So.  The environmental health officer tells me that a community fridge was set up in South Derbyshire a month or two ago, essentially on the same principles as that in Frome: ambient goods (fruit, veg, bread, nonperishables) plus high risk foods only from registered businesses.  I am trying to get in touch with them to find out about insurance.

The CAG (Community Action Group) network has suggested that we should start a Botley Community Fridge CAG, and that insurance may then be easier or cheaper to get.  I am meeting with Jade Neville about that this afternoon.

Had a very useful meeting with kind and helpful John Clements yesterday.  It seems that the Ecclesiastical Insurance Company is concerned about the public liability implications of the community fridge.  They want a separate organisation (not the church) be responsible for the fridge’s safety, and to get separate public liability insurance for it.  I’ve contacted Feeding the Gaps to see whether they are willing to be that organisation if I find the money for the insurance.

The church’s other concerns about the fridge are:

1. monitoring of the food (for which we will be setting up a daily rota)
2. whether it would increase theft, vandalism etc. (though JC made the point that a community fridge would attract more people into the church which is what the church wants, and the odd petty theft might be worth the greater understanding and use of the church)
3. whether there is a need for it

I have agreed to write an article in the Sprout about the fridge, to see whether there is interest out there.

I’ve been in touch with Vale of White Horse’s very helpful environmental health officer.  I had sent her a risk assessment and other health/safety bumf using templates provided by the Frome community fridge people.  It turns out that some of those templates are probably not correct:

1. reference should be to ‘registered food businesses’ not ‘certified businesses’
2. the reason for not putting raw meat/fish/etc in the fridge is not that those foods are themselves risky, but rather that they can cross-contaminate so-called ‘high risk foods’, which are things that we eat without heating them up first (e.g. yoghurt, sandwiches).  That needs to be clear in the documentation.
3. disclaimers have no legal validity, so putting up a sign saying “In taking this food, I agree that…” is not enough to pass legal liability onto the food user
4. one of the disclaimers on the Frome fridge is that people with allergies should not use the food.  However the legislation on allergens is very much about labelling food clearly so that people with allergies can take anything except things that they are allergic to.  Having a blanket ban on people with allergies is a form of discrimination.

The environmental health officer plans to discuss these kinds of issues with Medip’s (Frome) and Oxford’s (possible other community fridge in Oxford) environmental health officers and will come back to us with recommendations.  Thank you Jennifer Reid!