COUNTING CRIMES

Just how bad is crime in Canada . and how can we tell? Since our
institute published Scott Newark's paper on Canadian crime statistics,
many critics, including John Moore ("Having fun with Numbers", Feb.
23) have indignantly argued that there is a single objective reality
about crime and it is adequately captured by Statistics Canada's
annual Juristat report. But neither proposition is correct. And
StatsCan agrees.

StatsCan acknowledges that there are many legitimate ways of reporting
crime, and whichever you choose will affect the outcome. According to
its handbook on justice statistics: "There are a number of ways of
measuring the incidence of crime and each method will yield a
different result."

So the choice is not between a "correct" method, and all others. Every
method, including StatsCan's, affects the resulting picture about
crime. StatsCan's analysts accept this, and they have not simply
chosen to defend their practices. On the contrary, despite some
disagreements, they have acknowledged that there is merit in a number
of the questions that Newark has raised, and they have invited him to
work with them to improve crime statistics reporting.

Of course StatsCan's imperfect way of measuring crime might still be
better than the other options. Here are just some of the reasons
Newark disagrees, and why the official picture of crime obscures as
much as it reveals.

The 2009 StatsCan Juristat report, to pick just a few examples,
tallies incidents of "causing a disturbance" but does not provide this
information on much more important crimes like first-or second-degree
murder. Similarly, one has to consult a much lower profile government
publication to learn that in 2009, "There were 78 youth aged 12 to 17
accused of committing homicide in 2009, 23 more than the previous
year. This represents the second-highest rate per 100,000 population
reported in over 30 years." We think that StatsCan's flagship
publication on crime in Canada needs to provide more accurate,
thorough and relevant information to Canadians. Newark's paper helps
show the way.

Moore and others have complained that the Newark paper focuses more on
crime volumes than rates. Volume refers to the total number of crimes
committed overall; crime rates looks at the number of crimes per
100,000 people.

But if these critics actually read his report, they would know that
Newark recognizes the difference and agrees crime rates matter. By
contrast, his critics ignore the fact that crime volumes also matter.
If you walk every day on a downtown street in Toronto or Montreal or
Vancouver, and you know that last year there were four gunshot deaths
there and this year there have been six, you might not be terribly
moved by officials telling you that there were also more people on the
street this year, and so crime is obviously "down." There is now
measurably more crime that worries you in your immediate
surroundings.

It is perfectly fine to have a discussion about the relative merits of
crime rates vs. volumes in forming a picture of crime; it is not fine
to attack people for having the temerity to take the available data
and ask whether we can do a better job measuring and analyzing crime.

The critics also claim that Newark's report supports an indiscriminate
"tough on crime" agenda. They should actually read the report. The
author repudiates such an approach, pleading for a better analysis and
reporting on crime so that we can focus enforcement on the small
number of people committing most of the crimes that really matter to
Canadians. As he writes in the report: ". instead of being 'tough' on
crime, it's better to be honest about crime so as to be smart about
crime."

Finally, Newark's critics leave the impression that the Juristat
report indisputably shows crime declining in Canada. But what does the
report itself tell us about crimes that Canadians are likely to think
are directly relevant to their own safety and that of their family?
Among other things, that from 2008 to 2009:

- - kidnapping/unlawful confinement increased by 76 incidents

- - homicide and attempted murder increased by 84 incidents

- -child pornography increased by 205 incidents

- - using/pointing/discharging a firearm increased by 237
incidents

- - trafficking of drugs other than cocaine and marijuana increased by
582 incidents

- - sex assaults against children increased by 1,185
incidents

The vehemence of the reaction by the academic crime policy
establishment to Newark's report is totally disproportionate to the
substance of their criticism, which is mostly based on what they wish
he had said rather than what he actually said. We will continue to
work with researchers and StatsCan to create as accurate and
informative a picture as possible of crime in Canada so that we can
truly be smart about crime.