Cheshire West and Chester Council

The authority had developed a feed service plan for 2010-2011 that was broadly in line with service planning guidance in the Framework Agreement. However, the plan was a relatively recent document that had not been approved by the relevant delegated senior officer. The authority had developed a food safety plan for 2010-2011 that also included elements of feed law enforcement, which had been approved by the relevant delegated senior officer. The feed service plan should be expanded to include imported feed monitoring activities at the port and the authority’s financial allocation to imported feed work. The food service plan had been approved by the appropriate member forum.

The authority had recently updated its procedures for imported feed, which provided useful guidance for officers. However, the authority had not developed and implemented a procedure to ensure that imported feed procedures were reviewed and updated on a regular basis.

All officers, including the lead officer for feed, had completed a full 10 hours of continuing professional development (CPD) training in accordance with the Feed Law Enforcement Code of Practice. However, the lead officer for feed would benefit from updated hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) training in order to fulfil the level two qualifications criteria in the Feed Law Code of Practice. Records of qualifications and CPD were generally available. However, not all training records had been retained by the authority in line with the Framework Agreement.

There were systems and arrangements in place in relation to the control of imported feeds. The authority had developed a system, in co-operation with the port, for the identification of incoming consignments of feed through the systematic checking of ship arrival lists. Auditors discussed the benefit of formally documenting this process in a procedure or adding it to the current procedures in place.

As part of the audit a reality visit was carried out at the port. Although there were no relevant feed not of animal origin (FNAO) imports from third countries arriving at the port, there were suitable facilities and equipment for the inspection and sampling of imported feed available, should they be required.

No documentary checks, identity checks or random physical checks had been carried out on FNAO from third countries, due to the lack of relevant imported feed activity at the port.

Records in relation to imported feed were maintained and easily retrievable. However, some records would benefit from including useful information, such as the size and scale of the business, product withdrawal procedures and greater detail of the company HACCP systems.

There were extensive liaison arrangements with central government, other enforcement bodies, professional organisations and other external stakeholders. The authority had ensured that the port and businesses using the port facilities had been advised in regard to imported feed control requirements.

The authority had carried out some quantitative and qualitative monitoring of its imported food and feed activities, annual officer performance and development appraisals, regular documented team meetings, and ad hoc officer ‘one to one’ meetings. However, much of this monitoring had not been documented. Auditors discussed the benefit of developing and implementing a monitoring procedure to ensure that risk-based monitoring of all areas of imported feed enforcement was carried out on a regular basis. Records of such monitoring should be maintained.