Three Scots councils are amongst worst in Britain for enforcing food hygiene standards, say Which?

Which? said that in some of the worst performing local authorities, "you might as well toss a coin before deciding which restaurant to trust with your health".

But local authorities have dismissed the report as unfair, saying it is not a fair reflection on the work they do, saying they conform with Food Standards Agency audits.

Which? looked at 398 local authorities in the UK and ranked them for their performance on food hygiene using the data that they submit annually to the Food Standard Agency's Local Authority Enforcement Monitoring System, including the 32 Scottish local authorities.

Which? said that a year on from when they last assessed local authorities on their food enforcement work, they have found some areas of Scotland were "falling well below basic food hygiene requirements".

The watchdog said that City of Edinburgh was the poorest performing Scottish local authority with only 68% of its medium and high risk businesses meeting hygiene requirements. North Lanarkshire Council was rated as the best performing local authority in Scotland but only rated 42nd on the UK list topped by Cherwell, Oxfordshire.

The watchdog said businesses are ultimately responsible for complying with hygiene rules but that local authorities are tasked with enforcing compliance.

It said more than nine in 10 (99%) people in Scotland said it is important that local authorities ensure compliance with food hygiene rules.

Which? spokesperson, Gordon MacRae, said: "Our research reveals a shocking postcode lottery on food hygiene where in some places you may as well toss a coin before deciding which restaurant to trust with your health.

"Tackling food enforcement has to be a priority for Scottish ministers and the new food agency, Food Standards Scotland, when it comes into being in April."

Which? said that to compare fairly they gave extra weight to those local authorities who had a higher proportion of medium and high risk premises that were hygiene compliant. They said this reflects whether or not they are fulfilling their role of ensuring food businesses are able to comply with hygiene law.

It also examined the proportion of food premises that were pro-actively rated for risk. When a business opens it should be given a risk rating of A (high) to E (low). It also examined the proportion of planned inspections and follow-ups that should have been done and were actually completed.

But the City of Edinburgh Council dismissed the report claiming its enforcement successes are being examined by the Food Standards Agency with a view to promoting its methods to local authorities south of the border.

Professor Alison McCallum, director of public health and health policy for NHS Lothian supported the council, describing the report as "misleading" as Edinburgh has agreed a "targeted" approach with the Food Standards Agency.

He said: "On the basis of their approach, Edinburgh's environmental health officers have demonstrated time and time again their ability to respond rapidly when required in and out of hours, often facilitating premises closure within two to four hours of being notified of a problem."

A Falkirk Council spokesman added: "The statistics chosen by Which? do not reflect the broad range, depth and volume of inspections and interventions which we have with food businesses. For example, they ignore enforcement action taken by means of improvement notices, closures and prosecutions."

It said at its recent Food Standards Agency audit, it merited "no non-conformances" and three examples of best practice which should be followed by other councils.

It admitted it had 127 unrated premises, out of some 1400 registered, consisting mainly of childminders and farms which were "all very low-risk activities in terms of food hygiene and therefore are not a priority for inspection".