Page 901 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 30 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries was trying to say that comparing the first six months of 1991-92 to the first six months of 1992-93 might be misleading because they might have been the periods when things were really slow, and that it was the second six months that showed the big increase. Yes, that is a possibility. However, when you look in the annual report you see that the number of offences - again I say that offences are what we record - for 1991-92 was 1,683. That is rather less than double the 886 which was the first six months figure. So in fact the first six months of 1991-92 had a greater rate of motor vehicle theft than the second six months. Therefore, in comparing that first six months with the equivalent first six months, we are looking at the worse end and, on the worse end, we are down by 12 per cent.
We then compare the figures to date, the most accurate figures available to police on offences, which show that there have been 1,042 in 1992-93 compared to 1,151 in the equivalent eight-month period. Mr Humphries divided 1,042 by eight to show the result that motor vehicle offences are currently running at 130 a month. He is absolutely right. What he failed to do was to divide 1,151 by eight - that is, take the equivalent period and divide it by the equivalent number of months. The answer there is 143. So the rate of motor vehicle theft - dividing the number of offences to date by the number of months, and we have only an eight-month period to compare - at the moment is 130, and the rate 12 months ago was 143.
Mr Humphries: On a six-monthly basis, a six-monthly comparison.
MR CONNOLLY: No, on a year to date basis. The most accurate figures available to us show that there have been 1,042 offences reported as at 5 March. In the equivalent eight-month period for 1991-92 there had been 1,151. You were quite happy to divide 1,042 by eight to get 130 and to say that the rate is at 130. The equivalent exercise for the previous six months would have given you a figure of 143. You went off and compared the incidents and you divided incidents by eight or 12. As people keep saying at the Estimates Committee, you cannot compare apples with lemons or oranges with apples or whatever; you must compare like with like. You acknowledged that in your speech today. If you look at the six-month periods you get a decrease, or if you look at the year to date figures you get a decrease. No matter how you twist and turn with these figures, Mr Humphries, you get a decrease.
The fact is that there is a decrease in the rate of motor vehicle thefts. I do not know how you can take from those figures any other conclusion. We are currently running, with the most up-to-date figures, at about 100 fewer offences than we had in the equivalent period in the previous financial year. Our rates are decreasing. So the first leg of your argument is just a hollow nonsense. I would have thought that the Liberal Party could have said, "Well, look, we were wrong". The Government says, "We were wrong" from time to time when we are wrong. I have no difficulty in saying, "We were wrong" when I am wrong but - - -
Mr Humphries: I forget the last occasion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .