Scores on Doors

Posted by Andrew Wadge on March 13th 2008 in Supporting consumer choice

Information for consumers is once again in the news.  This week the FSA Board considered proposals for a national 'scores on doors' scheme to put hygiene scores on display in food premises.

The scheme proposed is aimed at providing information to inform consumers and consumer choice.  But once again there is the debate about whether consumers want information of this type – will they understand it, and what will they do with it.

As Chief Scientist of the Agency, I am regularly involved in discussions about food issues that are far from straightforward. Food hygiene information on food businesses and how we present it to consumers fall into the same category.  Because informing consumers is difficult is not a reason for making excuses and ducking the issue.  This is what I think and, more importantly, this is what the Board thought on ‘scores on the doors’. 

Those who heard the Board discussion heard that the debate was not about whether we have a scheme, but about the type of scheme that would benefit consumers.

It was agreed that the Agency will consult on two options for a national scheme.  This consultation will be launched in the coming weeks.

Consumer and food business organisations, and enforcement bodies, will provide key input to that consultation.  But it would be great to know what ordinary consumers would like from a scheme.  As a family man with children, as well as being a scientist, I am firmly in the camp of ‘the more information for consumers the better’.

So what camp are you in – do comment here, and watch the website for the chance to give your views to the consultation.

add new comment

Scores on the Doors

Posted by Colin Hamer (not verified) on 10/04/2008 - 18:47

Giving consumers information is what it is all about. The 4 tier scheme is a fudge and the public will not have the information to make a decision - most premises will be 2 star - so what choice is there?
Make it compulsory to display the score as most consumers unless making a special effort will not look on the web before entering a cafe, pub or restaurant.
If the vast majority local authorities have chosen to go with a five star scheme then surely this must be included in the consultation!

Traffic Lights

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 02/04/2008 - 13:04

Hi Hazel

Whilst I do not like traffic lights because I think they are simplified to the point where a complex issue like nutrition becomes meaningless the main point of my earlier e-mail was that under the proposed EC Regulation on the Provision of Food Information to Consumers traffic lights would not be an acceptable scheme under the criteria laid down by the Commissioner. It is the waste of our taxpayers money in promoting a scheme that the EU has already considered and rejected that I find objectionable and the fact that I have in two blog postings asked Andrew to justify the legal basis for continuing to promote traffic lights and been met with a deafening silence.
Large amounts of your and my money are still being spent promoting and advertising this scheme based on the false premise that it will be an acceptable national scheme and I was merely stating the belief that this would be better spent in ensuring the mandatory scheme will be effective.

Only a consumer but....

Posted by Hazel (not verified) on 28/03/2008 - 16:41

Apologies, I am writing this as someone with no specialist knowledge about the topic, but simply as a consumer. I have read the previous posts and appreciate that the proposal needs some very careful planning to make it both meaningful and workable for all concerned, but having said that, I am in favour of such a scheme. To be able to clearly see food hygenie information before stepping through the door of an establishment would be a very positive move forward in my opinion. In response to whether consumers will understand it, yes, they will, provided it's an understandable system and it's well publicised.
I would also like to respond to the person who critizised the traffic light system. I like it! While I am more than capable of the mental arithmetic needed to work out my daily nutritional requirements, I like the quick fix of seeing the colours, I find that the irresistable urge for a bag of crisps, diminishes in direct correlation with how many reds there are on the label and for me that immediate emotional response is far more effective at making me think about what I'm buying and eating than the more intellectual approach of doing the calculations.

scores on the doors

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 25/03/2008 - 15:24

Having run courses using S.F.B.B i think scores on the doors will work because knowing the public have this information on hand should make the food businesses keep up the standards if it was made compulsary to show the scores

Scores on the Doors

Posted by Local Authority EHP (not verified) on 19/03/2008 - 08:30

Implementation of the scheme has big implications for resources on already struggling Env.Health Departments. What do the FSA propose? Are we to retrospectively apply a star rating to premises or must we assess each premise anew? If we do base the score on last inspection this does not give a business chance to improve their score until the next inspection which could be nearly 2 years away and needless to say it would be impossible to assess each premise afresh. We do not have the resources to give to this as well as carry out our normal statutory functions. On top of this the FSA are once again shying away from the real issue of customer choice and information if a 5 tier system is not used and scores do not have to be displayed. What is the point?

FSA News

Posted by Anonymous (not verified) on 17/03/2008 - 12:07

Dear Andrew

Not strictly related to this subject but I note that again you have used the latest edition of FSA news to again try to pretend that your discredited traffic light scheme is still somehow acceptable to the EC. Commissioner Kyprianou when presenting the EC labelling proposal made it clear that the average consumer must be given the credit for the intelligence to understand the mandatory information required for nutrition, i.e. the GDA scheme, and that national schemes must not detract from this information. As you describe your scheme as at a glance and the justification you give for the scheme is that people cannot understand the GDA information then it is obvious that the scheme does not meet the requirements laid out by the Commissioner.

Your scheme was presented to and rejected by the EU Commission in their considerations so why do you think they will find it to be an acceptable national scheme.

Perhaps it would be better if, instead of baking pies, you could either provide a legal justification for your belief that traffic lights are an acceptable scheme under the proposed EC regulation or even better stop wasting public money trying to promote a discredited scheme and use it for a useful purpose such as public education in the use of the EC recommended system so that we can have nutrition information that truly allows the public to construct a balanced diet based on a proper understanding of nutrition requirements

Scores on Doors

Posted by Student EHP (not verified) on 14/03/2008 - 17:38

Whilst I feel that Scores on Doors or, as perhaps it should be called, Scores on the Web, is a very good idea, I believe it will remain too low profile unless businesses are obliged to display a score certificate that the public can see before they choose to go in, as in Denmark, NZ,Canada etc. If you owned a restaurant and knew your score would be in the window, would you make an effort to improve hygiene? I would...

Scores on the Doors

Posted by Martin Padfield (not verified) on 14/03/2008 - 10:11

It appears the FSA are sitting on the fence. They clearly state that most of the existing schemes are 5 star based and yet they fail to consult on this.

They are now going for a 12 week consultation. I have to ask "What have they been doing?" Local Authorities have been waiting to receive a clear steer for months as to which sort of scheme to adopt.Have they read the Northumbria University report? Are the London Authorities and so many others going to change from the 5 tier systems they have been using?

There are clear benefits to the 5 tier system. A more accurate description to the public of how well the business is performing and an incentive to business to improve themselves are just two.

In a 3 tier system the vast majority of premises will fall into the middle category. If a business in this category has some improvement they may still only receive 2 stars. A considerable improvement is required to make the jump to the top level. The smaller increments reward them when they do make an effort to improve. A 5 tier system allows them to show the public they are improving.It encourages the competitive element to improving standards above other businesses.

What benefit will there be to customer information and choice if most businesses are lumped together in a middle category with little chance to show improvement.

I sincerely hope that people respond fully to the consultation and point the FSA in the direction of what is good for business and the public rather than sitting on the fence and not making any real decisions.