Accounts Commission for Scotland Protecting you and your environment HOW YOUR COUNCIL PERFORMED IN 1995/96 Introduction Each year, councils publish a range of information Using the information to show people how well they are providing their services in comparison with previous years and For each activity we have set out why some of the how they compare with other councils. differences in performance may have arisen. We also highlight particular features of the This leaflet contains information on five indicators information - for example, the range in relating to councils’ services in 1995/96 affecting performance achieved by different councils. the environment. These are: However, we do not explain why a council has achieved a particular level of performance or • the percentage of food hygiene inspections what should be regarded as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ undertaken on time performance. • the quality of the water Several factors affect the way a council performs • the percentage of household waste recycled its activities. You need to be aware of these in • the time taken to deal with planning applica- order to understand why results may vary. Some tions from householders of these factors are outwith the control of the • enquiries and complaints made about trading council - for example, population size and density, standards. geographical area, and the mix between urban and rural settlements. Others may be specific to a The information in this leaflet covers the years particular service or the groups of people it serves. 1993/94 to 1995/96 and is important for two These local factors may mean that a council with reasons. Firstly, it shows what performance a performance which, at first sight, appears to be standards have been achieved in the years worse than that of another has, in fact, done leading up to local government reorganisation in better given the more difficult circumstances it April 1996. Secondly, it shows standards against faces. which to measure the work of the new councils following reorganisation. The Commission has published a comprehensive report on the information for all the services for which there are performance indicators. This provides more detailed analysis of the informa- tion over the three years 1993/94 to 1995/96. Environment Environment In 1995/96, services such as Highland it was undertaken by the Information on services provided by inspecting shops and restaurants regional councils. Inverness, Kincardine & Deeside, for food hygiene, and other and Perth & Kinross district councils Trading standards and water and environmental services such as had not been provided to the sewerage services were provided by refuse collection, were provided by Commission at the time of the the 53 district councils and three the nine regional councils and the preparation of this publication. islands councils. three islands councils. Some of the information referred to Since the reorganisation of local Local planning, which in this pamphlet is not shown in government in April 1996, water contributes to the quality of the either the tables or the charts. It is, environment, was primarily a and sewerage services have been however, available in the the responsibility of the three newly district and islands council respon- Commission’s full national report. established water authorities. sibility. However, in Borders, Dumfries & Galloway, and INDICATOR 1 Food safety hygiene inspections: the number of premises in each of four categories requiring inspection during the year, and the percentage of premises in each category which were inspected within the target time. What the indicator reports The purposes of food hygiene target time between inspections: Therefore, the indicator reports inspections are to: the council’s food hygiene • within 6 months inspection workload and its identify potential risks to the • • between 6 and 12 months success in achieving its own health of the public arising • between 12 and 24 months inspection targets for the four risk from the processing, cooking, more than 24 months. categories. handling and storage of food • The ‘within 6 months’ risk • confirm that food preparation No comparative information for category is for premises which processes meet the require- 1993/94 is available because have the highest risk of food ments of the Food Safety Act performance information for hygiene problems and so require 1990. environmental health services the most frequent inspection was introduced for the first time Business premises dealing in food visits. The ‘more than 24 months’ in 1994/95. are categorised according to the risk category is for premises frequency with which they which have the lowest risk and should be inspected, depending require fewest visits. on their level of food safety risk. This risk is determined on the For each category of premises, the basis of: indicator provides information on: • the type of premises • the confidence the council has • the number of premises that in the management of food the council intended to processes at the premises. inspect during the year There are four categories of • the percentage of targeted premises, defined according to the premises inspected within the target time. Environment 1 Points to bear in mind Each risk category is defined according to the maximum time between inspections. Some premises, particularly in the ‘within 6 months’ category, may be visited more frequently due to the assessed level of risk, but these additional visits are not counted. Commentary Some products have an inher- ently higher risk with respect to food poisoning than others. These In 1995/96 there were 29,864 establishments due for inspection by the 53 include all high-protein foods councils for which information is available. Of these: such as meat, fish, milk and dairy products. • 8.1% (2,414) were in the ‘within 6 months’ inspection category Factors that will influence a • 39.6% (11,829) were in the ‘between 6 and 12 months’ council’s decision on the required category number of inspections are: • 43.8% (13,088) were in the ‘between 12 and 24 months’ category • the likely risk according to the • 8.5% (2,533) were in the ‘more than 24 months’ category. type of food • the extent to which food is Across Scotland, councils inspected within the target time between 0% handled, and the risk of cross- and 100% of the premises for which they planned inspections in the ‘within 6 months’ category. Half of all councils (26) managed to inspect at contamination where a process involves both raw and least 85% (Figure 1). cooked food For the other categories, the variations in the percentage of premises • the method of processing. inspected within the target times were: Particular emphasis is placed • ‘between 6 and 12 months’ - 17% to 100%. Twenty-six councils on inspecting any high-risk inspected at least 88% product where the conditions can allow the growth of food • ‘between 12 and 24 months’ - 14% to 100%. Just under half of poisoning organisms - for the councils (25) inspected at least 90% example, canning, vacuum ‘more than 24 months’ - 8% to 100%. Half of the councils packing and any process • providing information for this category of premises inspected 100%. where temperature is a controlling factor • the number of consumers likely to be put at risk if there is a failure in food hygiene and safety procedures • the cleanliness, layout, lighting, ventilation and structural condition of the premises • the attitude and technical knowledge of the management on hygiene and safety matters. 2 Environment Figure 1: The percentage of premises in the ‘within 6 months’ category inspected within target time 0 102030405060708090 100 Tweeddale Shetland Lochaber Caithness Orkney Banff & Buchan Badenoch & Strathspey Kirkcaldy Western Isles Aberdeen, City of Ettrick & Lauderdale Hamilton Nithsdale Moray Ross & Cromarty Wigtown Dunfermline Clydesdale East Lothian Bearsden & Milngavie Kyle & Carrick Dumbarton Falkirk Renfrew Argyll & Bute Cumnock & Doon Valley Angus Kilmarnock & Loudoun Inverclyde Cunninghame East Kilbride Roxburgh Dundee, City of Motherwell Edinburgh, City of Eastwood Clackmannan Gordon West Lothian Monklands Glasgow, City of Annandale & Eskdale Berwickshire Clydebank Cumbernauld & Kilsyth Midlothian Nairn North East Fife Skye & Lochalsh Stewartry Stirling Strathkelvin Sutherland Environment 3 INDICATOR 2 Commentary The percentage of water samples which met required standards for: • chemical quality Chemical quality • microbiological quality The percentage of samples that • colour quality. met the standard for chemical quality varied from 97.9% to What the indicator reports 99.8%, with ten councils The indicator provides information on three aspects of the standard of reporting at least 99.0% of mains water supply. their samples within the standard required (Figure 2). Sampling is undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Water Supply (Water Quality) (Scotland) Regulations 1990, which set out Microbiological quality standards to be met for each of the three aspects of water quality. The 1990 Regulations require that 95% of samples contain Points to bear in mind no organisms indicating potential contamination. All The three parts of this indicator measure different aspects and should not but one council met this be added together. standard, with performance levels varying between 97.1% and 99.6%. However, Western Fig 2: The percentage of water samples which met standards 1995/96 Isles reported that only 94.4% 100 of samples met the quality 90 standard. 80 Colour quality 70 The percentage of samples that 60 met the required colour quality 5050 standard ranged from 85% to Percentage 40 40 100%, with seven of the 12 30 councils reporting over 99% of 20 their samples within the 10 standard required. 0 Fife Borders Central Lothian Orkney Tayside Grampian Highland Shetland Dumfries& Strathclyde Galloway Western Isles Chemical quality Microbiological quality Colour quality INDICATOR 3 The percentage of household Councils obtain waste material • separating waste after waste recycled. for recycling by: collection. There is a government target that • collections at recycling by the year 2000 councils should What the indicator reports centres (e.g.