Labour crime claims misleading

#1
Its official then - they're lieing to us...

Government claims of successes on law and order since 1997 are "overstated" and "misleading", a study has said.

The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, at London's King's College, said billions spent on reform had not yielded significant improvements.

Spending on law and order has risen dramatically and proportionately now costs more than the US, the study said.

The Home Office said the analysis was wrong and pointed to record numbers of police officers and prison places.

But the King's College report says questions remain over value for money.

On close inspection, it says, successes in cutting crime are not impressive, with a rise in the number of killings.

Fewer offences result in a conviction, in spite of the government's claim that more are brought to justice.

According to the report, one of the "most conspicuous failures" is on re-offending, with targets modified, missed or dropped.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said the widespread use of fines and cautions were being used to manipulate the figures.

"This report betrays a history of fiddled figures and doubtful claims. For example, of the total number of offenders brought to 'justice', convictions have actually fallen from 69% in 2003 to 53% in 2006.

"The rest have been provided by gimmicks such as fines and increased use of cautions, meaning actual and effective justice is not being delivered."
From the BBC
 
#2
Here are the figures

Criminal Damage to a Dwelling - Down 4%
Criminal Damage to a Vehicle - Up 2%
Criminal Damage to a Building other than a dwelling - Down 7%
Arson - Down 5%
Other Criminal Damage - Down 3%

Burglary in a Dwelling - Down 7%
Burglary in a Building Other Than a Dwelling - Down 4%

Possession of a Controlled Substance - Up 27%
Trafficking in Controlled Drugs - Up 5%
Other Drug Offences - Down 26%

Fraud and Forgery - Down 17%

Robbery gave no percentile figures but seem to be going up

Sexual Assault on a Female - Down 7%
Other Sexual Offenses - Up 5%
Rape Against a Female - Up 3%

Vehicle Interference and Tampering - Down 7%
Theft From Shops - Up 5%
Other Theft and Handling - Down 6%
Theft From the Person of Another - Up 1%
Theft From a Vehicle - Up 1%
Theft of a Vehicle - Down 12%
Theft or Unauthorised Taking - Up 7%

More Serious Violence Against the Person - Down 4%*
Homicide - Down 12%
Death by Dangerous Driving - Down 2%
More Serious Wounding/Act Endangering Life - Down 4%*
Other More Serious Voilence Offences - Up 8%
Other Offences Against the Person - Up 1%

Violent Crime - Up 2%

Violent Disorder - Up 49%^
Other Offences - Down 1%


* This is where I had to work out the percentile shift myself
^ Site gave a possible reason for this as adding Asbo breaches into this catagory this year
 
#3
From where do your figures come from, hmm?

Sven wrote elewhere
When offering evidence in support of a point of view or to forward a theory, it is etiquette to provide links to that evidence
Link please - as you are always so fast to ask for yourself.

And if you think I am going to take seriously figures you have worked out you have another thing coming
 
#4
Liarbor misleading people?????

nothing new here then, every word from them has to be checked, if a politician says "good morning" have a look at your watch.
 
#5
in_the_cheapseats said:
From where do your figures come from, hmm?

Link please - as you are always so fast to ask for yourself.

And if you think I am going to take seriously figures you have worked out you have another thing coming
I do apologize.

The Website

And if You don't trust my maths - goto the relevent page and work it out for Yourself - I would be interested in Your calculations
 
#6
Ord_Sgt said:
Its official then - they're lieing to us...

Government claims of successes on law and order since 1997 are "overstated" and "misleading", a study has said.

The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, at London's King's College, said billions spent on reform had not yielded significant improvements.

Spending on law and order has risen dramatically and proportionately now costs more than the US, the study said.

The Home Office said the analysis was wrong and pointed to record numbers of police officers and prison places.

But the King's College report says questions remain over value for money.

On close inspection, it says, successes in cutting crime are not impressive, with a rise in the number of killings.

Fewer offences result in a conviction, in spite of the government's claim that more are brought to justice.

According to the report, one of the "most conspicuous failures" is on re-offending, with targets modified, missed or dropped.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said the widespread use of fines and cautions were being used to manipulate the figures.

"This report betrays a history of fiddled figures and doubtful claims. For example, of the total number of offenders brought to 'justice', convictions have actually fallen from 69% in 2003 to 53% in 2006.

"The rest have been provided by gimmicks such as fines and increased use of cautions, meaning actual and effective justice is not being delivered."
From the BBC
Despite the (BBC) report's bluster, it seems to say very little; Just some accusations of the government setting easy targets, and the increase in non-conviction offences. But has crime actually risen or fallen...?

I think the time and money spent on doing this piece of research would be better spent trying to explain the apparent divorce between the finding of the British Crime Survey (which indicates that crime has been falling and is at its lowest for a decade) and the public's perception of crime.
 
#7
I could easily get ALL crime figures down within a year and save the taxpayer billions. It's quite simple really. Kill all heroin and crack addicts and anyone with a previous record for crime who is subsequently caught for commiting another crime. It would also be a crime for judges to let people off on technicalities.
 
#8
Fallschirmjager said:
I could easily get ALL crime figures down within a year and save the taxpayer billions. It's quite simple really. Kill all heroin and crack addicts and anyone with a previous record for crime who is subsequently caught for commiting another crime. It would also be a crime for judges to let people off on technicalities.
Whilst some of your suggestions might well work, let's not forget that the British Crime Survey is not based on police arrest or conviction figures; it is based on a face-to-face survey asking members of the public whether they have experienced crime in the last year.
 
#9
Fallschirmjager said:
I could easily get ALL crime figures down within a year and save the taxpayer billions. It's quite simple really. Kill all heroin and crack addicts and anyone with a previous record for crime who is subsequently caught for commiting another crime. It would also be a crime for judges to let people off on technicalities.
Good to see you taking a balanced view on things :thumleft:
 
#10
This came from a Sunday Times article. The most worrying statistic (I will try and find the link) is the number of convictions - it has plummeted. The number of cautions and fixed penalties has increased.

So yet again Labour promises are worth nothing.
 
#11
Sven said:
in_the_cheapseats said:
From where do your figures come from, hmm?

Link please - as you are always so fast to ask for yourself.

And if you think I am going to take seriously figures you have worked out you have another thing coming
I do apologize.

The Website

And if You don't trust my maths - goto the relevent page and work it out for Yourself - I would be interested in Your calculations
You do surprise me SVEN! Quoting from the Home Office Website (er, I think run by this government) is somewhat misleading in itself, albeit probably one of the only sources available. Considering you are a Labliar mouthpiece, I don't know why I am surprised! Do you figures include the 24,000 crimes committed by UK nationals in Europe but not listed by the Home Office?

Do you figures take into account the shift in stats due to the policies of the Police to massage the detection rates as per Gummint requirements?
 
#12
Amusingly, bearing in mind FJ's last post, we were discussing over a sherbet issues of the day on friday and came to human rights abuse in China. Like good liberals we sucked our teeth and said dear me. Then one of our number said "Hang on chaps, if the British government took all the crims round the back and slotted them, would any of us really care?"

A brief check around revealed that surprisingly, no, nobody could give a hoot if criminals were terminated with extreme prejudice. As long as our cars were unbroken into, our homes inviolate, our daughters likewise, more power to their elbow. Funny how five reasonable, pretty centrist guys can agree on that very quickly, whereas we would have debated restoration of the death penalty for murder to the nth degree...

So, FJ's suggestion is probably not a million miles from where the majority of the population secretly stand. Mmm nice.
 
#13
RABC said:
This came from a Sunday Times article. The most worrying statistic (I will try and find the link) is the number of convictions - it has plummeted. The number of cautions and fixed penalties has increased.

So yet again Labour promises are worth nothing.
Are You sure it is Labour and not the Police taking the easy way out?

Cautions mean less man hours investigating, ASBOs do not need the burden of proof.

If You as a manager had assets such as these, wouldn't You use them more and more.

And I believe that cautions were first introduced by the Tories, although if anyone knows different please tell me
 
#14
Fallschirmjager said:
I could easily get ALL crime figures down within a year and save the taxpayer billions. It's quite simple really. Kill all heroin and crack addicts and anyone with a previous record for crime who is subsequently caught for commiting another crime. It would also be a crime for judges to let people off on technicalities.
I think that idea has already been discussed Fallschirmjager. I think it was called the '3 strikes and we kill your whole family' policy. I personally think it's a great idea based on the principles of Nature vs Nuture. If a cnut commits crimes regularly, he was obviously brought up wrong and the family is equally guilty. Sorry to go on, but at the same time, it would free up large amounts of affordable housing for those in need.
 
#15
3 convictions per 100 is good odds by my maths, i think i will start of small then work up to murders, of course i wont speed anywhere thats the 3 convictions.
 
#16
Sven said:
RABC said:
This came from a Sunday Times article. The most worrying statistic (I will try and find the link) is the number of convictions - it has plummeted. The number of cautions and fixed penalties has increased.

So yet again Labour promises are worth nothing.
Are You sure it is Labour and not the Police taking the easy way out?

Cautions mean less man hours investigating, ASBOs do not need the burden of proof.

If You as a manager had assets such as these, wouldn't You use them more and more.

And I believe that cautions were first introduced by the Tories, although if anyone knows different please tell me
The government have had ten years to sort out the police. To turn around after ten years of a government and say, well maybe the police are to blame is so disingenuous. After a couple of years, then fine turn the police inside out. After ten years? turn the government and the police inside out - and all of those over-paid "guardians of public democracy and governance" who feed in the trough of Westminster.

If I fail to manage you, then we are both failures. There is little point in detyerming ten years on who is the biggest failure. Rather we might as well crack on and do something instead of wasting hours and pounds in trying to escape the blame. FFS of course crime and law and order are a mess. you have had Jack Straw, charlie chuckles the clown and john "Taxi" Reid amongst others in the driving seat at Queen Anne's Gate - not to mention the era of Blind Pew. It was always going to be a cluster! So now sort it out or get out.
 
#17
Giblets said:
Sven said:
in_the_cheapseats said:
From where do your figures come from, hmm?

Link please - as you are always so fast to ask for yourself.

And if you think I am going to take seriously figures you have worked out you have another thing coming
I do apologize.

The Website

And if You don't trust my maths - goto the relevent page and work it out for Yourself - I would be interested in Your calculations
You do surprise me SVEN! Quoting from the Home Office Website (er, I think run by this government) is somewhat misleading in itself, albeit probably one of the only sources available. Considering you are a Labliar mouthpiece, I don't know why I am surprised! Do you figures include the 24,000 crimes committed by UK nationals in Europe but not listed by the Home Office?

Do you figures take into account the shift in stats due to the policies of the Police to massage the detection rates as per Gummint requirements?
Why on earth should the 27,000 european crimes be included in the survey - it is about Crime in the UK You know
 
#18
Sven, in debate there is a clear difference between "answering the question by supplying an appropriate piece of information" and "talking into the space just after the question before posing a different one". Next time you listen to Question Time, see what I mean? Poppet.
 
#19
Cuddles said:
Sven said:
RABC said:
This came from a Sunday Times article. The most worrying statistic (I will try and find the link) is the number of convictions - it has plummeted. The number of cautions and fixed penalties has increased.

So yet again Labour promises are worth nothing.
Are You sure it is Labour and not the Police taking the easy way out?

Cautions mean less man hours investigating, ASBOs do not need the burden of proof.

If You as a manager had assets such as these, wouldn't You use them more and more.

And I believe that cautions were first introduced by the Tories, although if anyone knows different please tell me
The government have had ten years to sort out the police. To turn around after ten years of a government and say, well maybe the police are to blame is so disingenuous. After a couple of years, then fine turn the police inside out. After ten years? turn the government and the police inside out - and all of those over-paid "guardians of public democracy and governance" who feed in the trough of Westminster.

If I fail to manage you, then we are both failures. There is little point in detyerming ten years on who is the biggest failure. Rather we might as well crack on and do something instead of wasting hours and pounds in trying to escape the blame. FFS of course crime and law and order are a mess. you have had Jack Straw, charlie chuckles the clown and john "Taxi" Reid amongst others in the driving seat at Queen Anne's Gate - not to mention the era of Blind Pew. It was always going to be a cluster! So now sort it out or get out.
Does this mean You are opposed to cautions and asbos, Cuddles? If so, join the club - I have opposed them from the start. Are You taking the position of getting rid of their use?

And fixed penalties? Are You against them (another Conservative invention by the way - another cost cutting exercise)
 
#20
Cuddles said:
Sven, in debate there is a clear difference between "answering the question by supplying an appropriate piece of information" and "talking into the space just after the question before posing a different one". Next time you listen to Question Time, see what I mean? Poppet.
OK

The 27,000 crimes have no bearing on this since they were in fact committed outside the UK

That do You
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top