labelling. • Undertakes research and technical analysis to support food safety activities across the department and the state. • Coordinates data collection, analysis and the procurement and management of statewide data systems (this includes coordinating and undertaking food surveillance) and publishes an annual report. • Approves food safety auditors, food analysts and food safety program (FSP) templates under the Act. • Provides advice, guidance and tools for stakeholders, including the public and food businesses and professional development for local government, EHOs and food safety auditors. • Declares the annual local government food surveillance requirements. • Maintains vigilance and undertakes research on emerging food trends, such as home based businesses, and works to ensure food legislation is adhered to and applied in a consistent manner across local government. The FSU works closely with the department’s Communicable Disease Prevention and Control Unit, the Communicable Disease Epidemiology and Surveillance Unit and the Office of the Chief Health Officer,
1 The objectives of the Victorian Food Act 1984 include ensuring food for sale is both safe and suitable for human consumption, preventing misleading conduct in connection with the sale of food and providing for the application in Victorian of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code.
Page 6 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
especially during multijurisdictional outbreaks of food-borne illness. The FSU also works with the department’s Water and Environmental Health Teams to assess potential food safety risk arising from events such as algal blooms. Our priorities for 2014-2016 • Implementing a framework for better risk-based inspection of food businesses by local government EHOs and developing model enforcement guidelines. • Developing a suit of advice and tools for allergen management in food services. • Developing the Salmonella spp. reduction strategy. The national scene Victoria’s role in the development of national food standards varies according to the complexity of the proposed amendments to the Code. The department consults with other relevant departments and provides comments to Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) on a whole-of-Victorian-government basis. Many of the applications from food businesses to amend the Code are relatively straightforward. These applications are generally seeking permissions for new substances, or substances from new sources, to be used in food production or to be sold as food. Where the matter is more complex, involves significant policy considerations (state and national) or could have broad and significant social or economic impact, the department establishes a working group, comprising representatives from all relevant departments, to develop a Victorian position. The different states and territories and New Zealand may have varying policy positions or priorities. The department will often consult and collaborate with other jurisdictions to assist Victoria in formulating a balanced view that will result in minimum effective regulation to protect public health and safety while not having a disproportionate impact on the food industry. The number of FSANZ applications/proposals analysed and responded to in 2015 was 26, which is on par with previous years. There was however a significant increase on previous year’s activities due to the complex nature of the regulatory matters being considered by FSANZ. These included a review of the microbiological criteria for all foods and of the regulation of infant formula, consideration of the migration of chemicals from packaging into food, and a review of the regulation of novel foods and nutritive substances.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 7
Food safety regulatory framework
Figure 1: Food regulation in Australia and New Zealand2
2 http://agriculture.vic.gov.au/agriculture/food-and-fibre-industries/food-regulators-forum/victorias-regulatory-food-framework
Page 8 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Looking at the evidence
Victorian food safety surveillance and surveys Coordinated surveillance and food safety surveys are effective ways of monitoring food safety across Victoria, and for directing efforts to target potentially high risk foods or practices. Victorian local councils are required to comply with their obligations outlined in section 32 of the Act. Statewide and regional coordination of the collection of food samples for laboratory analysis provides an opportunity for a focussed and thorough investigation of specific types of food. In 2014, changes were introduced into the Code – Standard 1.6.1 – Microbiological Limits for Food, relating to the criteria for Listeria monocytogenes (L. monocytogenes) in food. L. monocytogenes is an important foodborne pathogen as it causes listeriosis, an infection that is particularly serious for the elderly, pregnant women and people with a compromised immune system. The revised criteria separate ready-to-eat food into two categories, each with different acceptable microbiological levels for L. monocytogenes. The categories include ready-to-eat food in which the growth of L. monocytogenes will not occur and ready-to-eat food in which the growth of L. monocytogenes can occur. Whether ready-to-eat food will support the growth of L. monocytogenes is determined by the particular characteristics of the food, including how acidic it is (the pH), and how much moisture is in the food (the water activity). As L. monocytogenes can grow at refrigerator temperatures, the refrigerated shelf life of the food is also an important consideration. Dips are a diverse and widely consumed category of food; however, data about whether dips support the growth of L. monocytogenes, is not readily available. Therefore, from March to May 2015, a coordinated survey of dips prepared and sold in class 2 businesses in Victoria was conducted. EHOs from 32 of the 79 Victorian councils collected and submitted for analysis 655 dip samples and administered surveys assessing food handling practices at each of the food businesses from which a sample was obtained. Both chemical and microbiological parameters were assessed by the participating laboratories. Results from this survey revealed that the pH and water activity of dips varies widely. Based on the requirements of Standard 1.6.1, 65.5 per cent of dips would not support the growth of L. monocytogenes, but 34.5 per cent of dips would support the growth. The pH of the dip was the most important criteria for preventing growth of L. monocytogenes. Different categories of dips tend to show likelihood to support growth or to not support growth; for example, 65.5 per cent of hummus samples would support growth of L. monocytogenes, compared with 6.9 per cent of salsa and chutney dips. In this survey it was shown that 33.0 per cent of dips were reportedly stored for more than five days, which is also considered a risk factor for the growth of L. monocytogenes. The majority of samples (549) were deemed satisfactory based on the Guidelines for the Microbiological Examination of Ready-to-Eat Foods, while 78 were marginal (31 Escherichia. coli, 46 Bacillus. cereus, 1 E. coli and B. cereus), 14 unsatisfactory (6 E. coli, 7 B. cereus, 1 E. coli and B. cereus), 4 potentially hazardous (2 Salmonella spp., 2 B. cereus), and 10 in which L. monocytogenes was detected in 25 grams. While this coordinated survey shows that the majority of dips are microbiologically satisfactory, it also shows the importance of understanding the pH and water activity of these foods in order to determine whether they would support the growth of L. monocytogenes. Coordinating the collection of food samples is a powerful tool for gathering and evaluating food safety evidence that can guide best practice in food safety. Further, information from surveys such as this is routinely shared with other food safety regulators in Australia and New Zealand, and with Victorian local council EHOs to support their Food Act enforcement activities.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 9
Figure 2: Statutory food surveillance by purpose
Working with regions to improve food safety surveillance Much of the surveillance work undertaken by the department relies on food samples collected by local councils and sent for laboratory analysis to comply with the council’s obligations outlined in s. 32 of the Act. Oftentimes, the strength and validity of the surveillance data can be increased through the coordinated collection of food samples. One way in which the FSU supports coordinated surveillance is through support of regional food sampling groups. Regional food sampling groups are composed of representative EHOs from each of the member councils, who undertake to conduct coordinated food sampling, as appropriated for each region. This support includes attending regional food sampling group meetings and assisting with survey design and data analysis. In 2015, the FSU worked closely with the North and West Metropolitan Region to re-establish a regional food sampling group after a period of inactivity. This included providing input in reworking the terms of reference for the group and instigating a regular meeting schedule. The FSU also supported this region by providing advice on survey design and analysis. The North and West Metropolitan Region includes many council areas that have food businesses preparing and serving a wide variety of culturally diverse food types. Representatives from the FSU also attend meetings of other regional food sampling groups, as requested, to provide advice and support for food surveillance activities. Well-coordinated surveillance can be of critical importance in monitoring food safety across the state. The FSU sees enormous benefit from working closely with the regions in regard to food surveillance activities. Investing in diagnostic capability for detecting viral pathogens in food A number of important pathogens that we can get from contaminated food are viral, such as hepatitis A virus and norovirus. Hepatitis A virus can be spread through contaminated food or water and can be associated with poor hygiene conditions and leads to a viral liver disease. While it is more often contracted by people who have travelled overseas to countries where it is more common, there have been outbreaks of illness in Australia associated with particular types of food. Norovirus, while often spread person-to-person, can also be spread through contaminated food and water. It leads to a generally short-lived gastrointestinal illness, characterised by vomiting and diarrhoea. Unlike many bacterial foodborne pathogens, such as Salmonella spp. or pathogenic Escherichia coli, viral pathogens can be very difficult to detect in food. This is because viral pathogens can only replicate if they are inside a living cell (the host), thus making them difficult or impossible to grow in the laboratory. In more recent years, advances in molecular biological techniques, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), have allowed for better detection of some viruses in food. However, many food laboratories are
Page 10 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
not equipped to implement these methods as they require expensive equipment and highly trained personnel. The lack of testing capability for hepatitis A virus in Australia was highlighted during a large outbreak of hepatitis A associated with the consumption of semidried tomatoes, which occurred in Australia in 2009. At the time, food samples had to be sent to overseas laboratories for testing, prolonging the time before receiving results, and making epidemiological investigations more difficult. This incident reinforced the importance of addressing this need for laboratory testing capability within Australia. The South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) proposed such a project to the FSU as part of a competitive research process, and was commissioned to carry out this work. Using international standard methods, SARDI implemented testing protocols for the detection of hepatitis A virus and norovirus in food, offering these important validated tests in Australia. Joining the FSU in funding SARDI for this work was FSANZ, the South Australian Government and the NSW Food Authority. The investment in this testing capacity proved invaluable during an outbreak of hepatitis A associated with the consumption of frozen berries during 2015. Food samples were analysed by SARDI and did not need to be shipped offshore for testing. In a foodborne outbreak situation, rapid turnaround times for laboratory analyses can impact on the speed at which an investigation progresses. New cases can be prevented by early identification of the suspect food. Therefore, it is crucial that appropriate investment in capacity building for testing capabilities of foodborne pathogens is proactive. The ability to accurately detect pathogenic viruses in food in a timely manner is very important as part of epidemiological investigations of foodborne illness and may be critical for keeping our food supply safe.
Figure 3: Statutory food surveillance tests conducted on food samples by type of testing
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 11
Developing systems and programs
Food premises compliance assessment guide and supporting materials project In order to develop greater consistency in how local government assesses the compliance of food premises and achieve proportionate regulatory action where there is non-compliance, the FSU developed a comprehensive project for councils. The project focuses on the practice of food safety inspections and monitoring by local government EHOs and has a number of major components including a compliance assessment guide (the Guide), an enforcement framework and on-line tools to support the use of the Guide and the enforcement framework. The project is expected to run for a minimum of three years and will be implemented in three major stages with the first stage completed in December 2014. Achievements from the first stage include: • the development of a draft compliance assessment guide for local government EHOs • commencement of the drafting an enforcement framework (with all of the appropriate tools) • determination of what on-line tools needed to be developed to support local government EHOs in their use of the Guide and the enforcement framework. The second stage involves trialling the draft Guide, on-line tools and enforcement framework with a representative group of councils. The representative group comprises seven Victorian councils; two metropolitan, two regional, two rural and Melbourne City Council, for a period of six months. Two major outcomes are sought from this stage of the trial: 1. recommendations on improvements that could be made to the Guide and supporting material (on- line tools and enforcement framework) 2. recommendations on the best strategy to implement the Guide and supporting material (on-line tools and enforcement framework) at all councils in Victoria. Procurement for a suitable consultant to undertake the trial commenced in February 2015. However, mitigating factors resulted in the procurement process being abandoned and recommencing in the latter part of 2015. As of 31 December 2015 a candidate for the project had been shortlisted for interview. It is anticipated that a decision on that candidate would occur in early 2016.
Partnering with Environmental Health Professionals Australia – the 2015 symposium Environmental Health Professionals Australia (EHPA) is the professional representative body for local government EHOs, with the majority of the Victorian workforce as members. Each year the organisation holds a two day symposium for members (non-members may attend but must pay a higher attendance fee) that acts as a professional development activity as well as an opportunity for members of the profession to network. Historically the symposium has been supported by the department through sponsorship. From 2005 to 2014 the department also held an annual forum for local government EHOs which had content solely related to food safety except for the years 2011 and 2013, when the forum went for two days and contained content from across the Health Protection Branch. The forums gave the department an opportunity to explain government policy and department initiatives to local government and provided an opportunity for council officers to engage with department staff on the range of challenges they face in implementing government legislation and programs.
Page 12 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
A constrained budget for the 2015/16 year lead the FSU to rethink how it could best deliver professional development content to EHOs and support them in the performance of their statutory obligations under the public health legislation. A solution was to enter into a partnership with EHPA for 2015/16, as opposed to a sponsorship agreement, and lengthen the annual EHPA symposium to three days to allow for more content and have professional development outcomes. The arrangement would result in departmental staff partnering with the EHPA symposium organising committee with the symposium program, venue and delegate fees being agreed to by both the department and EHPA. The inaugural three day EHPA symposium was held in October 2015 at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. The theme of the symposium was ‘One Team One Goal’ with the purpose of providing up- to-date information and training for EHOs. The program for the event was developed by a symposium committee formed with representatives from EHPA, the FSU, and the host municipality, the City of Melbourne. There were 181 attendees on day one, 211 attendees on day two, and 124 attendees on day three. In total there were delegates from 69 of the 79 councils. Each of the three days featured a keynote speaker:
• Monday – Shannon McKiernan who shared his experiences working with Aspen Medical in Africa fighting the Ebola epidemic; • Tuesday – Dr Louise Mahler who spoke about vocal intelligence • Wednesday – John Doherty, Solicitor, spoke about his experiences in the Garibaldi food poisoning case where the food regulatory system failed so many people. Over the course of the three day event, eighteen workshops were held as well as the four field trips. Speakers from various units within the department provided a range of information on technical areas and other speakers were sourced from local government, universities and commercial fields. In total 10 sessions/workshops had food safety themes and there were two presenters from the FSU. The overall evaluation report on the 2015 symposium was excellent and set the bar high for future symposiums. It is anticipated that the department will enter into similar arrangements for the 2016 EHPA symposium. These forums provide a great opportunity for the department to both inform and provide learning opportunities for EHOs on a variety of food safety issues, covering a broad range of public health regulatory issues.
Gary Smith, Manager, Food Safety Unit giving a presentation to the EHPA symposium.
Sous vide training program The success of cooking shows on television continues to encourage both chefs and the home cook to try previously unfamiliar styles of cooking. Sous vide – French for ’under vacuum’ – is one such style. Sous vide foods are foods that are cooked under controlled conditions of temperature and time, inside sealed
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 13
packages, in water baths or steam ovens. Some examples of food cooked this way includes rare beef steaks, kangaroo fillets, chicken, seafood, vegetables and sauces. Cooking food this way can give different characteristics to the food than conventional cooking methods. EHOs often see new techniques of cooking in the food businesses they inspect and sous vide cooking is one such technique whose popularity continues to grow. In 2015, the department identified that detailed guidance on sous vide was needed for EHOs and food businesses to ensure the continued production of safe food. A sous vide supplement was produced for use with the department’s Food Safety Program template for class 2 retail and food businesses – specifically for version three. Before the sous vide supplement was released, the FSU provided training to Victorian EHOs on how to use the supplement and how to assist food businesses to use it too. FSU staff had some fun cooking 63 oC eggs and chicken, and got a big reaction from EHOs every time they were served up for tasting in the training sessions. Training was delivered by FSU staff around the state over five months, including Geelong, Ballarat, Ararat, Bendigo, Shepparton, Traralgon and metropolitan Melbourne. Approximately 250 EHOs attended and feedback was consistently positive, indicating a desire and need to understand sous vide cooking and to help food businesses do it safely. The sous vide supplement has been developed for foods that are:
• vacuumed packed or similarly sealed to expel air prior to cooking • cooked by immersing in hot water or steam • cooked at lower temperatures than other common cooking methods, but for a time period sufficient to produce safe food • cooked safely to kill potentially hazardous bacteria prior to consumption.
EHOs who attended the training commented that they appreciated the informative, hands-on application of food science training, which clearly laid out the processes of sous vide in a simplified and easy to understand session. Learning the limitations of size, temperature and time and the ability to have a two- way conversation with trainers about the processes of sous vide were also positives noted in feedback, as well as the taste test!
Department staff demonstrating the safe use of sous vide techniques to EHOs during a training session
Streatrader update Streatrader is the FSU’s online system for businesses and community groups to register and notify their temporary and mobile food premises with their registering council. Streatrader is used by both business and community groups and, since going live in October 2012, the number of users has increased from 5,000 to more than 20,000.
Streatrader support As a way of assisting local government and users during the introduction of Streatrader, the FSU established a support service (phone and email).
Page 14 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
The Streatrader support service allowed the FSUs Streatrader team to quickly identify and respond to issues, plan system improvements, and deliver training and support programs for councils, businesses and community groups. At its peak, the Streatrader support service was taking up to 450 calls a week. This number reduced over time and the department focussed on investing time and resources in system improvements, web development and training and support for councils. By April 2015 the number calls and emails had reduced to 120 a week.
Transitioning Streatrader support to councils In April 2015, the department handed over the provision of direct support for Streatrader users to councils. To facilitate this transition, the department provided significant assistance to councils at this time, running over 40 training sessions across the state. The FSU continues to provide phone and email support to councils to ensure a smooth transition. Fixed, temporary and mobile food premises (class 1-4)
The food business count All Victorian food business are regulated under the Act and are classified on the basis of the potential hazard posed by their highest risk food handling activity. Four classes of premises capture the different food safety requirements; the level of regulation is largely determined by the risk of microbial hazards posed by food handling and the potential impact on people’s health. Class 1 represents the highest risk food premises; providing food to vulnerable population groups in facilities such as nursing homes and hospitals. Class 4 represents the lowest risk premises, such as a service station selling pre-packaged confectionery. Class 2, encompassing premises such as restaurants and cafes, is by far the largest class, representing 73 per cent of the total fixed premises in Victoria (see Table 1). Under the Act, class 1, 2, and 3 food premises must register annually with their local council. Class 4 premises, due to their lower risk food handling activities, are required only to notify their local council on a once-off basis. Councils are not required to undertake an annual inspection of class 4 food businesses and are not required to contact them to ascertain if they are still operating.
Figure 5: Mobile and temporary food premises registrations in 2015 across Victoria
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 15
Figure 4: Fixed premise registrations in 2015 across all classes
Across Victoria, a total of 63,820 fixed (class 1-3), temporary and mobile (class 2-4) food premises were registered and regulated under the Act. Temporary and mobile food premises made up 40 per cent (18,078) of this total. Of all the temporary and mobile food premises, 14 per cent were mobile and 86 per cent were temporary, 64 per cent were metropolitan and 36 per cent were non-metropolitan.
Table 1: Snapshot of fixed, mobile and temporary food premises in Victoria in 2015*
Total Temporary & mobile Fixed
2,590 Mobile premises 15,488 Temporary premises
Type of premise - class 4 7,931 10,947 Type of premise - class 3 805 10,142 38,569 Type of premise - class 2 5,342 33,227 Type of premise - class 1 2,373 20,275 Located in non-metropolitan Victoria 6,467 13,808 43,545 Located in metropolitan Melbourne 11,611 31,934 63,820 Total of class 1-3 fixed and class 2-4… 18,078 45,742
*Note: Includes water transport vehicles (class 3) as mobile premises. Excludes vending machines, which are minimally regulated under the Act.
Page 16 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Regulation and incident management
Mandatory reporting of food-related illness, injury or death under Australian consumer law Since January 2011 an amendment to Australian Consumer Law has meant that the suppliers of consumer goods (including food) and related services are required to report deaths, serious injuries or illnesses associated with the use of such goods. This requirement is known as mandatory reporting and all participants in the supply chain are required to comply with the reporting requirement. This includes retailers, distributors, importers or manufacturers of food. If a food business becomes aware of an illness, injury or death related to the use of food, the business must report this to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) using an online form on the ACCC website. The electronic notification is automatically sent to the relevant state or territory food regulator for assessment and any necessary action. In 2015 the department’s FSU received 321 reports. Of these, 299 (93 per cent) did not meet the mandatory reporting requirements because: • they were incorrectly reporting an issue that was not a food safety risk (for example, an injury which resulted from a consumer dropping a product), or • the report did not include sufficient information for follow-up and this information could not be readily obtained. Of the remaining 22 reports: • 15 (five per cent) were isolated incidents that had been adequately and appropriately responded to by the business receiving the complaint • four (less than one per cent) related to three food recalls. These were submitted after the recalls in order to meet the mandatory reporting requirements (as opposed to lodgement of the mandatory report resulting in the food recall) • three were referred to other food regulators for follow up. Food recalls 2015 Under the Act, it is an offence to sell unsafe food. Where food in the marketplace is found to be unsafe, the food business responsible for the manufacture or importation of that food has a responsibility to remove it from the marketplace – usually through initiating a food recall. Food may be found to be unsafe after, for example, an investigation of a food complaint or through government testing. FSANZ defines a food recall as ‘action taken to remove from sale, distribution and consumption, foods which may pose a safety risk to consumers'3. FSANZ is a Commonwealth Government Statutory Authority that develops food standards jointly with New Zealand. The Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 sets the functions of FSANZ, one of which is to coordinate food recall action for Australia. Food recalls typically occur voluntarily, in consultation between the relevant state or territory food authority and the food business conducting the recall. However, there are emergency powers in the Act that allow the Chief Health Officer to mandate a food recall should there be a need to do so. In 2015 a total of 81 food recalls were instigated by Australian food businesses – the highest number in more than 10 years. Of these, 24 (25 per cent) were instigated by Victorian food businesses (manufacturers or importers).
3 http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/industry/foodrecalls/recalls/pages/whatisafoodrecall.aspx
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 17
Figure 6: Food recalls across Australia in 20154
Table 2 shows the reason for all recalls involving Australian businesses in 2015 and whether a Victorian food business (manufacturer or importer) initiated the recall. As in 2014, undeclared allergens were the most common reason for recall in 2015. Biotoxins resulted in the second highest number of recalls this year, at 19 per cent, after the Department of Health and Human Services Tasmania undertook routine oyster testing in the bays and found parahaemalytic shellfish toxin.
Table 2: Food recalls by reason, 2015
Reason In Australia In Australia (%) Instigated by Instigated by Country of (number) Victorian Victorian origin (where food food importer imported) manufacturer (number) (number) Germany, Undeclared Malaysia, China, 39 48% 7 9 Allergen Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Thailand Biotoxin 15 19% 0 0 - Microbiological 13 16% 3 0 - contamination Foreign matter 8 10% 1 0 - in food Other 4 5% 1 1 NZ Labelling 2 2% 0 2 China Total 81 100% 12 12 -
4 Ibid
Page 18 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Allergen recalls in 2015 The majority of allergen-related recalls in 2015 were instigated as a result of a survey of coconut milk products for the presence of undeclared (dairy) milk. These recalls were undertaken by state and territory government food authorities. This survey resulted in 24 of the 39 allergen recalls (62 per cent) in 2015, and was undertaken in response to the investigation of an allergic reaction to undeclared dairy milk in an imported coconut beverage in August 2015, which also resulted in a recall.
Biotoxin recalls in 2015 As can be seen in Table 2, 19 per cent of food recalls in Australia in 2015 were undertaken by oyster producers in Tasmania, when the Department of Health and Human Services Tasmania undertook routine testing from the waters of the east coast after a large algal bloom. Shellfish, such as oysters, can be affected by naturally occurring events like algal blooms, as they feed on the algae, which concentrates the toxins produced by the algae. The result can be paralytic shellfish poisoning, which can cause serious illness and even death. Responding to the frozen berries linked to hepatitis A An investigation into frozen berries from China conducted by the department’s Health Protection Branch in February 2015 not only led to a national response to a hepatitis A outbreak, it also reinvigorated the national debate on country of origin labelling laws. The department’s Communicable Diseases Prevention Control Unit was notified of hepatitis A in four adults - three in Victoria and one in New South Wales on Friday 13 February 2015. Follow up investigations of the four cases identified a common link. Hepatitis A virus infection is uncommon in Australia. Most cases result from contact with the virus during international travel. In this instance, there was no history of travel and the only common link between the cases was the consumption of a particular brand of commercially available frozen berries. Given this information, the FSU contacted the supplier of the food to advise of the potential risk to public health. The supplier was asked to consider a food recall. The supplier responded immediately by voluntarily initiating a recall of Nanna’s Frozen Mixed Berry products that day and then recalled further products over the coming days as a precautionary measure. Following the recall, the supplier stopped importing from possible sources of the potential contamination, and increased its testing regime of its imported frozen berries from all countries. The outbreak garnered national media attention, which assisted with the recall and further identification of cases. In total 28 cases of hepatitis A were identified as being linked to the outbreak associated with frozen berry consumption. No other common exposure was determined. The investigation was complex as the product was manufactured overseas and required liaison with various government agencies such as the Commonwealth’s Department of Agriculture and Department Health, FSANZ, and the Chinese government. This outbreak saw the testing of product for the hepatitis A virus for the first time in Australia. Previous outbreaks resulted in products being sent for testing overseas because of the lack of a validated test method in Australia. Australian testing was made possible through FSU funding of SARDI to develop and validate a testing method for hepatitis A. This meant that the laboratory was equipped and ready to test product when requested, enabling a quick response with results. In addition, as hepatitis A test results are not definitive and difficult to interpret, the FSU was able to discuss results with local laboratory experts. As the frozen berries implicated in the outbreak were packaged in China with no processing in Australia, the importer, the FSU and the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture believe that the cause was most likely an isolated on-farm contamination rather than an ongoing processing or manufacturing issue.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 19
Notifiable microorganisms in food Under the Victorian Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008, laboratories must notify the department when they detect certain pathogenic microorganisms in food or drinking water. Table 3 shows reports of all notifiable pathogens received during 2015. Schedule 5 of the Public Health and Wellbeing Regulations 2009 specifies the pathogens that must be reported and the manner in which it must be done. When it receives such notifications, the FSU’s Regulation and Incident Management Team conducts a risk assessment in each case to determine the appropriate course of action. Risk assessments take into account factors such as: the species, type and level of microorganism present; whether the food is raw, ready-to-eat, unsealed or packaged; whether the food can or cannot support the growth of the microorganism; and whether the food has been sold to the public. Depending on the food sample, this may result in referral to the appropriate food regulator (such as the local council, Dairy Food Safety Victoria or PrimeSafe) or direct investigative follow-up by the FSU with the food business involved to ensure a prompt and appropriate public health response. Some investigations can result in a food recall to ensure that affected food is removed from the marketplace.
Table 3: Reports received by the department in 2015 from laboratories of notifiable microorganisms in food under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008
Pathogen No. % Salmonella spp. 244 49.6% Listeria monocytogenes 199 40% Campylobacter spp. 37 7.5% Vibrio spp. 10 2% E.coli 2 0.4% Cryptosporidium spp. 0 0% Cyclospora spp. 0 0% Giardia cysts 0 0% Hepatitis A 0 0% Norovirus 0 0% Total 492 100%
The department received 492 notifications of notifiable microorganisms in food in 2015. Of these:
• 302 (61 per cent) came from testing conducted by food business under their licensing requirements with Dairy Food Safety Victoria, PrimeSafe, or under internal food safety and quality assurance programs. • 82 (16.6 per cent) came from samples obtained for testing by Victorian councils • 70 (14 per cent) came from samples tested by other state and territory food regulators • 37 (7.5 per cent) came from samples required to be tested by Importers under the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture’s Imported Food Inspection Scheme • 1 (0.2 per cent) came from a private person who sought testing of a meal cooked at home. Overall, 2015 saw a 14 per cent reduction in the total number of notifications reported compared with 2014. Salmonella spp. comprised approximately half of the total notifications. Compared with 2014, the numbers of Salmonella spp. notifications in 2015 were higher. This could be attributed to the New South
Page 20 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Wales Food Authority (NSWFA) using a Victorian laboratory for testing purposes, and the requirement for the laboratory to report the detection of Salmonella spp. in food to the FSU, regardless of the jurisdiction and source of the sample tested. A total of 58 samples from NSWFA comprised notifications of the presence of Salmonella spp., and of these 42 were of Salmonella spp. samples in raw chicken collected as part of a poultry microbiological survey. Salmonella spp. in raw chicken is a common occurrence and is expected to be present. It presents no health risk in and of itself. In addition, 12 of the 58 positive Salmonella spp. notifications from the NSWFA were attributed to outbreak investigations and found in a variety of prepared foods not distributed in Victoria. Of the 244 Salmonella spp. notifications, 111 were for raw meats, which do not present a public health risk. The other main types of foods positive for Salmonella spp. (11) were spices, coconut and sesame seeds which are considered high risk foods by the Commonwealth’s Department of Agriculture and hence are tested for Salmonella spp. at the border prior to market release under the Imported Food Inspection Scheme. Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) made up the vast majority of the remaining laboratory notifications to the department in 2015, comprising a total of 199 notifications (40 per cent). This is 18 per cent less than that reported in 2014. Approximately half (45 per cent) of the Lm notifications pertained to detection in dairy foods, smallgoods, seafood, prepared meals and sandwiches tested by food manufacturers as part of their own quality assurance programs, and/or requirements from their regulators Dairy Food Safety Victoria and PrimeSafe. Notifications of Lm (71; 35 per cent) in various food types (prepared meals, sandwiches, pastries, dips) sampled by council officers from registered food premises in their municipalities was part of their compliance with annual mandatory food sampling requirements under the Act. As standard procedure, council EHOs follow up each notification with the food business to establish the means of contamination and recommend cleaning and sanitising of the manufacturing/food preparation environment and good hygiene practices to prevent reoccurrences. Of these 71 Lm notifications, 13 were in dips that came from a statewide survey undertaken by the FSU. In 2015, six laboratory notifications resulted in food recalls. One was a smoked salmon dip that was recalled due to the particular parameters of the food indicating a public health risk – namely, the dip was packaged with a shelf life of greater than five days and could support the growth of Lm. A second food recall was for a pre-prepared fried rice meal, which presented a public health risk as it had a shelf life of 21 days and could support the growth of Lm. The meal was actually required to be reheated prior to consumption, and therefore ordinarily would not have been regarded as a public health risk as the reheating should have rendered the food safe. However, in this instance, recall was deemed as the appropriate action because the reheating instructions had not been validated to ascertain if the temperature reached was indeed sufficient to kill Lm. The other four recalls were of different batches of the one hemp protein powder, due to the presence of Salmonella spp. These were deemed to be a public health risk and were recalled through the ACCC processes as the powder was not deemed to be a food. Temporary closures, suspensions and revoked registrations Where a council has serious concerns about a food premises, it may suspend or revoke the premises’ registration until those concerns are addressed. The department was not notified of any registration suspensions or revocations in 2015. Under the Act, an alternative approach is for council to direct that the business take steps to ensure adequate hygiene and food handling at the premises. As part of this order, the registering council’s chief executive officer may temporarily close a food premises or stop particular food handling activities in the
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 21
meantime, where this is necessary to protect public health. In such serious cases, the business may only resume operations once the problems have been fixed. In 2015, nine Victorian councils notified the department of the closures of 18 food premises, as required under the Act.5 There were seven food premises closures in the City of Melbourne, four in the City of Greater Dandenong , and one in each of the following municipalities: Gannawarra Shire, City of Glen Eira, Manningham City Council, Maribyrnong City Council, City of Monash, Moreland City Council and City of Whitehorse. This power to close a food business complements councils’ longstanding authority to order a clean-up of a food business or other steps to ensure safe food handling conditions. The temporary closure of a food premises is a more significant step that can only be ordered by a council chief executive officer when it is clear that food should not be sold from the site until improvements are made. Food complaint response The FSU received and responded to 443 food complaints in 2015. Table 4 shows these according to the nature of the issue and Table 5 gives examples of the types of complaints received during 2015. FSU staff responded to 9766 emails to the dedicated food safety email inbox as well as 5,216 telephone calls to the food safety hotline.
Table 4: number of complaints received by the FSU
Complaint Number Percentage Food premises cleanliness / 258 58 handling
Physical contamination 24 5
Labelling 45 10
Microbiological contamination 24 5
Allergens 27 6
Composition 15 3
Chemical contamination 13 3
Health claims 8 2
Other 3 1
5 Section 19(4)(b) of the Food Act requires councils to notify the department of the making of an order under Section 19(3)(a) or (3)(b) in which council directs that either: a food premises must not be kept or used for the sale, or the handling for sale, or any food; or a food premises must not be kept or used for the preparation of food. 6 While this number is lower than previous years, it does not represent a reduction in the number of issues being referred to the FSU, but reflects a refinement made to the reporting methods to ensure that analysis of the data is qualitative rather than quantitative.
Page 22 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Table 5: Examples of food complaints, 2015
Complaint type Examples Piece of metal found in ham steak Physical Hair in packaged meal contamination Piece of rubber in canned soup Incorrect nutrition information panel on dip Labelling breaches No country of origin on packaged confectionery Inaccurate compositional information in nutrition panel on beverage Chemical taste in soy milk Chemical ‘Pine mouth’ syndrome after consuming pine nuts
Complaints come predominantly from members of the public, as well as the food industry. The FSU also responds to numerous requests for information from Victorian council EHOs. Most food complaints related to isolated, one-off incidents from local council-registered premises, such as the cleanliness and handling practices observed at food premises or foreign objects found in food. In accordance with standard protocol, the FSU refers these to council EHOs for follow-up investigation. The FSU generally has a coordinating role in the investigation of incidents and complaints where foods which are manufactured in Victoria are distributed beyond a local area; as well as supporting the Chief Health Officer to exercise the use of his/her delegated powers under the Food Act. In these cases, depending on the nature of the issue the department liaises with any relevant state and territory food regulators, other Victorian regulators (including Dairy Food Safety Victoria, which regulates dairy food, and PrimeSafe, which is responsible for meat and seafood, and local councils). The primary focus of such investigations is to mitigate any risk to public health. To ensure a nationally consistent, risk-based approach to food safety matters, the department adheres to the principles of the Australia and New Zealand food regulation enforcement guideline7, which has been endorsed by all states and territories. This document promotes a graduated approach to enforcement, based on the public health risk presented by the food safety incident. In other words, matters of public health risk are responded to as a matter of priority. As food companies transcend borders, all states and territories cooperate to act on food incidents and complaints quickly and efficiently. For example, a food product may be manufactured in one state and the company’s head office may be located in another in which it does not manufacture food at all. Where a complaint needs to be investigated or a food recall considered, different levels of government in different jurisdictions may need to work together. For example, a Victorian food manufacturer may have inadvertently omitted peanuts from the ingredients list on the label of one of its foods. As this would be a public health risk and breach of the Code and an immediate consumer-level food recall would be initiated. The FSU and the relevant local council would contact the manufacturer to determine how this happened and to ensure that any necessary corrective action is taken. The council would also consider possible enforcement action. If, however, the Victorian manufacturer made the product under contract to a food company whose head office was located in another state, for example, New South Wales, then following investigation by the
7 Department of Health, Australian and New Zealand Food Regulation Enforcement Guideline, Version 9, Canberra, November 2009. Prepared by the Implementation Sub-Committee Enforcement Guideline Working Group.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 23
relevant Victorian council, the recall would be instigated by the New South Wales company under the advisement of the NSWFA. To facilitate the referral process, all states and territories have agreed to function under the ‘home jurisdiction rule’, which provides for a cooperative referral mechanism where a trace-back of a food complaint implicates another jurisdiction. The FSU assists local councils with this referral process. Convictions under the Act In 2015, convictions were recorded against 30 parties (companies or individuals) in relation to 21 food premises operating in Victoria, brought by 13 councils8. Of these 21 premises, two have not as yet been able to be included in the conviction register because at the time of writing, information was still outstanding from the two councils involved. With respect to the remaining 19 food premises, the convicted companies and individuals were found guilty of a total of 372 offences under the Act. The statistics in this report include only offences for which a conviction was recorded. A company may be charged with offences under the Act if it is the proprietor of the food business; and an individual may be charged if they are the proprietor of the business, or is a director of a proprietor company or is involved in the management of the business.
Types of offences and premises Most of the convictions were for breaches of section 16 of the Act, which is a failure to comply with the Code. The vast majority of these were breaches of chapter three of the Code – the food safety standards; specifically Standard 3.2.2 – Food Safety Practices and General Requirements and Standard 3.2.3 – Food Premises and Equipment. See Appendix 10 for further details.
Penalties The penalties imposed in 2015, in addition to the recording of a conviction, included fines ranging from $2,000 to $60,000 (both of which were imposed on individuals rather than companies); and in one case 50 hours of volunteer work was imposed on an individual rather than a fine. The highest fine imposed, $60,000, related to offences including failing to ensure that the required food safety program was kept at the food premises and eight breaches of the food safety standards regarding cleanliness and hygiene, including failing to provide soap and paper towels at hand washing facilities, failing to store food so as to protect it from the likelihood of contamination and failing to take all practicable measures to eradicate and prevent the harbourage of pests. The lowest fine imposed, $2000, related to 24 breaches of the food safety standards.
8 Boroondara, Darebin, Glen Eira, Greater Dandenong, Knox, Manningham, Melbourne, Melton, Mildura, Monash, Mornington Peninsula, Whitehorse, Yarra Councils.
Page 24 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Communication
International cooperation The 2015 year saw a continuation of visits to Victoria of high-level international delegations interested in learning about Victoria’s system of food regulation. These visits also gave the Department and its co- regulators - local councils, PrimeSafe, Dairy Food Safety Victoria and Biosecurity Victoria, valuable opportunities to learn more about regulatory systems that operate beyond Australia’s borders, and for us to showcase many of our successes. One such opportunity was a visit to Victoria in June by officials from the China Food and Drug Administration. Supported by the World Bank, the delegation spent time in both Melbourne and Canberra to discuss how food law is implemented in Australia. The delegation was particularly pleased to review a copy of the department’s food safety template that is translated into simplified Chinese and asked many questions about how regulators manage food safety across the diversity of cultural groups that operate food businesses here in Victoria. This visit by Officials from one of our largest trading partners followed a similar, and very successful visit to Victoria by officials from the United States of America Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) in late 2014; the United States being another very important trading partner for Australia. Officials from the USFDA were in Victoria as part of a two-week, rigorous review of the food safety regulatory system in Australia. As one of the two largest food manufacturing states of Australia, Victoria was well placed to demonstrate how Australia’s food laws are applied in manufacturing settings. Moreover, with strong local government involvement in the administration of food laws, Victoria offered USFDA officers a unique insight into how all three levels of Australian governments work together to ensure a safe food supply. A key component of the two-week program comprised two separate teams of USFDA officers accompanying local council EHOs during inspections of food manufacturing premises to audit the way in which those inspections are planned and conducted and the laws enforced. Local government officers spent considerable time explaining inspection and follow-up processes, enforcement activities and council data systems, all of which contributed to the USFDA officers’ understanding of how the food regulatory system operates in Australia. The debrief that followed the visit showed that USFDA officers found the visits to food manufacturers and the range of meetings extremely valuable and acknowledged the enthusiasm and professionalism of those with whom they met. For Victoria’s food manufacturing industry, this was a particularly important visit and it is hoped that the experience and the knowledge gained in Victoria will auger well with subsequent discussions that these officers will have within their organisation about the comparability of our food regulatory system with the food safety outcomes required by the US Food Safety Modernisation Act. A favourable outcome in this regard should ensure that our exporters are not subjected to additional requirements or audits by US officials in order for their food products to be accepted in to the United States of America. November welcomed another important visitor to Victoria - Mr Ian McWatt, Director, Food Standards Scotland. The program for Mr McWatt’s visit included a meeting with officers of the City of Melbourne to discuss monitoring and enforcement activities. That meeting was rounded off by Mr McWatt accompanying the council’s EHOs on an inspection of a food business. Mr McWatt also met with Victoria’s Chief Veterinary Officer and departmental officers. The latter meeting included an overview of Victoria’s role in the development of food standards under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, the role of local councils in the administration of the Food Act 1984, Victoria’s food sampling program and its role in the food recall system.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 25
Stakeholder engagement and communication Following the findings in the 2015 Victorian Auditor-General’s report, ‘Managing Regulator Performance in the Health Portfolio’, the FSU has been working to improve communication with stakeholders. Communication typically includes emails, telephone discussions, face-to-face meetings, industry trade shows and web based information. The FSU has a strong web presence. The Better Health Channel is the primary means of communicating with consumers, including in the provision of general food safety information, health warnings, guidelines, videos, factsheets, and notification of convictions under the Act. Due to the high proportion of culturally and linguistically diverse stakeholders interested in food safety matters (either as consumers, employees or proprietors), guidance information is often available in multiple languages; most frequently in Arabic, Vietnamese and Simplified Chinese. The FSU also provides the award winning DoFoodSafely online learning resource for people working in a food business. It is principally targeted to new workers in food businesses but is also popular with those wishing to enter the food industry. A review of the program will be undertaken in 2016, with stakeholder feedback sought on the content, design and relevance of the information it delivers to the user. It is anticipated that the results of the consultation will be implemented to better reflect the needs of consumers, employees and proprietors using this internationally recognised program. A password protected web portal specifically for EHOs is also administered by the FSU and provides EHOs with up-to-date bulletins, forums and templates, regulation guidance, information on training and development and other quick links to assist them in their regulatory role. The methods of communicating with these and other stakeholders varies but the purpose of FSU communication is to highlight emerging issues and risks, share knowledge and expertise, investigate food safety concerns and complaints, seek feedback on the development of policy and business tools, and providing training and information. A formal stakeholder engagement and communication plan is currently being developed, and will be reviewed annually by the FSU to ensure engagement and communication are driving the work of the FSU.
The Minister for Health, the Hon Jill Hennessey, promoting the World Health Organisation's International Food Safety Day with department staff at the Collingwood Children's Farm.
Food safety hotline and email box In 2015 the FSU free-call hotline and dedicated email inbox received a total of 5200 calls and 986 emails from the public, food businesses, council officers and students. The majority of email queries are related to complaints about food premises (388), which are referred to the relevant local council or regulator for
Page 26 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
investigation; registration inquiries (176); auditing / analysts / food safety template queries (152); and public food safety enquiries (117), such as what to do with food when there has been a power failure. All calls to the hotline and emails to the [email protected] inbox are actioned within 24 hours. Summer food safety campaign In conjunction with the Minister for Health’s office and the department’s Communications and Media Branch, the FSU supported a range of consumer information broadcast to the public about keeping food safe over the summer period while enjoying Christmas celebrations and summer picnics. Websites
Better Health Channel In 2015, more than 304,000 people searched food safety topics on the Better Health Channel. The top food safety page views were: ‘Food safety storage’ (133,058), ‘Food safety eggs’ (39,025), and ‘Food safety when cooking’ (18,359).
Food Safety Unit Over 547,842 searches were made of the FSU website – https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/public- health/food-safety - which is principally designed for food businesses and food regulators, such as EHOs The site also links to a secure section (password protected) that provides EHOs with information on policies and procedures, guides on compliance and other relevant information. The Better Health Channel provides the main portal for information for the public, however, specific information, such as information how to make a complaint about food or responsibilities for clubs doing sausage sizzles is available on the FSU site. In 2015 the FSU website entry page had 64,596 page views, the ‘Food templates’ pages had 52,567, and ‘Food business classification’ had 30,150.
DoFoodSafely eLearning tool One of the most used resources on the Better Health Channel is the DoFoodSafely online food handler’s training module. In 2015 there were more than 872,000 page views. DoFoodSafely is primarily designed for people just commencing work in the food industry or about to. Figures are not available for how many people actually completed all modules in the tool and received a certificate of completion at the end (meaning they scored over 93 per cent across all the modules) but a review and revamp of the program will commence in 2016 to address this and other issues as well as updating the program to include new and additional information, such as the role of food handlers and allergens.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 27
Appendix 1: Data sources, specifications and limitations
This report has been developed under Section 7C of the Act. Data sources, specifications, limitations and other explanatory notes about the data presented in this report are described here. As data on fixed food premises on the one hand, and temporary and mobile food premises on the other, are drawn from different sources, these are described in the Tables 1.1 and 1.2 respectively. Data specifications which apply to all premises types and described in Table 1.3.
Table 1.1: Fixed food premises (class 1-3)
Specifications Description Date range 1 January to 31 December 2015 Data Department of Health and Human Services’ Food Performance Dataset (as specifications amended from time to time) provides a common set of concepts, data elements and edit/validation rules that define activities carried out under the Act. The terminology is aligned to the concepts and provisions in the Act. The use of the Food Performance Dataset across all municipalities is intended to promote a consistent approach to administering the Act across the state, as provided in s. 7A of the Act. Inclusions Class 1–3 food premises Registrations: A count of all class 1–3 fixed food premises: • registered with Victorian councils as required under the Act as at 31 December 2015, regardless of the date of initial registration or renewal • operated by businesses, community groups and not-for-profit organisations • with a registration status of ‘New’, ‘Renewal’ or ‘Transfer’, unless otherwise stated. Compliance activity: A count of all compliance checks conducted in relation to class 1, 2 and 3 fixed food premises. Compliance checks are undertaken to assess compliance with the Act, the Code and premises’ food safety programs (FSPs). Compliance checks include: • An audit conducted by a department-approved food safety auditor. Audits are conducted on all class 1 and 2 food premises that have a non-standard FSP (that is, an FSP tailored specifically for the food premises). Class 1 and 2 food premises, are required to be audited once within a 12-month period. The audit determines whether the FSP is adequate and whether the premises is complying with it and with its obligations under the Act and the Code. • A council assessment conducted by an EHO once in a 12-month period of all class 1 premises (this is in addition to the annual audit conducted by a department-approved food safety auditor. • A council assessment conducted by an EHO once in a 12-month period of all class 2 premises with a standard FSP (an FSP prepared using a department- approved template). It is optional for councils to conduct an assessment of a class 2 premises that have a non-standard FSP. An assessment determines if the food premises is complying with the Act, the Code and its FSP. • An inspection of a food premises conducted by an EHO to examine if a food premises is complying with the Act and the Code. An inspection can be conducted in relation to any food premises regardless of the food premises classification. However, class 3 premises must be inspected at least once within
Page 28 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Specifications Description a 12-month period. All new class 1-3 premises must be inspected prior to registration being first granted and all premises must be inspected on change of ownership. Enforcement actions: A count of actions taken under the Act in relation to food premises in order to prevent or reduce the possibility of a serious danger to public health, or to mitigate the adverse consequences of a serious danger to public health. Enforcement actions comprise: • General enforcements which refer to a range of directions, orders and actions permitted under the Act, such as, a direction to comply with records, training or audit requirements, an order to close a food premises, or seizure of food. • Infringement notices which refer to notices issued by councils for various breaches of the Act or the Code without the need for prosecution. A list of infringement offences is contained in Schedule 1 of the Act. Exclusions Class 4 fixed food premises: The number of class 4 fixed food premises that actively traded in Victoria in 2015 is not known. Due to the lower risk of class 4 premises’ food handling activities, these businesses are only required to notify councils of their basic details – such as business type, the nature of the business, types of food handled and their address and contact details – on a once-off basis. Councils are not required to contact them annually to ascertain whether they are still operating. For these reasons, data on class 4 fixed food premises are excluded from this report. New versus renewed food premises registrations: The data cannot be reported separately at this stage. Ceased registration 1 January to 31 December: Data in this report relates to fixed food premises registered with councils as at 31 December 2015. Data excludes food premises that were operating but closed during the year before that date. Features and Missing and incomplete fixed premises data: 77 of 79 councils were able to limitations of the report fully against the department’s Food Performance Dataset in relation to fixed data food premises operating in their municipalities in 2015: • Due to data system or reporting software issues, the following data were not
available in time for publication: – Alpine Shire Council, quarters 3 and 4 – Yarriambiack Shire Council, quarters 3 and 4 Work is ongoing so that all councils can report fully in the future. Zero versus missing values: At this stage, the data system has no facility for recording missing data – that is, where a ‘0’ shows in a council data report, it may mean either that there was no result for the period, or that there are missing data. Rounding: Tables in this report may not add to 100 per cent due to rounding. Sources Quarterly council reports: Councils are required to report their activities under the Act to the department on a quarterly basis. These reports contain details relating to the numbers of food premises and any events that occurred at the premises during the quarter, such as an inspection or enforcement action. For a full list of activities that are required to be reported, refer to the Victorian Government Gazette No. S 375 Friday 17 September 2010 at
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 29
Table 1.2: Temporary and mobile food premises (class 2–4)
Specifications Description Date ranges As at 31 December 2015, except where noted the count is cumulative for the period 1 January to 31 December 2015. Data These are outlined in: specifications • the department’s Food Performance Dataset, as previously described • the Streatrader system documentation. When a food premises registration or notification is approved (class 2–3) or accepted (class 4) by a council, the Streatrader system allocates a unique account reference number to each trader. Inclusions Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises Registrations and notifications: A count of temporary and mobile premises and water transport vehicles recorded in Streatrader and comprising: • class 2–3 premises with a registration status of ‘New’, ‘Renewal’ or ‘Transfer’ as recorded over the period • class 4 premises with a notification recorded. Unless otherwise stated, the data indicate category type, that is, business or community group/not-for-profit organisation. Note: premises type is ‘temporary’ or ‘mobile’. Class 2–4 registrations/notifications: A count of food premises registrations (class 2–3) or notifications (class 4) under the Act recorded in the Streatrader system as at 31 December 2015. This differs from reports in which ‘premises’ is the denominator; that is, there may be more than one food premises per registration. Class 4 premises: A count of class 4 temporary and mobile food premises that traded in 2015. In contrast to class 4 fixed food premises (see earlier explanation) these premises must routinely inform councils of where and when they will be trading. They do this by lodging statements of trade (SOT) in the Streatrader system. Because these data are entered directly by traders into a statewide data system, comparisons may be made between councils. Class 4 initial notifications: A count of class 4 premises that notified a council of their food selling activities under the Act for the first time during the period. Community groups: refers to not-for-profit bodies, or persons or unincorporated groups of persons undertaking food handling activities solely for the purposes of raising funds for charitable purposes. Streatrader account holders: A count of all business and community group proprietors with an account on the department’s online Streatrader system, including those who actively traded in 2015 and those who did not. There may be more than one food premises per account. This includes those with water transport vehicles associated with their registrations, but excludes those with vending machines associated with their registrations. Streatrader accounts: A count of all accounts held by businesses and community groups on Streatrader, including those who are actively trading and those who are not. This includes those with water transport vehicles associated with their registrations, but excludes those with vending machines associated with their registrations. The business or community group that holds the account and associated registration or notification, and all associated food premises, is referred to as the trader or proprietor. These terms are therefore interchangeable. Trading days: A count of days on which temporary or mobile food businesses intended to trade within a specified period, for example, a particular month or year. One premise may trade on one or many days throughout the year. These reports are a cumulative count of all days on which premises traded in Victoria during 2015. Actively traded in 2015: A count of businesses or community groups that
Page 30 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Specifications Description submitted at least one statement of trade in 2015. Cross-council trading: A cumulative count of municipalities in which a trader operated over the course of 2015. Each trader has a single registration/notification that permits him or her to operate anywhere across the state. There may be one or more premises per registration. Principal (registering) council: The principal council is the council the trader needs to register with to sell food in Victoria. This is determined with reference to the following: • If the business or community group already has a fixed premises registered with a council, it must register its temporary or mobile premises with the same council. • If the business or community group has a place where it routinely prepares or stores food, it is required to register with the council in whose municipality these activities are taking place. • If all food handling activities take place at the mobile or temporary premises, the business or community group must register with the council in whose municipality its mobile food premises is garaged, or where the equipment for its temporary food premises is stored. • If none of these are applicable, the business or community group must register with the council in whose municipality its main business address is located. The principal council registers the food van or stall for the state and, therefore, on behalf of all other councils in whose municipalities it will trade. It is responsible, together with those ‘trading councils’, for monitoring compliance. The registering and trading councils can take enforcement action when deemed appropriate. Compliance activity: A count of mandatory and discretionary compliance checks conducted on temporary and mobile food premises (including water transport vehicles) to check whether they are complying with their food safety obligations. In many cases temporary premises, such as market stalls, operate occasionally and at many different locations. Accordingly, at a state level, the compliance (inspection) requirements are different for these premises than for fixed premises. In addition, compliance approaches may differ across councils. In summary: • Mobile vehicles have very similar compliance/inspection requirements to fixed premises whereby an initial inspection and an annual inspection are required for all class 2 and 3 premises. For businesses with large numbers of class 3 vehicles – provided there are no compliance concerns – one annual inspection for every three vehicles may be conducted. • Temporary premises inspections are at council discretion; there is no requirement for an initial or annual inspection by the registering council. Many operators have a fixed component to their businesses (for example, home-based businesses) and many councils use the annual inspection of the fixed component as an opportunity to review and discuss the temporary operation with the trader. Exclusions Vending machines are defined as food premises under the Act but are minimally regulated due to the low-risk of foods sold. Data on food vending machines are excluded from this report. New versus renewed food premises registrations: These data are available for temporary and mobile food premises but are excluded from this report as they are not meaningful for this premises type – that is, these premises typically open and close but are not generally transferred to other proprietors. Trading days for water transport vehicles: These data are excluded from this report. Features and Missing and incomplete data – enforcement actions: limitations of the Data on temporary and mobile food premises operating in all 79 Victorian data municipalities were available for inclusion in this report, except for enforcement
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 31
Specifications Description actions taken by councils for breaches of the Act by these premises. The department is working with councils to ensure that these data can be reported in future. Source Data on temporary and mobile food premises are sourced from Streatrader, a customised database and software application developed by the department and used by councils to administer Victoria’s statewide registration/notification scheme for these premises. The data in this report drew on information entered into the Streatrader system by food business and community group system users and council officers in Victoria’s 79 municipalities.
Table 1.3: All food premises types (fixed, temporary and mobile) – common specifications
Specifications Description Food premises The Act classifies food premises according to the public health risks involved in classifications their food handling activities. There are four classes: • class 1 – high-risk foods for groups most vulnerable to food-related illness • class 2 – high-risk foods that need correct temperature control at all times to keep them safe • class 3 – unpackaged low-risk foods or pre-packaged high-risk foods, occasional community groups’ ‘cook and serve’ foods • class 4 – other low-risk food handling activities, including pre-packaged low-risk food. Class 1, 2 and 3 food premises must register annually, while class 4 premises are required to notify councils on a once-off basis. Areas outside Food premises data relating to Victoria’s six alpine resorts are included in the municipalities figures for the municipalities that manage food safety compliance at these resorts, that is: • Indigo Shire – Mount Hotham Alpine Resort and Falls Creek Alpine Resort • Mansfield Shire – Mount Stirling Alpine Resort and Mount Buller Alpine resort • Baw Baw Shire – Mount Baw Baw Alpine Resort • Murrindindi Shire – Lake Mountain Alpine Resort. Data for French Island is listed in the figures for the Bass Coast Shire.
Compliance Compliant, major non-compliance and critical non-compliance: The outcome check outcomes of a compliance check undertaken by an auditor or an EHO is categorised as ‘compliant’, ‘major non-compliance’ or ‘critical non-compliance’. Compliant refers to a premises that is fully compliant or where only minor deficiencies that do not pose a public health risk are identified in relation to compliance with the FSP, the Act or the Code. A number of minor non- compliances, when taken together, may lead to the conclusion that there is a major non-compliance. Major non-compliance refers to (a) a deficiency or breach that does not, in the particular case, pose an immediate, serious threat to public health at the time at which it has been identified, but which may pose such a threat if no remedial action is taken, or (b) any other serious breach of the FSP, the Act and/or the Code. Critical non-compliance refers to a deficiency or breach that poses a serious threat to public health. This includes situations where there is a serious risk of food being sold or prepared that is unsafe to eat.
Page 32 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Specifications Description Other data Program files, Departmental of Health and Human Services sources Department of Health and Human Services’ FSU’s regulatory and incident management program files were the source of data on: • Laboratory notifications of pathogens under Schedule 5 of the Public Health and Wellbeing Regulations 2009 • Complaints made to the FSU about food and/or food premises • Food recalls conducted in Australia and Victoria to remove foods that pose a health risk from the distribution chain • Food premises closures by councils under s. 19 of the Act which enables councils to temporarily order the closure of a food premises to protect public health until major or ongoing problems relating to adequate hygiene and food handling at the premises are remedied. These data are based on information reported by councils. Convictions register, Department of Health and Human Services The tables in this report are based on information provided by councils and on related court records which were placed on the register of convictions. The register includes prosecutions brought by councils for offences under the Act or the Regulations where a conviction was recorded in 2015. It does not include prosecutions where the outcome: • was a finding of guilt but where no conviction was recorded • was a finding of not guilty, or where the charges were withdrawn or struck out. The Act requires councils to provide information about convictions in matters that they have prosecuted or in relation to premises that they have registered or that are in their municipalities. The Act also permits the Secretary of the department to obtain information from other sources for the purpose of ensuring that the information on the register is reliable and verified. To access the register go to the FSU’s website at:
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 33
Specifications Description Features and Accuracy and completeness limitations of the While every effort is made to ensure that the data presented in this report are data complete and accurate, the report may contain some errors. For example, councils may have under- or over-reported food premises numbers, or incorrectly recorded a food premises as class 1, 2, 3 or 4 at the time when data were collated for this report. Technical data reporting problems which could not be resolved in time for publication may also affect the data. Missing food sampling data Information for the Rural City of Ararat and the Shire of Murrindindi is not included as these data were not submitted. Rounding Note that tables in this report may not add to 100 per cent due to rounding.
Page 34 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Appendix 2: Functions, governance and legislation
Food regulation system In Australia, three levels of government share responsibility for developing and administering food safety laws within a framework that endeavours to harmonise regulatory requirements relating to a widely dispersed and varied food industry. The commonwealth, state and territory governments jointly develop national food standards, which are embodied in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code). These standards are given force through state and territory legislation. In Victoria’s case that legislation allocates significant enforcement responsibility to local government. Food regulation in Victoria is managed by two state government departments, two statutory authorities and 79 local councils. To ensure food safety and the protection of public health, these Victorian regulators come together as the Victorian Food Regulators Forum (the Forum). The Forum operates under a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that clarifies the roles, responsibilities and arrangements for cooperation between Victoria’s food regulators, including data sharing and referrals. The Forum also provides an opportunity for sharing lessons about best practice in regulation. The current parties to the MOU are: • the Department of Health and Human Services • the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) (representing councils) • Dairy Food Safety Victoria • PrimeSafe (meat and seafood). The current MOU is being revised to further strengthen collaboration, and will:
• include the role of the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources (DEDJTR) under the Act in relation to egg and sprout production • focus further on ways to prevent regulatory overlap (the current ‘single regulator’ per premises approach will be enhanced) • clarify statutory roles and responsibilities of the various parties in more detail where there is a threat to public health involving food for sale. The MOU and information about the Forum can be accessed at Agriculture Victoria’s website:
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 35
A key object of the Act is to ensure that such food is both safe and suitable for human consumption. It does this by:
• providing the means through which the Code is applied as the law in Victoria • establishing enforcement powers, including emergency powers, where there are immediate threats to public health • setting out offences for breaches of the food laws and the applicable penalties and defences • establishing a food premises classification system and providing the means through which municipal councils regulate food businesses. The Act applies to most food businesses in the state including manufacturers, retailers, cafés and restaurants, as well as facilities that serve food such as hospitals and aged care facilities. Under the Act, food business owners are legally responsible for ensuring that the food they sell to customers is safe and suitable to eat. The Act adopts a proportionate approach to the regulation of the sale of food by enabling the use of the least burdensome intervention reasonably necessary to achieve the outcome sought. The nature of food, together with the way it is handled, and the vulnerability to illness of the persons eating the food, determines the degree of risk. Based on these factors, four classes of food premises are established under the Act – from the highest risk (class 1) through to the lowest risk (class 4). Food premises are classified by councils under this framework. The level of regulation for each class is matched to the degree of risk. For example, only those businesses that handle unpackaged, high-risk food must have a food safety supervisor. Minimal regulation applies to businesses that handle only pre- packaged, low-risk food. Roles The Act provides specific roles for councils, primary production regulators, the department, the department’s Chief Health Officer and Secretary, and the Minister for Health. Councils Under the Act, Victoria’s 79 councils are the regulators of food businesses in their municipalities. Councils regulate food businesses primarily though registration of premises, monitoring compliance, providing education and advice, and taking enforcement action where necessary. Local government therefore has responsibility for the day-to-day regulation of the majority of food businesses in the state. Councils register and inspect food businesses that sell, store, manufacture, package or transport food for human consumption (including liquor) .9 This includes premises that operate from permanent venues (known as fixed premises), temporary food premises such as stalls, and mobile food premises such as food vans and carts. For large councils, the latter includes numerous major festivals conducted annually in their municipalities, as well as a large number of once-off or occasional stalls. Under Streatrader – an online statewide scheme implemented in 2012 – food vans and stalls need only a single registration (class 1–3) or notification (class 4), regardless of how many municipalities they trade in. Councils conduct food sampling programs, which involve purchasing a ‘statutory number’ of foods from class 1 and 2 premises in the municipality and having samples analysed to assess food safety and compliance with standards. The statutory number of samples is derived by the department using a complex formula based on the number and type of food premises in each municipality and which is gazetted every two years.
9 Premises that mainly handle raw meat, poultry or seafood are licensed and inspected by PrimeSafe, while dairy premises are licensed by Dairy Food Safety Victoria.
Page 36 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Providing information and advice to food handlers during premises visits is a high priority for council EHOs. Many councils also offer food handling information seminars and regular newsletters for food premises proprietors and staff. Councils also have an active role in educating the community about food safety and responding to customer complaints about food hygiene, contamination, suspected food poisoning and food handling. Finally, councils are responsible for acting on all food recalls advised by the department and referring information to the relevant food business. Primary producer regulators The Act governs some areas of primary production. For example, the DEDJTR has a key role in regulating egg and sprout production. PrimeSafe is responsible for the meat and seafood industries, while Dairy Food Safety Victoria regulates dairy farms and dairy processing and manufacture. Licensing, guidance and enforcement of the standards affecting these sectors is within the province of these regulators under their own industry specific Acts, supported by the Food Act 1984. Minister for Health The Minister for Health is Victoria’s lead minister on the Forum. The Minister is required to vote on behalf of Victoria on all food standards and national policy proposals and takes a whole-of-government position to the Forum. The Victorian Minister for Agriculture is also a member of the Forum. In addition to this role, the Minister for Health has specific powers under the Act. For example, with a devolved regulatory system it is important to have a statutory mechanism that can be invoked, if required, to ensure significant policy issues are addressed in a consistent way across the state. Section 7E of the Act enables the Minister for Health to issue directions to councils. It is envisaged that such a power would only be exercised as a last resort where cooperative measures or the release of statewide guidance by the department are insufficient; for example, if a council has failed to act of its own accord to remedy a significant systemic problem. In practice, a consultative approach between the different food safety regulators tends to be most effective. The Minister for Health did not issue any directions to councils under s. 7E in 2015. FSU, Department of Health and Human Services The FSU, which is part of the Health Protection Branch of the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, supports the Minister by conducting research and analysis and providing advice and recommendations to the government on all national food policy and regulatory proposals. The FSU participates in a whole-of-government food regulation group to ensure comprehensive advice to government and manages a substantial intergovernmental work program. The FSU also manages numerous interrelated projects that stem from the provisions of the Act. That work includes: investigating alleged food safety incidents; initiating and coordinating food recalls; responding to public health incidents and emergencies; handling enquiries and complaints; gathering and analysing data; undertaking research; public reporting; providing information; providing education and tools to promote food safety and compliance with food laws; and performing the FSU’s statutory functions (for example, approval of food safety templates and food safety auditors, providing guidance and information to councils and auditors, and maintaining the statewide register of convictions for offences under the Act). As food safety and regulation is multidimensional and is shared across all three levels of government, the FSU works with a range of partners in carrying out its functions.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 37
Chief Health Officer All of the regulators described above have powers under legislation to address noncompliance though enforcement action. If these routine powers prove to be insufficient to address any emerging serious danger to public health from food, the Act enables additional steps to be taken by the department through the powers available to the Chief Health Officer under the Act (exercising emergency powers delegated by the Secretary of the department) and the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008.
Legislation administered by the FSU • Food Act 1984 (Victoria) • Food (Forms and Registration) Regulations 2005 • Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 • Public Health and Wellbeing Regulations 2009
Other legislation of particular relevance to the FSU’s work: • Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 (Commonwealth) • Freedom of Information Act 1982 • Victorian Local Government Act 1989 • Public Administration Act 2004 • Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 • Biosecurity Act 2015 (Commonwealth).
Page 38 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Appendix 3: Class 1-3 fixed food premises registrations by class, region and municipality, Victoria 2015*
Class 1-3 fixed food premises registrations by class, region and municipality
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 86 849 232 1,167 Eastern Metropolitan Knox (C) 67 619 296 982 Eastern Metropolitan Manningham (C) 56 429 177 662 Eastern Metropolitan Maroondah (C) 59 460 214 733 Eastern Metropolitan Monash (C) 77 792 368 1,237 Eastern Metropolitan Whitehorse (C) 67 744 247 1,058 Eastern Metropolitan Yarra Ranges (S) 56 799 329 1,184 Eastern Metropolitan Total 468 4,692 1,863 7,023
North & West Metropolitan Banyule (C) 46 476 191 713 North & West Metropolitan Brimbank (C) 68 764 231 1,063 North & West Metropolitan Darebin (C) 61 817 231 1,109 North & West Metropolitan Hobsons Bay (C) 32 491 143 666 North & West Metropolitan Hume (C) 59 845 284 1,188 North & West Metropolitan Maribyrnong (C) 30 573 156 759 North & West Metropolitan Melbourne (C) 64 3,079 390 3,533 North & West Metropolitan Melton (S) 32 323 88 443 North & West Metropolitan Moonee Valley (C) 44 632 124 800 North & West Metropolitan Moreland (C) 65 856 263 1,184 North & West Metropolitan Nillumbik (S) 20 212 97 329 North & West Metropolitan Whittlesea (C) 57 635 214 906 North & West Metropolitan Wyndham (C) 58 629 215 902 North & West Metropolitan Yarra (C) 42 1,111 211 1,364 North & West Metropolitan Total 678 11,443 2,838 14,959 Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) 49 498 103 650 Southern Metropolitan Cardinia (S) 31 342 156 529 Southern Metropolitan Casey (C) 97 773 317 1,187 Southern Metropolitan Frankston (C) 61 510 169 740 Southern Metropolitan Glen Eira (C) 63 621 233 917 Southern Metropolitan Greater Dandenong (C) 70 859 404 1,333
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 39
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Southern Metropolitan Kingston (C) 68 843 306 1,217 Southern Metropolitan Mornington Peninsula (S) 69 820 256 1,145 Southern Metropolitan Port Phillip (C) 35 812 133 980 Southern Metropolitan Stonnington (C) 47 1,032 175 1,254 Southern Metropolitan Total 590 7,110 2,252 9,952 Barwon South-Western Colac Otway (S) 9 248 86 343 Barwon South-Western Corangamite (S) 10 131 55 196 Barwon South-Western Glenelg (S) 9 132 32 173 Barwon South-Western Greater Geelong (C) 95 1,290 354 1,739 Barwon South-Western Moyne (S) 4 123 57 184 Barwon South-Western Queenscliffe (B) 1 68 13 82 Barwon South-Western Southern Grampians (S) 6 131 33 170 Barwon South-Western Surf Coast (S) 9 255 66 330 Barwon South-Western Warrnambool (C) 17 239 51 307 Barwon South-Western Total 160 2,617 747 3,524 Gippsland Bass Coast (S) 11 291 51 353 Gippsland Baw Baw (S) 15 420 88 523 Gippsland East Gippsland (S) 25 319 102 446 Gippsland Latrobe (C) 31 290 92 413 Gippsland South Gippsland (S) 10 243 79 332 Gippsland Wellington (S) 15 273 109 397 Gippsland Total 107 1,836 521 2,464 Grampians Ararat (RC) 8 100 31 139 Grampians Ballarat (C) 52 575 121 748 Grampians Golden Plains (S) 2 94 40 136 Grampians Hepburn (S) 7 182 98 287 Grampians Hindmarsh (S) 6 70 24 100 Grampians Horsham (RC) 8 146 61 215 Grampians Moorabool (S) 7 130 61 198 Grampians Northern Grampians (S) 7 79 49 135 Grampians Pyrenees (S) 2 64 35 101 Grampians West Wimmera (S) 3 54 18 75 Grampians Yarriambiack (S)** 4 70 5 79 Grampians Total 106 1,564 543 2,213 Hume Alpine (S)** 9 160 55 224
Page 40 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Hume Benalla (RC) 5 83 38 126 Hume City of Wodonga (C) 17 177 62 256 Hume Greater Shepparton (C) 32 329 110 471 Hume Indigo (S) 7 167 75 249 Hume Mansfield (S) 3 127 47 177 Hume Mitchell (S) 13 190 52 255 Hume Moira (S) 14 194 38 246 Hume Murrindindi (S) 5 148 41 194 Hume Strathbogie (S) 5 83 26 114 Hume Towong (S) 4 46 20 70 Hume Wangaratta (RC) 12 191 101 304 Hume Total 126 1,895 665 2,686 Loddon Mallee Buloke (S) 6 55 31 92 Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) 16 258 81 355 Loddon Mallee Central Goldfields (S) 8 77 15 100 Loddon Mallee Gannawarra (S) 4 51 41 96 Loddon Mallee Greater Bendigo (C) 50 631 152 833 Loddon Mallee Loddon (S) 3 92 31 126 Loddon Mallee Macedon Ranges (S) 16 271 111 398 Loddon Mallee Mildura (RC) 19 352 133 504 Loddon Mallee Mount Alexander (S) 5 138 66 209 Loddon Mallee Swan Hill (RC) 11 145 52 208 Loddon Mallee Total 138 2,070 713 2,921 Metropolitan Total 1,736 23,245 6,953 31,934 Non-metropolitan Total 637 9,982 3,189 13,808 Victoria Grand Total 2,373 33,227 10,142 45,742 B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. Notes: *The Act requires class 1, 2 and 3 food premises to register annually with the responsible council. Class 4 food premises must notify the responsible council of the basic details of the food premises, such as business type, nature of business, food types handled, address and contact details on a once-off basis. Class 4 fixed premises, which by definition handle only low-risk foods, are excluded from this report as total numbers of premises are not precise due to variations in data capture across councils. For further explanation see Appendix 1. The Act’s food premises classification: Class 1 Potentially high-risk foods for groups most vulnerable to food-related illness Class 2 Potentially high-risk foods which need correct temperature control to keep them safe Class 3 Unpackaged low-risk foods, or pre-packaged potentially high-risk foods, occasional community groups’ ‘cook and serve’ foods Class 4 Other low-risk food-handling activities, including pre-packaged low-risk food. **Alpine Shire Council and Yarriambiack Shire Council: only Quarter 1 & 2 data submitted
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 41
Appendix 4: Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises registrations/notifications by class, region and municipality in which their principal councils were located, Victoria 2015*
Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises* registrations/notifications by class, region and municipality in which their principal councils were located
Mobile Mobile Mobile Temporary Temporary Temporary premises premises premises premises premises premises Department of Health and registrations registrations notifications registrations registrations notifications Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 13 4 - 184 173 184 558
Eastern Metropolitan Knox (C) 13 134 2 81 106 233 569
Eastern Metropolitan Manningham (C) 7 6 1 53 55 76 198
Eastern Metropolitan Maroondah (C) 15 10 3 26 55 129 238
Eastern Metropolitan Monash (C) 11 15 4 89 44 178 341
Eastern Metropolitan Whitehorse (C) 10 13 2 117 79 345 566
Eastern Metropolitan Yarra Ranges (S) 49 28 3 120 125 319 644
Eastern Metropolitan Total 118 210 15 670 637 1,464 3,114
North and West Metropolitan Banyule (C) 8 13 43 33 169 266
North and West Metropolitan Brimbank (C) 41 26 7 49 29 122 274
North and West Metropolitan Darebin (C) 30 19 4 82 43 88 266
North and West Metropolitan Hobsons Bay (C) 41 31 2 54 43 115 286
North and West Metropolitan Hume (C) 61 37 8 104 70 204 484
North and West Metropolitan Maribyrnong (C) 15 4 4 36 22 107 188
Page 42 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Mobile Mobile Mobile Temporary Temporary Temporary premises premises premises premises premises premises Department of Health and registrations registrations notifications registrations registrations notifications Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
North and West Metropolitan Melbourne (C) 73 45 5 372 220 250 965
North and West Metropolitan Melton (S) 18 11 3 38 43 97 210
North and West Metropolitan Moonee Valley (C) 6 10 1 44 33 97 191
North and West Metropolitan Moreland (C) 23 9 5 98 73 164 372
North and West Metropolitan Nillumbik (S) 6 8 1 29 42 162 248
North and West Metropolitan Whittlesea (C) 27 18 - 93 58 - 196
North and West Metropolitan Wyndham (C) 54 26 7 101 130 238 556
North and West Metropolitan Yarra (C) 19 9 - 119 86 118 351
North and West Metropolitan Total 422 266 47 1,262 925 1,931 4,853
Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) 5 7 2 50 40 103 207
Southern Metropolitan Cardinia (S) 16 21 4 39 49 147 276
Southern Metropolitan Casey (C) 35 43 9 70 64 313 534
Southern Metropolitan Frankston (C) 20 30 1 42 39 98 230
Southern Metropolitan Glen Eira (C) 19 11 3 67 53 144 297
Southern Metropolitan Greater Dandenong (C) 13 16 4 84 61 127 305
Southern Metropolitan Kingston (C) 14 21 4 80 109 242 470 Mornington Peninsula Southern Metropolitan (S) 24 34 5 96 102 363 624
Southern Metropolitan Port Phillip (C) 27 13 8 116 91 127 382
Southern Metropolitan Stonnington (C) 20 5 3 121 70 100 319
Southern Metropolitan Total 193 201 43 765 678 1,764 3,644
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 43
Mobile Mobile Mobile Temporary Temporary Temporary premises premises premises premises premises premises Department of Health and registrations registrations notifications registrations registrations notifications Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Barwon South-Western Colac Otway (S) - 5 1 32 44 38 120
Barwon South-Western Corangamite (S) 3 4 1 3 13 38 62
Barwon South-Western Glenelg (S) 4 9 - 15 12 - 40
Barwon South-Western Greater Geelong (C) 29 28 1 26 32 58 174
Barwon South-Western Moyne (S) 9 9 2 32 24 31 107
Barwon South-Western Queenscliffe (B) 1 1 1 3 5 4 15
Barwon South-Western Southern Grampians (S) 2 2 - 33 26 29 92
Barwon South-Western Surf Coast (S) 23 12 3 32 40 45 155
Barwon South-Western Warrnambool (C) 17 22 1 49 57 93 239
Barwon South-Western Total 88 92 10 225 253 336 1,004
Gippsland Bass Coast (S) 3 14 3 39 39 55 153
Gippsland Baw Baw (S) 22 21 7 40 47 91 228
Gippsland East Gippsland (S) 13 19 1 20 25 13 91
Gippsland Latrobe (C) 16 4 7 43 62 130 262
Gippsland South Gippsland (S) 6 10 1 51 50 77 195
Gippsland Wellington (S) 8 8 4 41 41 71 173
Gippsland Total 68 76 23 234 264 437 1,102
Grampians Ararat (RC) 2 2 1 14 3 25 47
Grampians Ballarat (C) 26 35 5 68 50 156 340
Grampians Golden Plains (S) 8 22 - 36 43 45 154
Page 44 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Mobile Mobile Mobile Temporary Temporary Temporary premises premises premises premises premises premises Department of Health and registrations registrations notifications registrations registrations notifications Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Grampians Hepburn (S) 8 5 2 26 46 71 158
Grampians Hindmarsh (S) 1 1 - 29 4 10 45
Grampians Horsham (RC) 4 6 - 12 4 13 39
Grampians Moorabool (S) 5 18 4 23 56 55 161
Grampians Northern Grampians (S) 3 5 1 23 20 19 71
Grampians Pyrenees (S) 6 3 - 30 14 31 84
Grampians West Wimmera (S) 6 3 - 10 5 6 30
Grampians Yarriambiack (S) 4 1 - 28 14 - 47
Grampians Total 73 101 13 299 259 431 1,176
Hume Alpine (S) 4 9 - 20 11 34 78
Hume Benalla (RC) - 5 - 20 32 24 81
Hume City of Wodonga (C) 35 8 2 63 36 83 227
Hume Greater Shepparton (C) 10 14 4 21 24 148 221
Hume Indigo (S) 6 8 3 65 53 64 199
Hume Mansfield (S) 7 12 - 34 22 20 95
Hume Mitchell (S) 19 10 1 32 26 45 133
Hume Moira (S) 9 13 3 54 18 29 126
Hume Murrindindi (S) 9 4 1 34 52 48 148
Hume Strathbogie (S) 9 3 5 21 19 29 86
Hume Towong (S) 5 - - 9 7 14 35
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 45
Mobile Mobile Mobile Temporary Temporary Temporary premises premises premises premises premises premises Department of Health and registrations registrations notifications registrations registrations notifications Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Hume Wangaratta (RC) 18 3 10 31 22 33 117
Hume Total 131 89 29 404 322 571 1,546
Loddon Mallee Buloke (S) - 3 1 9 11 8 32
Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) 13 25 2 18 14 63 135
Loddon Mallee Central Goldfields (S) 1 4 2 13 15 27 62
Loddon Mallee Gannawarra (S) - 3 - 11 15 14 43
Loddon Mallee Greater Bendigo (C) 16 42 7 39 53 255 412
Loddon Mallee Loddon (S) 3 5 - 24 7 36 75
Loddon Mallee Macedon Ranges (S) 12 15 1 51 54 101 234
Loddon Mallee Mildura (RC) 41 37 14 77 69 175 413
Loddon Mallee Mount Alexander (S) 10 7 2 38 33 67 157
Loddon Mallee Swan Hill (RC) 6 9 1 8 11 41 76
Loddon Mallee Total 102 150 30 288 282 787 1,639
Metropolitan Total 733 677 105 2697 2240 5159 11611
Non-Metropolitan Total 462 508 105 1,450 1,380 2,562 6,467
Victoria Grand Total 1,195 1,185 210 4,147 3,620 7,721 18,078 B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. *Notes: Under Victoria’s statewide system for registration/notification of a food van or stall, one council must be primarily responsible for, and approve, a business’s food handling operations at its portable premises. Known as the principal council (or registering council), this is the council a food business will deal with most in the future. Includes water transport vehicles as class 3 mobile premises. Excludes food vending machines, which are minimally regulated under the Act.
Page 46 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Appendix 5: Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises registrations/notifications by proprietor type, class and municipality, Victoria 2015*
Class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises registrations/notifications by proprietor type, class, municipality and region, 2015
Business Business Business Community Community Community Department of Health Premises Premises Premises Group Group Group and Human Services Registrations Registrations Notifications Registrations Registrations Notifications region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 56 58 45 141 119 139 558 Eastern Metropolitan Knox (C) 35 162 42 59 78 193 569 Eastern Metropolitan Manningham (C) 21 26 17 39 35 60 198 Eastern Metropolitan Maroondah (C) 28 50 21 13 15 111 238 Eastern Metropolitan Monash (C) 61 29 36 39 30 146 341 Eastern Metropolitan Whitehorse (C) 33 22 56 94 70 291 566 Eastern Metropolitan Yarra Ranges (S) 95 101 102 74 52 220 644 Eastern Metropolitan Total 329 448 319 459 399 1,160 3,114 North and West Metropolitan Banyule (C) 19 27 19 32 19 150 266 North and West Metropolitan Brimbank (C) 82 48 45 8 7 84 274 North and West Metropolitan Darebin (C) 103 59 19 9 3 73 266 North and West Metropolitan Hobsons Bay (C) 68 45 26 27 29 91 286 North and West Metropolitan Hume (C) 138 71 62 27 36 150 484 North and West Metropolitan Maribyrnong (C) 45 19 27 6 7 84 188
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 47
Business Business Business Community Community Community Department of Health Premises Premises Premises Group Group Group and Human Services Registrations Registrations Notifications Registrations Registrations Notifications region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total North and West Metropolitan Melbourne (C) 377 231 179 68 34 76 965 North and West Metropolitan Melton (S) 32 26 27 24 28 73 210 North and West Metropolitan Moonee Valley (C) 24 33 19 26 10 79 191 North and West Metropolitan Moreland (C) 100 62 47 21 20 122 372 North and West Metropolitan Nillumbik (S) 31 31 39 4 19 124 248 North and West Metropolitan Whittlesea (C) 89 44 - 31 32 - 196 North and West Metropolitan Wyndham (C) 136 74 64 19 82 181 556 North and West Metropolitan Yarra (C) 109 70 33 29 25 85 351 North and West Metropolitan Total 1,353 840 606 331 351 1,372 4,853 Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) 32 21 25 23 26 80 207 Southern Metropolitan Cardinia (S) 47 52 44 8 18 107 276 Southern Metropolitan Casey (C) 82 82 65 23 25 257 534 Southern Metropolitan Frankston (C) 44 58 28 18 11 71 230 Southern Metropolitan Glen Eira (C) 61 42 45 25 22 102 297 Southern Metropolitan Greater Dandenong (C) 63 58 35 34 19 96 305 Southern Metropolitan Kingston (C) 44 79 53 50 51 193 470 Southern Metropolitan Mornington Peninsula (S) 78 84 93 42 52 275 624 Southern Metropolitan Port Phillip (C) 121 89 64 22 15 71 382 Southern Metropolitan Stonnington (C) 108 63 35 33 12 68 319 Southern Metropolitan Total 680 628 487 278 251 1,320 3,644
Page 48 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Business Business Business Community Community Community Department of Health Premises Premises Premises Group Group Group and Human Services Registrations Registrations Notifications Registrations Registrations Notifications region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total Barwon South- Western Colac Otway (S) 9 24 22 23 25 17 120 Barwon South- Western Corangamite (S) 3 8 9 3 9 30 62 Barwon South- Western Glenelg (S) 11 15 - 8 6 - 40 Barwon South- Western Greater Geelong (C) 52 57 46 3 3 13 174 Barwon South- Western Moyne (S) 24 24 11 17 9 22 107 Barwon South- Western Queenscliffe (B) 1 1 1 3 5 4 15 Barwon South- Western Southern Grampians (S) 12 20 13 23 8 16 92 Barwon South- Western Surf Coast (S) 35 41 17 20 11 31 155 Barwon South- Western Warrnambool (C) 39 58 13 27 21 81 239 Barwon South- Western Total 186 248 132 127 97 214 1,004 Gippsland Bass Coast (S) 23 38 21 19 15 37 153 Gippsland Baw Baw (S) 40 60 53 22 8 45 228 Gippsland East Gippsland (S) 28 43 12 5 1 2 91 Gippsland Latrobe (C) 28 34 36 31 32 101 262 Gippsland South Gippsland (S) 14 33 40 43 27 38 195 Gippsland Wellington (S) 34 27 28 15 22 47 173 Gippsland Total 167 235 190 135 105 270 1,102 Grampians Ararat (RC) 2 3 18 14 2 8 47 Grampians Ballarat (C) 80 75 40 14 10 121 340 Grampians Golden Plains (S) 25 45 22 19 20 23 154
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 49
Business Business Business Community Community Community Department of Health Premises Premises Premises Group Group Group and Human Services Registrations Registrations Notifications Registrations Registrations Notifications region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Grampians Hepburn (S) 31 36 50 3 15 23 158 Grampians Hindmarsh (S) 2 2 5 28 3 5 45 Grampians Horsham (RC) 13 10 11 3 - 2 39 Grampians Moorabool (S) 22 51 34 6 23 25 161 Grampians Northern Grampians (S) 15 20 13 11 5 7 71 Grampians Pyrenees (S) 28 8 22 8 9 9 84 Grampians West Wimmera (S) 8 5 2 8 3 4 30 Grampians Yarriambiack (S) 10 4 - 22 11 - 47 Grampians Total 236 259 217 136 101 227 1,176 Hume Alpine (S) 16 15 26 8 5 8 78 Hume Benalla (RC) 4 12 8 16 25 16 81 Hume City of Wodonga (C) 74 27 22 24 17 63 227 Hume Greater Shepparton (C) 17 21 38 14 17 114 221 Hume Indigo (S) 53 36 30 18 25 37 199 Hume Mansfield (S) 29 21 16 12 13 4 95 Hume Mitchell (S) 45 28 16 6 8 30 133 Hume Moira (S) 12 22 23 51 9 9 126 Hume Murrindindi (S) 32 25 21 11 31 28 148 Hume Strathbogie (S) 7 13 16 23 9 18 86 Hume Towong (S) 7 2 5 7 5 9 35 Hume Wangaratta (RC) 45 23 37 4 2 6 117 Hume Total 341 245 258 194 166 342 1,546
Page 50 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Business Business Business Community Community Community Department of Health Premises Premises Premises Group Group Group and Human Services Registrations Registrations Notifications Registrations Registrations Notifications region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total
Loddon Mallee Buloke (S) 1 2 4 8 12 5 32 Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) 20 28 35 11 11 30 135 Loddon Mallee Central Goldfields (S) 7 11 12 7 8 17 62 Loddon Mallee Gannawarra (S) 3 6 8 8 12 6 43 Loddon Mallee Greater Bendigo (C) 40 65 79 15 30 183 412 Loddon Mallee Loddon (S) 8 6 14 19 6 22 75 Loddon Mallee Macedon Ranges (S) 39 35 36 24 34 66 234 Loddon Mallee Mildura (RC) 68 51 69 50 55 120 413 Loddon Mallee Mount Alexander (S) 34 22 35 14 18 34 157 Loddon Mallee Swan Hill (RC) 14 16 27 - 4 15 76 Loddon Mallee Total 234 242 319 156 190 498 1639 Metropolitan Total 2,362 1,916 1,412 1,068 1,001 3,852 11,611 Non-Metropolitan Total 1,164 1,229 1,116 748 659 1,551 6,467 Victoria Grand Total 3,526 3,145 2,528 1,816 1,660 5,403 18,078 B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. *Note: Includes water transport vehicles. Excludes food vending machines, which are minimally regulated under the Act.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 51
Appendix 6: New class 4 temporary and mobile food premises notifications by principal council, Victoria 2015*
New class 4 temporary and mobile food premises notifications by principal council, Victoria 2015
Department of Health and Jan- Apr- Jul- Oct- Human Services region Council Mar Jun Sep Dec Total
Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 33 34 57 32 156
Eastern Metropolitan Knox (C) 54 33 52 30 169
Eastern Metropolitan Manningham (C) 23 9 4 14 50
Eastern Metropolitan Maroondah (C) 18 20 19 17 74
Eastern Metropolitan Monash (C) 35 44 26 26 131
Eastern Metropolitan Whitehorse (C) 37 11 17 18 83
Eastern Metropolitan Yarra Ranges (S) 43 61 41 54 199 Eastern Metropolitan Total 243 212 216 191 862
North & West Metropolitan Banyule (C) 22 32 24 34 112
North & West Metropolitan Brimbank (C) 34 24 22 23 103
North & West Metropolitan Darebin (C) 44 25 11 20 100
North & West Metropolitan Hobsons Bay (C) 19 27 13 31 90
North & West Metropolitan Hume (C) 65 28 36 40 169
North & West Metropolitan Maribyrnong (C) 15 18 30 45 108
North & West Metropolitan Melbourne (C) 43 45 45 19 152
North & West Metropolitan Melton (S) 22 15 27 33 97
North & West Metropolitan Moonee Valley (C) 29 11 18 13 71
North & West Metropolitan Moreland (C) 43 25 37 25 130
North & West Metropolitan Nillumbik (S) 24 26 17 22 89
North & West Metropolitan Whittlesea (C) 31 24 31 26 112
North & West Metropolitan Wyndham (C) 52 37 36 28 153
North & West Metropolitan Yarra (C) 12 25 29 24 90 North & West Metropolitan Total 455 362 376 383 1,576
Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) 24 8 12 26 70
Southern Metropolitan Cardinia (S) 29 23 39 24 115
Southern Metropolitan Casey (C) 62 87 55 59 263
Southern Metropolitan Frankston (C) 15 36 34 50 135
Page 52 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Department of Health and Jan- Apr- Jul- Oct- Human Services region Council Mar Jun Sep Dec Total
Southern Metropolitan Glen Eira (C) 21 19 17 23 80
Southern Metropolitan Greater Dandenong (C) 37 27 29 21 114
Southern Metropolitan Kingston (C) 54 24 36 29 143
Southern Metropolitan Mornington Peninsula (S) 53 37 61 44 195
Southern Metropolitan Port Phillip (C) 28 35 26 28 117
Southern Metropolitan Stonnington (C) 24 23 22 15 84 Southern Metropolitan Total 347 319 331 319 1,316
Barwon South-Western Colac Otway (S) 12 7 8 11 38
Barwon South-Western Corangamite (S) 10 14 4 11 39
Barwon South-Western Glenelg (S) 2 6 9 11 28
Barwon South-Western Greater Geelong (C) 7 15 16 11 49
Barwon South-Western Moyne (S) 3 12 6 7 28
Barwon South-Western Queenscliffe (B) - - 1 2 3
Barwon South-Western Southern Grampians (S) 7 4 5 4 20
Barwon South-Western Surf Coast (S) 5 2 8 15 30
Barwon South-Western Warrnambool (C) 13 13 13 27 66 Barwon South-Western Total 59 73 70 99 301
Gippsland Bass Coast (S) 18 22 9 17 66
Gippsland Baw Baw (S) 14 13 9 22 58
Gippsland East Gippsland (S) 4 2 5 9 20
Gippsland Latrobe (C) 26 20 24 30 100
Gippsland South Gippsland (S) 18 11 8 30 67
Gippsland Wellington (S) 18 17 15 6 56 Gippsland Total 98 85 70 114 367
Grampians Ararat (RC) 3 4 1 4 12
Grampians Ballarat (C) 26 28 30 19 103
Grampians Golden Plains (S) 12 9 4 5 30
Grampians Hepburn (S) 17 10 22 20 69
Grampians Hindmarsh (S) 2 2 4 3 11
Grampians Horsham (RC) 3 3 3 5 14
Grampians Moorabool (S) 21 14 4 7 46
Grampians Northern Grampians (S) 4 3 1 1 9
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 53
Department of Health and Jan- Apr- Jul- Oct- Human Services region Council Mar Jun Sep Dec Total
Grampians Pyrenees (S) 5 10 1 2 18
Grampians West Wimmera (S) 1 3 2 1 7
Grampians Yarriambiack (S) 3 1 9 12 25 Grampians Total 97 87 81 79 344
Hume Alpine (S) 11 5 5 11 32
Hume Benalla (RC) 1 3 6 3 13
Hume City of Wodonga (C) 14 12 10 12 48
Hume Greater Shepparton (C) 47 47 35 34 163
Hume Indigo (S) 9 19 7 10 45
Hume Mansfield (S) - 2 1 - 3
Hume Mitchell (S) 5 7 8 9 29
Hume Moira (S) 6 4 14 5 29
Hume Murrindindi (S) 7 4 7 6 24
Hume Strathbogie (S) 3 7 12 8 30
Hume Towong (S) 1 4 - 1 6
Hume Wangaratta (RC) 9 2 4 6 21 Hume Total 113 116 109 105 443
Loddon Mallee Buloke (S) 4 - - 2 6
Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) 7 7 47 21 82
Loddon Mallee Central Goldfields (S) 4 3 3 11 21
Loddon Mallee Gannawarra (S) 1 2 - 2 5
Loddon Mallee Greater Bendigo (C) 55 48 30 34 167
Loddon Mallee Loddon (S) 8 4 6 3 21
Loddon Mallee Macedon Ranges (S) 23 18 6 14 61
Loddon Mallee Mildura (RC) 31 23 11 24 89
Loddon Mallee Mount Alexander (S) 6 12 5 16 39
Loddon Mallee Swan Hill (RC) 4 3 12 15 34 Loddon Mallee Total 143 120 120 142 525
Metropolitan Total 1,045 893 923 893 3,754
Non-Metropolitan Total 510 481 450 539 1,980
Victoria Grand Total 1,555 1,374 1,373 1,432 5,734
B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. *Note: Excludes food vending machines, which are minimally regulated under the Act.
Page 54 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Appendix 7: Compliance checks conducted at class 1–3 fixed food premises by class, municipality and region, Victoria 2015*
Compliance checks conducted at class 1–3 fixed food premises by class, municipality and region, Victoria 2015
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 168 1,179 121 1,468 Eastern Metropolitan Knox (C) 153 780 145 1,078 Eastern Metropolitan Manningham (C) 137 644 95 876 Eastern Metropolitan Maroondah (C) 129 643 168 940 Eastern Metropolitan Monash (C) 87 600 182 869 Eastern Metropolitan Whitehorse (C) 77 994 66 1,137 Eastern Metropolitan Yarra Ranges (S) 129 1,135 222 1,486 Eastern Metropolitan Total 880 5,975 999 7,854 North & West Metropolitan Banyule (C) 82 727 87 896 North & West Metropolitan Brimbank (C) 194 1,392 155 1,741 North & West Metropolitan Darebin (C) 117 925 91 1,133 North & West Metropolitan Hobsons Bay (C) 53 667 25 745 North & West Metropolitan Hume (C) 143 1,223 167 1,533 North & West Metropolitan Maribyrnong (C) 49 761 40 850 North & West Metropolitan Melbourne (C) 70 3,304 149 3,523 North & West Metropolitan Melton (S) 36 266 29 331 North & West Metropolitan Moonee Valley (C) 105 832 80 1,017 North & West Metropolitan Moreland (C) 111 902 101 1,114 North & West Metropolitan Nillumbik (S) 48 380 65 493 North & West Metropolitan Whittlesea (C) 134 815 141 1,090 North & West Metropolitan Wyndham (C) 93 378 113 584 North & West Metropolitan Yarra (C) 82 1394 108 1,584
North & West Metropolitan Total 1,317 13,966 1,351 16,634 Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) 109 651 39 799 Southern Metropolitan Cardinia (S) 69 524 93 686 Southern Metropolitan Casey (C) 216 1,052 173 1,441 Southern Metropolitan Frankston (C) 126 628 91 845 Southern Metropolitan Glen Eira (C) 166 1,317 212 1,695
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 55
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Southern Metropolitan Greater Dandenong (C) 123 1,249 208 1,580 Southern Metropolitan Kingston (C) 156 1,304 136 1,596 Southern Metropolitan Mornington Peninsula (S) 136 1,106 188 1,430 Southern Metropolitan Port Phillip (C) 29 1,331 91 1,451 Southern Metropolitan Stonnington (C) 87 1,255 92 1,434 Southern Metropolitan Subtotal 1,217 10,417 1,323 12,957
Barwon-South West Colac Otway (S) 8 198 35 241 Barwon-South West Corangamite (S) 24 145 21 190 Barwon-South West Glenelg (S) 17 201 18 236 Barwon-South West Greater Geelong (C) 159 1,458 160 1,777 Barwon-South West Moyne (S) 2 92 8 102 Barwon-South West Queenscliffe (B) 1 83 5 89 Barwon-South West Southern Grampians (S) 16 142 15 173 Barwon-South West Surf Coast (S) 23 338 23 384 Barwon-South West Warrnambool (C) 33 281 20 334
Barwon-South West Subtotal 283 2,938 305 3,526 Gippsland Bass Coast (S) 43 733 26 802 Gippsland Baw Baw (S) 18 310 10 338 Gippsland East Gippsland (S) 62 349 54 465 Gippsland Latrobe (C) 78 550 48 676 Gippsland South Gippsland (S) 17 216 32 265 Gippsland Wellington (S) 20 344 35 399 Gippsland Subtotal 238 2502 205 2,945 Grampians Ararat (RC) 11 74 10 95 Grampians Ballarat (C) 110 811 104 1,025 Grampians Golden Plains (S) 4 103 11 118 Grampians Hepburn (S) 9 117 26 152 Grampians Hindmarsh (S) 11 56 8 75 Grampians Horsham (RC) 16 161 44 221 Grampians Moorabool (S) 15 128 41 184 Grampians Northern Grampians (S) 8 93 22 123 Grampians Pyrenees (S) 3 44 17 64 Grampians West Wimmera (S) 4 40 2 46 Grampians Yarriambiack (S) 2 24 1 27
Page 56 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Grampians Subtotal 193 1,651 286 2,130 Hume Alpine (S) 1 23 0 24 Hume Benalla (RC) 6 31 7 44 Hume City of Wodonga (C) 23 147 14 184 Hume Greater Shepparton (C) 58 320 31 409 Hume Indigo (S) 9 200 29 238 Hume Mansfield (S) 8 179 33 220 Hume Mitchell (S) 15 186 28 229 Hume Moira (S) 12 126 22 160 Hume Murrindindi (S) 5 68 7 80 Hume Strathbogie (S) 14 130 25 169 Hume Towong (S) 6 46 9 61 Hume Wangaratta (RC) 15 81 1 97 Hume Total 172 1,537 206 1,915
Loddon Mallee Buloke (S) 3 17 0 20 Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) 31 290 55 376 Loddon Mallee Central Goldfields (S) 2 20 1 23 Loddon Mallee Gannawarra (S) 3 17 7 27 Loddon Mallee Greater Bendigo (C) 97 648 39 784 Loddon Mallee Loddon (S) 5 127 8 140 Loddon Mallee Macedon Ranges (S) 27 226 7 260 Loddon Mallee Mildura (RC) 45 362 28 435 Loddon Mallee Mount Alexander (S) 16 203 23 242 Loddon Mallee Swan Hill (RC) 12 162 12 186 Loddon Mallee Total 241 2,072 180 2,493 Metropolitan Total 3,414 30,358 3,673 37,445
Non-Metropolitan Total 1,127 10,700 1,182 13,009 Victoria Grand Total 4,541 41,058 4,855 50,454 B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. *Note: Includes all compliance checks, that is, council inspections of class 1–3 food premises, council assessments of class 1 and 2 premises and food safety audits of class 1 (mandatory) and class 2 (optional for proprietors).
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 57
Appendix 8: Compliance checks conducted at class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises*
Compliance checks conducted at class 2–4 temporary and mobile food premises by class, municipality and region, Victoria 2015
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 19 17 15 51 Knox (C) 45 37 22 104 Manningham (C) 61 52 30 143 Maroondah (C) 54 62 30 146 Monash (C) 72 19 2 93 Whitehorse (C) 98 30 14 142 Yarra Ranges (S) 98 66 14 178 Eastern Metropolitan Total 447 283 127 857 North and West Metropolitan Banyule (C) 23 16 9 48 Brimbank (C) 66 14 1 81 Darebin (C) 18 4 - 22 Hobsons Bay (C) 16 14 - 30 Hume (C) 132 48 6 186 Maribyrnong (C) 19 3 1 23 Melbourne (C) 858 170 47 1,075 Melton (S) 31 22 8 61 Moonee Valley (C) 38 26 15 79 Moreland (C) 83 49 26 158 Nillumbik (S) 28 40 9 77 Whittlesea (C) 61 33 21 115 Wyndham (C) 256 101 24 381 Yarra (C) 113 39 1 153 North and West Metropolitan Total 1,742 579 168 2,489 Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) 4 3 - 7 Cardinia (S) 24 21 - 45 Casey (C) 54 56 1 111 Frankston (C) 32 35 16 83 Glen Eira (C) 33 16 - 49 Greater Dandenong (C) 231 53 14 298
Page 58 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total Kingston (C) 37 27 25 89 Mornington Peninsula (S) 110 110 86 306 Port Phillip (C) 56 35 33 124 Southern Metropolitan Total 581 356 175 1,112 Barwon South-Western Colac Otway (S) 34 42 26 102 Corangamite (S) - 2 - 2 Glenelg (S) 22 35 17 74 Greater Geelong (C) 9 3 - 12 Queenscliffe (B) 8 6 7 21 Southern Grampians (S) 25 10 9 44 Surf Coast (S) 82 29 10 121 Warrnambool (C) 32 21 2 55 Barwon South-Western Total 212 148 71 431 Gippsland Bass Coast (S) - 1 - 1 Baw Baw (S) 92 71 51 214 East Gippsland (S) 7 3 - 10 Latrobe (C) 15 20 16 51 South Gippsland (S) 14 21 6 41 Gippsland Total 128 116 73 317 Grampians Ballarat (C) 119 34 11 164 Golden Plains (S) 41 17 9 67 Hepburn (S) 4 3 9 16 Horsham (RC) 22 9 1 32 Moorabool (S) 17 11 - 28 Pyrenees (S) 60 9 6 75 West Wimmera (S) 2 - - 2 Yarriambiack (S) 5 2 - 7 Grampians Total 270 85 36 391 Hume Alpine (S) 7 3 - 10 Benalla (RC) 2 - 1 3 City of Wodonga (C) 49 13 4 66 Greater Shepparton (C) 33 17 6 56 Indigo (S) 18 7 7 32 Mansfield (S) 30 19 16 65 Mitchell (S) 35 16 1 52
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 59
Department of Health and Human Services region Council Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Total Moira (S) 48 29 36 113 Strathbogie (S) 8 1 - 9 Towong (S) 4 1 1 6 Hume Total 234 106 72 412 Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) 61 53 17 131 Central Goldfields (S) 1 1 - 2 Gannawarra (S) 4 6 8 18 Greater Bendigo (C) 116 86 9 211 Loddon (S) 26 9 5 40 Macedon Ranges (S) 21 11 24 56 Mildura (RC) 44 18 5 67 Mount Alexander (S) 14 8 3 25 Swan Hill (RC) 14 17 - 31 Loddon Mallee Total 301 209 71 581 Metropolitan Total 2,770 1,218 470 4,458 Non-Metropolitan Total 1,145 664 323 2,132 Victoria Grand Total 3,915 1,882 793 6,590
B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. *Notes: Includes all compliance checks, that is, council inspections of class 2–4 premises, and council assessments of class 2 premises and food safety audits of class 2 premises (optional for proprietors). Includes water transport vehicles (class 3). Excludes food vending machines, which are minimally regulated under the Act.
Page 60 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Appendix 9: Enforcement action by councils for offences in relation to class 1–3 food fixed premises by class and municipality, Victoria 2015*
Enforcement action by councils for offences in relation to class 1–3 food fixed premises by class and municipality, 2015
Department of Health General General General Infringement Infringement Infringement and Human Services enforcements enforcements enforcements notices notices notices region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Eastern Metropolitan Boroondara (C) 1 38 5 - 16 1 61
Eastern Metropolitan Knox (C) 1 27 2 - 7 - 37
Eastern Metropolitan Manningham (C) 1 25 5 - 9 1 41
Eastern Metropolitan Maroondah (C) ------
Eastern Metropolitan Monash (C) - 44 4 - - - 48
Eastern Metropolitan Whitehorse (C) - 20 1 - - - 21
Eastern Metropolitan Yarra Ranges (S) - 1 - - 8 - 9
Eastern Metropolitan Total 3 155 17 - 40 2 217 North & West Metropolitan Banyule (C) - 5 - - - - 5 North & West Metropolitan Brimbank (C) - 2 - - 3 - 5 North & West Metropolitan Darebin (C) - 11 2 - - - 13 North & West Metropolitan Hobsons Bay (C) - 11 1 - - - 12 North & West Metropolitan Hume (C) - - 2 - - 1 3 North & West Metropolitan Maribyrnong (C) - 72 4 - - - 76 North & West Metropolitan Melbourne (C) - 158 3 - - - 161
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 61
Department of Health General General General Infringement Infringement Infringement and Human Services enforcements enforcements enforcements notices notices notices region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total North & West Metropolitan Melton (S) ------North & West Metropolitan Moonee Valley (C) - - 1 - - - 1 North & West Metropolitan Moreland (C) - 14 1 - - - 15 North & West Metropolitan Nillumbik (S) - 2 - - - - 2 North & West Metropolitan Whittlesea (C) 1 - - - 2 2 5 North & West Metropolitan Wyndham (C) 1 52 8 - 1 - 62 North & West Metropolitan Yarra (C) - 29 - - 3 - 32 North & West Metropolitan Total 2 356 22 - 9 3 392
Southern Metropolitan Bayside (C) - 6 - - 1 1 8
Southern Metropolitan Cardinia (S) - 16 - 1 4 - 21
Southern Metropolitan Casey (C) - 11 - 2 45 - 58
Southern Metropolitan Frankston (C) - 16 2 - 8 1 27
Southern Metropolitan Glen Eira (C) - 9 - - 1 - 10
Southern Metropolitan Greater Dandenong (C) - 4 - - 26 3 33
Southern Metropolitan Kingston (C) - 116 8 - 8 1 133
Southern Metropolitan Mornington Peninsula (S) 1 8 - - - - 9
Southern Metropolitan Port Phillip (C) 1 34 1 - - - 36
Southern Metropolitan Stonnington (C) 1 16 - - 2 - 19
Southern Metropolitan Total 3 236 11 3 95 6 354
Page 62 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Department of Health General General General Infringement Infringement Infringement and Human Services enforcements enforcements enforcements notices notices notices region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Barwon-South West Colac Otway (S) ------
Barwon-South West Corangamite (S) - 1 - - - - 1
Barwon-South West Geelong (C) ------
Barwon-South West Glenelg (S) - 1 - - - - 1
Barwon-South West Moyne (S) ------
Barwon-South West Queenscliffe (B) ------
Barwon-South West Southern Grampians (S) 1 4 - - 1 - 6
Barwon-South West Surf Coast (S) - 4 1 - 1 - 6
Barwon-South West Warrnambool (C) - 2 - - 1 - 3
Barwon-South West Total 1 12 1 - 3 - 17
Gippsland Bass Coast (S) ------
Gippsland Baw Baw (S) - 2 - 1 24 7 34
Gippsland East Gippsland (S) ------
Gippsland Latrobe (C) ------
Gippsland South Gippsland (S) ------
Gippsland Wellington (S) ------
Gippsland Total - 2 - 1 24 7 34
Grampians Ararat (RC) ------
Grampians Ballarat (C) - 19 - - - - 19
Grampians Golden Plains (S) - 4 1 - 1 - 6
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 63
Department of Health General General General Infringement Infringement Infringement and Human Services enforcements enforcements enforcements notices notices notices region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Grampians Hepburn (S) ------
Grampians Hindmarsh (S) - 3 - - - - 3
Grampians Horsham (RC) ------
Grampians Moorabool (S) ------
Grampians Northern Grampians (S) ------
Grampians Pyrenees (S) ------
Grampians West Wimmera (S) - 1 - - - - 1
Grampians Yarriambiack (S) ------
Grampians Total - 27 1 - 1 - 29
Hume Alpine (S) ------
Hume Benalla (RC) ------
Hume Indigo (S) ------
Hume Mansfield (S) - 1 - - - - 1
Hume Mitchell (S) ------
Hume Moira (S) ------
Hume Murrindindi (S) ------
Hume Shepparton (C) - 1 - - - - 1
Hume Strathbogie (S) ------
Hume Towong (S) ------
Hume Wangaratta (RC) ------
Page 64 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Department of Health General General General Infringement Infringement Infringement and Human Services enforcements enforcements enforcements notices notices notices region Council Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Hume Wodonga (C) ------
Hume Total - 2 - - - - 2
Loddon Mallee Bendigo (C) ------
Loddon Mallee Buloke (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Campaspe (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Central Goldfields (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Gannawarra (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Loddon (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Macedon Ranges (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Mildura (RC) - 1 - - 2 - 3
Loddon Mallee Mount Alexander (S) ------
Loddon Mallee Swan Hill (RC) - 1 - - - - 1
Loddon Mallee Subtotal - 2 - - 2 - 4
Metropolitan Total 8 747 50 3 144 11 963
Non- Metropolitan Total 1 45 2 1 30 7 86
Victoria Grand Total 9 792 52 4 174 18 1,049 B = Borough; C = City; RC = Rural City; S = Shire. *Note: Includes ‘general enforcement actions’ which refer to a range of actions taken by councils for breaches of various sections of the Act. Among these are various directions and orders to comply, premises closures, food seizures, revocation or suspension of registration, legal proceedings for breach of undertakings and increases in food premises audit frequency. Excludes offences under the Act which resulted in a conviction.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 65
Appendix 10: Offences under the Act that resulted in a conviction, by type of offence, Victoria, 2015
Offences under the Act that resulted in a conviction, by type of offence, Victoria, 2015
No. of Type of offence* offences S. 8A – Handle food in a way that the person ought reasonably to know is likely to render the 3 food unsafe. S. 11(1) – Handle food intended for sale in a manner that will render, or is likely to render, it 3 unsafe. S. 12(1) – Handle food intended for sale in a manner that will render, or is likely to render, it 6 unsuitable. S. 12(2) – Sell food that is unsuitable. 1
S. 14 (1) – Sale of food not complying with purchaser’s demand. 1
S. 16(1) – Failure to comply with any requirement imposed on the person by a provision of the Food Standards Code in relation to conduct of a food business or to food intended for sale or food for sale. Standard 1.2.5, Clause 2 – information requirements – date marking of food for 1 sale Fail to date mark food; sell food after the expiration of the use-by-date, where such a date mark is required. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 3(1) – food handlers’/supervisors’ knowledge and skill Fail to ensure persons undertaking or supervising food handling operations have skills 21 in, and knowledge of, food safety and food hygiene matters. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 6 – storage of food Fail to store food so as to protect it from the likelihood of contamination; fail to ensure the environmental conditions under which food is stored will not adversely affect its 61 safety and suitability; fail, when storing potentially hazardous food, to store food under temperature control. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 7 – processing safe and suitable food Fail to take all practicable measures to process only safe and suitable food; and when 17 processing food, to take all necessary steps to prevent the likelihood of food being contaminated. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 9 – food packaging Fail, when packaging food, to use packaging material that is fit for its intended use; that 1 is not likely to cause food contamination; ensure that there is no likelihood that the food may become contaminated during the packaging process. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 10 – food transportation Fail, when transporting food, to protect all food from the likelihood of contamination; 1 transport potentially hazardous food under temperature control; ensure potentially hazardous food intended for transportation frozen remains frozen during transportation. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 17 – hand washing facilities Fail to maintain easily accessible hand washing facilities; fail to maintain at or near each 34 hand wash facility, a supply of warm running water and soap or other items that may be
Page 66 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
No. of Type of offence* offences used to thoroughly clean hands; fail to ensure hand washing facilities are only used for the washing of hands, arms and face; fail to maintain at or near each hand wash facility single use towels or other means of effectively drying hands that are not likely to transfer pathogenic microorganisms to the hands. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 18 – general duties of food businesses Fail to inform food handlers of their health and hygiene obligations; disclose information 3 provided to the business by food handlers about their health or hygiene; take all reasonable steps to ensure persons on the premises do not contaminate food. Standard 3.2.2, Clauses 19 and 21 – maintaining clean premises and fixtures in good repair Fail to maintain the food premises and all fixtures, fittings and equipment having regard to its use, to a standard of cleanliness where there was no accumulation of food waste, 132 dirt, grease or other visible matter, and fail to maintain the food premises, fixtures, fittings and equipment in a good state of repair and working order having regard to their use. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 20 – clean utensils and food contact surfaces Fail to ensure eating and drinking utensils were in a clean and sanitary condition; fail to ensure that any food contact surfaces of equipment were in a clean and sanitary 16 condition whenever food that will come into contact with the surface is likely to be contaminated. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 22 – lack of food thermometer Fail to have temperature measuring device readily accessible that can accurately 2 measure the temperature of potentially hazardous food. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 23 – single use items Fail to ensure that single-use items do not contaminate food; do not allow the 2 transmission of infectious disease; are not reused. Standard 3.2.2, Clause 24(1) (c) and (d) – pests Fail to take all practicable measures to prevent pests entering the food premises and/or 24 to eradicate and prevent the harbourage of pests on the food premises. Standard 3.2.3: Food premises and equipment Standard 3.2.3, Clause 6(a) and (b) – garbage Fail to adequately contain the volume and type of garbage and recyclable matter on 2 food premises; fail to provide facilities for the storage of garbage that enclosed the garbage necessary to keep pests and animals away from it. Standard 3.2.3, Clause 8 – lighting Fail to have a lighting system that provides sufficient natural/artificial light for the 2 activities on the food premises. Standard 3.2.3, Clause 10(1) and (2) – suitable floors Fail to ensure floors are designed in a way that is appropriate for the activities conducted on the food premises; fail to have floors that were able to be effectively 8 cleaned or unable to absorb grease, food particles and water, or laid so that there is no ponding of water. Standard 3.2.3, Clause 11 – fixtures, fittings, equipment; walls and ceilings Fail to provide walls and ceilings where they are necessary to protect food from contamination; fail in that walls and ceilings were not sealed to prevent the entry of dirt, 9 dust and pests nor were they able to be effectively and easily cleaned; fail to ensure fixtures, fittings and equipment are fit for their intended use; fail to ensure walls and ceilings are able to be effectively cleaned and, to the extent that is practicable, be
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 67
No. of Type of offence* offences unable to provide for the harbourage of pests. Standard 3.2.3, Clause 12 – fixtures, fittings and equipment; food contact surfaces Fail to have fixtures, fittings and equipment adequate for the production of safe and suitable food; that are fit for their intended use; that are designed, constructed, located and installed so that there is no likelihood they can cause food contamination, and are 3 able to be effectively cleaned; fail to have food contact surfaces of fixtures, fittings and equipment able to be easily cleaned and, if necessary, sanitised, if there is a likelihood that they will cause contamination. Standard 3.2.3, Clause 14 – hand washing facilities Fail to have hand washing facilities that are located where they can be easily accessed 4 by food handlers; fail to have hand washing facilities that are permanent fixtures, or connected or otherwise provided with a supply of warm, running potable water. Standard 3.2.3, Clause 15 – adequate storage for non-food items Fail to have adequate storage facilities for the storage of items that are likely to be the source of contamination of food, including chemicals, clothing and personal belongings; 4 fail to ensure storage facilities are located where there is not likelihood of stored items contaminating food contact surfaces. S. 19 – Failure to comply with an order Fail to comply with an order to put premises in a clean and sanitary condition, and alter or 9 improve the premises as specified. S. 19F – No FSP at the premises 1 Fail to ensure a required FSP is kept at the premises to which it relates. S. 29 – Offences with respect to authorised officers (a) Interfere with an article seized under the Act. 1 Victoria total 372
*Notes: There may be more than one: offence per proprietor or food premises conviction per premises, that is, the proprietor was convicted of offences on more than one separate occasion. There may also be a proprietor with more than one premises. Convictions were recorded against 30 companies or individuals in relation to 21 food premises operating in Victoria during this period. The companies or individuals were found guilty of a total of 372 offences under the Victorian Food Act 1984 or the regulations. In most cases, they were convicted of multiple offences.
Page 68 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Appendix 11: Major food safety related committees 2015
11.1 National committees 2015
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Victorian representatives capacity
COAG Legislative and Department of To develop domestic food regulatory Council of Australian Minister for Health (lead) As Victorian Government Governance Forum on Health and Ageing policy and policy guidelines for setting Governments Minister for Primary representatives Food Regulation ( the (Food Regulation domestic food standards. (COAG) Industries Forum) Secretariat) To adopt, amend or reject standards Senior Manager, FSU As Department of Health & 1 meeting/year and to request that these be reviewed. Human Services (DHHS), Victoria senior official supporting Minister for Health
Food Regulation Department of To provide policy advice to the Forum. Minister for Health Senior Manager, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Standing Committee Health and Ageing (lead) A/g Executive Director, representative (FRSC) of the Forum (Food Regulation Minister for Primary Agriculture & Natural 2 meetings/year Secretariat) Industries Resources Policy, Department of Primary Industries (DPI)
Implementation Sub- Department of To develop or assist in the development FRSC of the Forum Manager, Systems and As DHHS, Victoria Committee for Food Health and Ageing of guidelines on consistent enforcement Program Development, representative Regulation (ISFR) (Food Regulation of food regulations that aim to minimise FSU 3 meetings/year Secretariat) cost to industry and meet the objective Chief Executive Officer, of minimum effective regulation. Dairy Safe Victoria Chief Executive Officer, Prime Safe
Front of Pack Labelling Department of To steer work plan in relation to the Minister for Health Senior Manager, FSU As Victorian FRSC Steering Committee Health and Ageing implementation of the recommendations and Ageing and Manager, Policy representatives 6 meetings/year (Food Regulation of the Blewett review of food labelling FRSC Coordination & Strategic Secretariat) law and policy. Planning Director, Agriculture & Food Industry Policy, DPI
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 69
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Victorian representatives capacity
Government Food Department of To ensure that accurate and consistent Implementation Sub- Senior Policy Analyst, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Communicator’s Group Health and Ageing food safety messages are Committee for Food representative (ISFR Working Group) (Food Regulation communicated to the public and Regulation (ISFR) 1 meeting and 2 Secretariat) stakeholders. teleconferences/year To enable sharing of current media issues information between jurisdictions. To share communication materials between jurisdictions. Coordinated Food Department of To provide a strategic overview to the ISFR Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria Survey Plan Working Health and Ageing national system for cooperative and Officer FSU representative Group (ISFR Working (Food Regulation collaborative actions on food surveys, Group) Secretariat) testing, monitoring, epidemiological 1 meeting/year, and studies, research, surveillance and teleconferences as intelligence gathering. required
Bi-National Food Safety Department of To coordinate information sharing, FSANZ Board Manager, Regulation and As DHHS, Victoria Network Health and Ageing communication and action on (bi- Incident Management, representative Meetings and (Food Regulation )national food incidents. FSU teleconferences as Secretariat) required
National Food Incident Department of To develop and maintain a national ISFR Manager, Regulation and As DHHS, Victoria Response Protocol Health and Ageing protocol to respond to food incidents in Incident Management, representative Working Group (ISFR (Food Regulation a consistent and coordinated manner FSU Working Group) Secretariat) Meetings and teleconferences as required
Page 70 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Victorian representatives capacity
National Food Incident Department of To develop and maintain a national ISFR Manager, Regulation and As DHHS, Victoria Response Protocol Health and Ageing protocol to respond to food incidents in Incident Management, representative Working Group (ISFR (Food Regulation a consistent and coordinated manner. FSU Working Group) Secretariat) 1 meeting/year, and teleconferences as required
Food Surveillance Department of To identify opportunities for cross- ISFR Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria Network Health and Ageing jurisdictional involvement and facilitate Officer, FSU representative 4 teleconferences/ year (Food Regulation collaboration and circumstances in and additional Secretariat) which a national or cross-jurisdictional teleconferences as approach will be efficient and effective. required To prioritise areas for action. To optimise information sharing.
Food Medicine Interface Department of To provide regulatory clarity around ISFR Manager, Regulation and As DHHS Victoria Working Group (ISFR Health and Ageing products that could be food or Incident Management, representative Working Group) (Food Regulation therapeutic goods FSU Meetings as required Secretariat)
FRSC Ad-Hoc Health Department of To determine how cost recovery will be Minister for Health Manager, Regulation and As DHHS Victoria Claims Working Group Health and Ageing determined with respect to the and Ageing and Incident Management, representative Meetings and (Food Regulation compliance and enforcement of self- FRSC FSU teleconferences as Secretariat) substantiated general level health required claims
Nutrition and Health Department of 1. To assist in the development of the ISFR Senior Food Safety As DHHS Victoria Claims Working Group Health and Ageing standard in the Code Science Officer, FSU representative (ISFR Working Group) (Food Regulation 2. To provide input with respect to Chief Executive Officer, Meetings and Secretariat) implementation and enforcement issues Dairy Safe Victoria teleconferences as required
Bi- National Recall FSANZ To provide for continuous improvement FSANZ board Manager, Regulation and As DHHS, Victoria Officers Group with respect to the implementation of Incident Management, representative 1 meeting per year food recalls. FSU
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 71
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Victorian representatives capacity
Expert Advisory Group Department of To work with Food Standards Australia ISFR Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria on Analytical Methods Health and Ageing New Zealand (FSANZ) on the Officer, FSU representative 1 meeting/year (Food Regulation standards development process in Secretariat) order to advise on fit for purpose analytical methods
Independent Review of Department of To review impacts and outputs of the FRSC of the Forum Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria the mandatory Health and Ageing fortification standards and Australian Officer - Nutrition, FSU representative fortification of bread (Food Regulation Health Ministers 2 meetings/year Secretariat) Advisory Council (AHMAC)
Working Group on High Department of To develop a strategy and high-level FRSC of the Forum Senior Manager, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Level Monitoring and Health and Ageing principles for monitoring and Senior Policy Analyst, FSU representatives Enforcement Strategy for (Food Regulation enforcement of food labelling in Food Labelling Secretariat) Australia. (Joint ISFR/FRSC working Group) 5 meetings/year
Strategic Plan Working Department of To develop and oversee the FRSC of the Forum Senior Manager, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Group Health and Ageing implementation of the Strategic plan representative (FRSC Working Group) (Food Regulation 2013–2017; the strategic plan is Secretariat) reviewed by FRSC every 12 months. Director Agriculture & Food 3 meetings/year Industry Policy, Department of Primary Industries
Food Safety Department of To review the Food safety management FRSC of the Forum Senior Manager, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Management Working Health and Ageing policy guideline with a particular focus Senior Policy Analyst, FSU representatives Group (Food Regulation on the adequacy and appropriateness Meetings as required Secretariat) of its guidance in relation to the general food service sector and closely related retail sector.
Page 72 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Victorian representatives capacity
Jurisdictional Forum FSANZ To engage in the standards setting FSANZ board Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria Meetings and process prior to an assessment for an Officer FSU Senior Policy representatives teleconferences as application or proposal being finalised Analyst, FSU required and provided to the FSANZ board.
Advisory Committee on FSANZ To consider requests made by industry FSANZ board Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria Novel Foods to FSANZ for novel food status and to Officer, FSU representative Meetings and identify those substances that require a teleconferences as pre-market risk assessment (via required application).
Local Government Department of 1. Annual reporting information provided FRSC of the Forum Manager, Systems and As DHHS, Victoria Working Group Health and Ageing by jurisdictions to ISFR using consistent Program Development, representative (ISFR Working Group) (Food Regulation reporting terminology, including FSU Secretariat) reporting on: Meetings and teleconferences as - application of ISFR national policy required such as enforcement guidelines, complaint guidelines, inspection frequency - general compliance/ enforcement statistics - food business profile and regulation services profile 2. High-level principles for nationally- consistent food premises inspection. 3. Develop a central repository for collations of available resources for interpretation of the Food Standards Code.
Environmental Health Environmental To discuss regulatory food safety Environmental Manager, Systems and As DHHS, Victoria Professional Australia Health Professional issues. Health Professional Program Development, representative (EHPA) Food Special Australia Australia FSU Interest Group (SIG) 12 meetings/year
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 73
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Victorian representatives capacity
Food Microbiology (FT– Standards Australia To review and revise standard Standards Australia Manager. Evidence As DHHS, Victoria 035) Australian analytical methods for Program, FSU representative Two meetings per year, detecting microorganisms in food. teleconferences as required
11.2 State committees 2015
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Representatives capacity
Victorian Food DPI, Victoria To discuss regulatory food safety issues Minister for Health Senior Manager, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Regulators Forum across all agencies Minister for Primary Chief Health Officer, representative 2 meetings/year Industries PrimeSafe Chief Health Officer, Dairy Food Safety Victoria Director Agriculture & Food Industry Policy, DPI Director Agricultural and Natural Resources Policy, DPI Health Claims DHHS, Victoria To develop a Victorian plan for Senior Manager, Senior Manager, FSU As DHHS, Victoria Implementation – implementing the Nutrition, Health and FSU, DHHS Senior Policy Analyst, FSU representatives Victoria Working Group Related Claims Standards (1.2.7) Senior Food Safety Meetings as required Science Officer, FSU Chief Executive Officer, Dairy Food Safety Victoria DHHS/Municipal DHHS, Victoria – To discuss regulatory food safety issues Senior Manager, Principle Policy Advisor, As DHHS, Victoria Association of Victoria chaired by Municipal relevant to local government FSU and the Chief FSU Manager, Systems representatives (MAV) Food Safety Association of Executive, MAV and Program Committee Victoria (MAV) Development, FSU Meetings as required Senior Food Science Officer, FSU
Page 74 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Convening department/ Meeting attendance National committees organisation Purpose Accountability Representatives capacity
Food Technology Food Technology To serve as an interface with industry FTAA Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria Association of Australia Association of on standard development. Officer, FSU representative (FTAA) Technical Sub- Australia committee Meetings as required
Streatrader Project DHHS, Victoria To project manage Streatrader – the Senior Manager, Systems Data Analyst, As DHHS, Victoria Group online statewide registration system for FSU and the Chief FSU representatives 26 meetings/year food vans and stalls. Executive, MAV Systems Regulatory Technical Officer, FSU Environment Health Officer, FSU
Allergen testing Special National To advise on compliance issues in NMI Senior Food Science As DHHS, Victoria Interest Group (SIG) Measurement relation to standards. Officer, FSU representatives 1 meeting/year Institute (NMI) Senior Food Safety (Public analytical Science Officer, FSU laboratory)
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 75
Appendix 12: Resources, publications and presentations
Resources and publications
2015 Title Audience Description
Streatrader – registration tool for The Streatrader website was further developed community groups and businesses providing additional ‘how to use’ information, selling food from temporary & Businesses frequently asked questions and other resources Jan– mobile food premises (online Community for business and community groups using the Dec portal) Groups system. Jan– Practical information for the public on keeping Dec Better Health Channel (online) General food safe and preventing foodborne illness. Secure departmental website for EHOs and managers working in local councils containing Jan– Environmental health professionals resources and tools for EHOs such as guidance Dec (online portal) Councils on policy, procedures and the Act. Details of offences under the Act or the Jan– regulations which resulted in a conviction being Dec Register of convictions (online) General recorded. Auditors Business Agreement between the department and Jan Auditor arrangements (6pp, online) Councils auditors registered under the Act. Report released on the EHO password protected website outlining the findings of the survey examining temperature control of food for the Assessment of temperature control prevention of microbial growth in food premises Jan at food premises in Victoria EHOs in Victoria. Presentation outlining of the Victorian electronic food sampling app that is used by council EHOs when submitting food samples to the laboratory. ‘Victorian Electronic Food Councils/ The app was developed jointly by the MAV, Feb Sampling’ App EHOs DHHS and an app developer, Acresta. Meat industry, Presentation outlining the incidence and risks of Mar ‘Listeria - Incidence and Risks’ PrimeSafe Listeria contamination of meat Mar & ‘Food safety programs and food Jul safety supervisors’ EHOs Presentations to the EHO orientation day Presentation to the FSU’s food safety auditor’s May ‘Review of Food safety Auditing’ Auditors forum ‘Challenges in Food Safety International Presentation to the Chinese Food and Drug Jun Compliance’ delegation Administration ‘Hidden allergens in the food supply’ and ‘Food supply and how to investigate food allergen Presentations to an ‘Allergen training day’ for Aug complaints’ EHOs EHOs
Page 76 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Chemists, industry, Presentation to the Royal Australian Chemical RACI Institute (RACI) regarding the detection of Sep ‘Detecting hepatitis A’ members hepatitis A. Microbiological Safety and Food Handling Practices of Seed Sprout International Products in the Australian State of academics, Victoria. Journal of Food regulators, Protection, 2015. 78(7): p. 1387- industry, International peer-reviewed journal publication 1391 Symes, S., P. Goldsmith, and scientific describing a survey examining the safety of seed Sep H. Haines community sprouts. 12 training sessions provided across Streatrader ‘New User’ training and Victoria on the latest developments in Sep-Nov ‘Streatrader ‘User Groups’ training EHOs Streatrader.
Oct ‘Kombucha, is it a risk?’ EHOs Presentation to the EHPA Annual Forum. ‘Wake-up call – hepatitis A in fresh Oct produce’ EHOs Presentation to the EHPA Annual Forum. ‘Audited food premises – your Oct responsibilities’ EHOs Presentation to the EHPA Annual Forum. Annual report on councils’ and the department’s activities, operations and achievements in food The Food Act report 2013: Making regulation prepared under s. 7C of the Food Act Oct it safer (online) General 1984. ‘Do not supply prohibited food Councils, Advice to businesses on the banning of Nov waste to pigs’ advice Business prohibited food waste being fed to pigs. Food safety template for class 2 retail and service businesses No.1 Version 3 on requirements of sous Councils, Publication updating templates for identified food Nov vide cooking practises Business practices.. International Presentation to the visiting UK Food Safety Nov ‘Food Safety Audits & Inspections’ delegation Authority on Victorian food regulation. Presentation to the Home Economics Institute Nov ‘Food Safety Regulation in Victoria’ Students outlining food regulation in Victoria.
Dec ‘All about the eggs’ EHOs Pilot of training for EHOs in safe egg handling.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 77
Appendix 13: Glossary of terms
Glossary of terms
Term Definition ACCC Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (the) Act In this report, unless otherwise specified, ‘the Act’ refers to the Victorian Food Act 1984. Approved auditor Auditors who are approved by the Department of Health and Human Services /auditor under the Act to audit food premises’ food safety programs. They may be independent private auditors or council officers who are approved to conduct audits on behalf of their councils. Assessment An assessment involves determining: if a template has been used to prepare a standard food safety program, whether it is the correct template for the business, and in all cases, whether the premises is complying with its FSP and the food safety standards. When conducted by a council, an assessment is a kind of extensive inspection of the food premises, which must include a checking of these matters. Audit An audit of a FSP to determine that it is adequate, and that the food premises is compliant with the program and with its obligations under the Food Safety Standards. Australia New Zealand The collection of bi-national standards designed to promote national Food Standards Code consistency in Australia’s and New Zealand’s food laws. It lists requirements (the Code) for food businesses in relation to food safety practices, general requirements and food premises set up and equipment. It also outlines the requirements for foods such as additives, labelling and genetically modified foods. Australia and New The food regulation system is overseen by the Forum is established under Zealand Ministerial the Food Regulation Agreement and has responsibility for developing Forum on Food domestic food regulation policy, developing policy guidelines for setting Regulation (the Forum) domestic food standards, and the promotion of a consistent approach to compliance with, and enforcement of, food standards. It also has the capacity to adopt, amend or reject standards and to request that these be reviewed. Class 1 food premises Premises that predominantly handle high-risk food that is served to vulnerable people in hospitals, childcare centres providing long day childcare, and aged care facilities such as nursing homes. Class 2 food premises Premises that handle high-risk foods that need correct temperature control at all times – including cooking and storage – to keep them safe. Class 3 food premises Premises that handle unpackaged low-risk foods or pre-packaged high-risk foods, or short-term community group ‘cook and serve’ activities. Class 4 food premises Premises carrying out only low-risk food handling activities such as bottled jams or honey. Also covers simple sausage sizzles, most cake stalls, and sessional kindergartens supplying low-risk snacks. These premises are required to notify councils of their food handling activities on a once-off basis; that is, they do not need to re-notify and councils are not required to contact them annually to ascertain whether they are still operating. (the) Code See Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code.
Page 78 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Term Definition Community group For the purposes of the Act, an organisation that sells food solely for the purpose of raising funds for charity or is a not-for-profit body. Compliance A situation where regulatory requirements under the Act are met. Food premises or individuals take action to comply with regulatory requirements and councils take action to ensure compliance, such as education, enforcement, prosecution and other tools to change behaviour. Compliance A check conducted to investigate whether food premises or individuals are assessment complying with the Act. It may be an audit, assessment or inspection depending on the nature of the activities being examined. Council Also referred to as local governments, councils are the third tier of the Australian political system. In 2015 there were 79 councils in Victoria, each consisting of between five and 12 councillors who are democratically elected to govern a particular geographic area in the best interests of the local community. See also municipality. Council assessment Where a FSP template has been used to prepare a standard food safety program, an assessment of a food premises that involves determining whether the correct template is being used by the business, and whether the premises is complying with its FSP and the food safety standards. Dairy Food Safety The independent regulator of Victoria’s dairy industry. Victoria (DFSV) Department of Health The Victorian department responsible for ensuring that food sold in Victoria is and Human Services safe, suitable and correctly labelled in the majority of food businesses; that is (the department) food manufacturers, retailers, cafés and restaurants, as well as premises that serve food such as hospitals and residential aged care services. Meat, seafood and dairy retailers are regulated by specialised regulators under their own industry-specific Acts (see Dairy Food Safety Victoria and PrimeSafe). Discretionary council An inspection of a food premises that is conducted at the discretion of the inspection council. It may be conducted because the council has concerns about the food business, or in response to any complaints received about the premises, or it may be a random spot check. EHO An environmental health officer. Environmental Health A national organisation that supports environmental health professionals Professionals Australia through ongoing education and research and provides ongoing professional (EPHA) development. EHPA is open to anyone who works in or has an interest in environmental health or public health and related fields. Fixed food premises A food premises at a fixed site, as distinct to a van or portable stall or tent. Forum See Australian and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation. Food Act 1984 (the Act) The principal Act that controls the sale of food in Victoria. Under the Act, food business owners must ensure food sold to customers is safe and suitable to eat. In this report, unless otherwise specified, the terms the ‘Act’ refer to this Act. Food business Under the Act, a business, enterprise or activity (other than those involved in primary production) that involves handling of food sold or intended for sale. Food handling The making, manufacturing, producing, collecting, extracting, processing, storing, transporting, delivering, preparing, treating, preserving, packing, cooking, thawing, serving or displaying of food.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 79
Term Definition Food manufacturers Businesses that produce products for distribution beyond the local area. Distribution may include regional, national or international markets. Foods manufactured are typically sold to wholesalers or retailers for distribution to the public. For the purposes of this report, in most cases this excludes manufacturers that primarily sell direct to the public from the premises, for example, bakeries that sell to the local community from their premises. Food premises For the purposes of the Act this refers to any premises at, on or from which food is sold or handled with the intention that it be sold, except primary food production premises. Food premises may be fixed, temporary or mobile. Food Performance The Victorian Food Performance Dataset and the associated reporting Dataset requirements are designed to improve food safety regulation and includes a common set of concepts, data elements and edit/validation rules that define the basis of activities carried out under the Act. The use of a common set of data elements across all council municipalities promotes a consistent approach to the administration of the Act across the state, as provided in s. 7A. Food recall A request to return to the maker a batch or an entire production run of a food product due to the discovery of safety issues. A recall may be mandatory or voluntary. Food safety Refers to a food supply that does not endanger consumer health through biological, chemical and/or other contaminants. Food safety and quality control ensures the desirable characteristics of food are retained through the cycle of production, handling, processing, packaging, distribution, preparation and sale. Food safety program A documented program developed by a business that describes how it will (FSP) manage food safety through the identification and control of hazards in the production, manufacturing and handling of food as described in the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system. The program also specifies the records that the business maintains to demonstrate the implementation of the program and actions taken to keep food safe. Food safety supervisor Under the Act class 1 and most class 2 businesses must have a food safety supervisor whose role is to supervise food handling in the business, and make sure that all staff understand how to handle food safely and are following the food safety program. Food safety The surveillance of food for physical, chemical and microbiological surveillance contaminants. In Victoria, the department monitors the safety of food in the food chain in conjunction with local governments and associated laboratories. Under the Act, food analysts regularly test food samples submitted by councils for pathogens that can cause food poisoning. There is a coordinated approach to food sampling across the state. Food Safety Unit (FSU) The FSU is responsible for ensuring that food sold in Victoria is safe, suitable and correctly labelled in the majority of food businesses; that is food manufacturers, retailers, cafés and restaurants, as well as premises that serve food such as hospitals and residential aged care services. Meat, seafood and dairy retailers are regulated by specialised regulators under their own industry-specific Acts (see Dairy Food Safety Victoria and PrimeSafe).
Page 80 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Term Definition Food Standards A statutory authority operating under the Commonwealth Food Standards Australia New Zealand Australia New Zealand Act 1991. This authority develops, in conjunction with (FSANZ) all states, territories and industry, standards for food composition, labelling and contaminants, including microbiological limits, that apply to all foods produced or imported for sale in Australia and New Zealand. These standards cover the food supply chain – from farm-gate to plate – for both the food manufacturing industry and primary producers. Under the Act, businesses are required to comply with these standards. Hazard Analysis and A management system in which food safety is addressed through the Critical Control Point analysis and control of biological, chemical, and physical hazards from raw (HACCP) material production, procurement and handling, to manufacturing, distribution and consumption of the finished product. High-risk food The nature of food, together with the way it is handled and the vulnerability to illness of the person eating the food, determines food safety risk. The terms ‘high risk’ and ‘low risk’ are used in this report for ease of reference. High-risk food should be taken to refer to foods that require more careful handling to keep them safe. This usually involves temperature control (refrigeration and/or cooking to a sufficiently high temperature) to control or kill pathogens that can cause poisoning. Independent FSP A FSP tailored specifically for the food premises. The Act describes these as ‘non-standard food safety programs’. They are often referred to as proprietary or independent programs. Infringement notice An infringement notice requires payment of a fine as a penalty for breaking the law. Since 1 March 2011 infringement notices may be issued in Victoria for certain hygiene or handling breaches under the Act. The list of infringement offences are contained in Schedule 1 of the Act. Initial registration The initial grant of registration to a food premises by the responsible council. Interface councils A self-selected group of local governments that border the Melbourne metropolitan area that face similar issues and that work together on various matters. Mandatory inspection An inspection of a food premises required under the Act that is conducted by a council for purposes including ensuring that the premises is complying with the Act and the applicable food safety standards and the Food Standards Code. Mobile food premises A food premises that is a vehicle, for example, a food van or coffee cart. Municipal Association of MAV is the legislated peak body for local government in Victoria and was Victoria (MAV) formed to support councils and councillors. Municipality Refers to the particular geographic area for which Victoria’s 79 councils are responsible as the third tier of the Australian political system. See also council. Noncompliance A situation where a food premises or individual does not follow the regulatory requirements under the Act. Notification Once-off requirement under the Act for a class 4 food premises to inform the responsible council of the basic details of a food premises such as business type, nature of business, food types handled, physical address and contact details. Pathogen A bacterium, virus or other microorganism that can cause disease.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 81
Term Definition PrimeSafe A statutory authority operating under the Meat Industry Act 1993 and Seafood Safety Act 2003 to regulate the safety of meat, poultry and seafood. Principal council (or Under Victoria’s statewide system for registration/notification of a food van or registering council) stall, one council must be primarily responsible for, and approve, a business’s food handling operations at its portable premises. Known as the principal council (or registering council), this is the council a food business will deal with most in the future. In effect, the principal council registers the food van or stall for the state and therefore on behalf of all other councils in whose municipalities it will trade. It is responsible, together with those ‘trading councils’, for monitoring compliance. It can take enforcement action where this is required. Proprietor For the purposes of this report, ‘proprietor’ refers to the business, community group or not-for-profit organisation responsible for the operation of a food premises. Register of convictions S. 53D of the Act requires the Secretary to the Department of Health and Human Services to keep a register of convictions for offences under the Act or the regulations. S. 53E requires that register to be published on a Department of Health and Human Services website at:
Page 82 The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe
Term Definition Temporary food Refers to a tent, stall or other structure that is not permanently fixed to a site premises from which food is sold, or a permanent structure such as a community hall not owned or leased by the food business that operates the premises and in which food is handled for sale, or from which food is sold on an occasional basis. Transfer of registration The transfer of registration of a food premises to the new proprietor. Warehouse/distributor Food premises, where goods that require dry or cold storage are kept pending distribution to other food premises, for example to retail food premises. Includes food wholesalers and importers. Water transport vehicle A vehicle used by a private water carter to transport water that is intended for human consumption or for purposes connected with human consumption. For the purposes of the Act, these are class 3 premises.
The Food Act report 2015: Keeping Victorian food safe Page 83