It's the way we tell 'em

Normally, and in many countries around the world, when accumulated records show that a particular thing has increased the message is one of, well, this particular thing has increased. It's reasuring that (though the saying there are lies, damn lies and statistics is well known) there is a certain symetry that is being maintained or at least an attempt at consistency.

People feel a little more informed and there is a little more certainty to their lives.

Not so in Great Britain. In Great Britain we collect records (much as any other country), collate them, analyse the results and then blurt out that regardless of what the results are showing we should not really believe them because we are using a new measure, method, practice or some such.

This is true of many measures including new figures from the Home Office which this time shows that violent crime has risen by 14%. But it hasn't.

The Home Office said much of the rise in violent crime had been due to an increase in the reporting and recording of violence.

Home Office Minister, Hazel Blears, said: "It is important to put the increases in police recording of violent crime into context."

She said better recording policies meant police forces now had a clearer picture of crime in their areas.

Yawn. If I had a pound for every time I heard this kind of thing from the Government I'd have 100 million pounds.

I would have had somewhat less than that but I've changed the way I record these things.

The BBC report originally stated that the high violent crime survey was from the British Crime Surver rather than from the home office themselves. I have updated the above posting accordingly.

Also, it makes me laugh that the following appears:

The British Crime Survey is seen as having the most reliable figures, and is based on interviews with the public.
Recorded crime represents incidents reported to the police.

So recorded crime shows a massive increase in violent crime but ministers see the figure based upon a survey as a more reliable indicator of trends.

I wonder what they'd think if the results were reversed?

Posted by JohnJo at January 22, 2004 11:14 AM | TrackBack