The media trumpets 2003 crime statistics while we suffer 2004 crimes. Pundits and politicians diddle last year's stats while we deal with this week's facts. "Experts" obsess over a retrospective comparison of statistics from different cities across Canada.
Contrast that with the average senior citizen or young child on Ellice Avenue. Do you really think they're concerned about how many murders Winnipeg had in comparison to Calgary or Moose Jaw last August? Not likely!
They're more concerned about whether they'll have their purse stolen or bike jacked before they reach home today.
Statistics could be much more relevant in Winnipeg's fight against crime. I've got several concerns about the collection, dissemination and use of statistics.
How are statistics collected?
A bike gets stolen. A window gets broken. Teens fight in the schoolyard. Someone gets threatened by another person. Someone tries to break into a house. A building becomes known for disruptive, drunken parties.
I know people aren't even telling the cops about all these incidents. The lack of reports doesn't mean things aren't happening. It means they don't have confidence that making reports will make a difference.
Winnipeg police issue "incident numbers" as a reference for some complaints. But not every complaint or call for help is assigned an incident number. So we don't really know what's being recorded as a "statistic" and what isn't being recorded at all.
I've been involved in eight criminal complaints this spring and summer in which police were called. I only received an incident number for one call. Do all eight incidents count toward the statistical totals, or just the one for which I received an incident number?
If we don't count every call, every complaint, there's no objective record of what's happening on the streets. We'll only know what the police deem worthy of response. Both sets of numbers are important.
We have the technology for recording, tracking and mapping both the original complaints as well as the police response. We just need the appropriate people typing the information into the system, so we don't keep police officers behind keyboards rather than on the street.
Once someone collects accurate statistics, who's allowed to see them?
Several years ago, I requested regular access to Winnipeg crime statistics for my neighbourhood. My request was denied, citing some mumbo-jumbo about privacy concerns and departmental policy.
I was ticked off. It's not like I was asking for someone's social insurance number! I wondered why they're hiding the statistics from the people already living with the consequences.
This defensive Winnipeg response differed sharply from that in New York, where statistics are regularly posted on the Internet and shared with community groups.
In New York, a key to dramatic improvements in safety was wiser deployment of police resources based on better use of statistical data.
Utilizing a system called CompStat, they gathered statistics and held weekly meetings. Commanding officers were held accountable for the effectiveness of their enforcement tactics in relation to computer mapping of criminal incidents.
Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik explained, "If the crime rate fell or a ring of burglars was stopped, commanders could be rewarded. If crime rose, they were held responsible and could be transferred, demoted or even fired."
A simple defence of "I'm doing what we've always done," or, "I spent lots of hours at work" was no longer enough. Achievement of progress was elevated above plain involvement in a process.
A lumbering, reactive police bureaucracy became much more proactive in addressing the most current crime patterns in neighbourhoods.
Some may object that a comparison with New York is unfair. It's true that they committed massive resources to their law-and-order strategies and have more legal power to implement creative strategies. While there is some merit in each of those arguments, we can still learn much from the ways others use statistics.
Winnipeg police already collect some monthly statistics. These could be reported by postal code. But their stats are clearly not a measure of complaints, only of police involvement.
The best way to start lobbying for more resources, bureaucratic adjustments or legislative changes is to show how police "incidents" are far outstripped by the incidence of crime in the neighbourhood.
We've done much to improve policing in Winnipeg. Community policing is great. I really don't want to discourage some of the cops who are closest to us in the community. Some I consider friends, not just cops.
But emerging crime patterns in our city demand additional departmental adjustments. We need much more bureaucratic co-operation with community.
Probably the best place to start is by working together on this year's facts -- not last year's stats.
Rev. Harry Lehotsky
514 Maryland Street
Winnipeg, Mb R3G 1M5
(204) 775-4929
lehotsky@escape.ca