PM Chris Hipkins and National’s Mark Mitchell disagree on Hipkins’ ram raid record - who’s got the numbers right?

OPINION:

Prime Minister Chris Hipkins made his second slip-up in Parliament this week, claiming the number of ram raids had fallen by 75 per cent during his tenure as Police Minister - a mistake that sparked a battle of cherry-picking statistics on ram raids.

The mistake came during Question Time yesterday when National leader Christopher Luxon accused the Prime Minister of failing to bring down crime during his eight-month stint as Police Minister.

Hipkins responded with the 75 per cent drop claim, saying it was achieved through “intensive intervention” from the Government.

That claim proved incorrect - there were 116 ram raids in August 2022 and 39 in February 2023, a drop of 77 - but a percentage decrease of 66.4 per cent.

It comes after Hipkins had to correct a statement he made in his first Question Time as Prime Minister when he erroneously stated the Government was now taking less tax as a proportion of the economy than when it became Government.

It was unclear whether Hipkins would have to correct his ram raid assertion.

In a written statement to the Herald, Hipkins acknowledged the mistake but accused the Opposition of splitting hairs.

“After a peak in August, monthly figures show ram raids have decreased by two-thirds,” Hipkins said.

“In the House I said three-quarters, if people want to split hairs about that they’re welcome to, but the point remains, our work to reduce crime in the form of ram raids is working. But, of course, we have more work to do.”

However, National police spokesman Mark Mitchell, who quickly called out Hipkins’ error yesterday, claimed ram raids had only decreased by 5 per cent - a figure he got by comparing the seven-month total before Hipkins was Police Minister with the seven months after he took over.

“Instead of cracking down on crime, Mr Hipkins is more interested in spinning his numbers about his reduction in ram-raids,” Mitchell said.

National MP Mark Mitchell. Photo / NZME

With the public presented two very different stories, which one is right?

The difference comes down to the interpretation of the data and how ram raids are recorded by police.

Put simply, a ram raid is not an offence with its own offence code, which means police data often relies on officers using the phrase “ram raids” while logging an incident otherwise it may not be counted as a ram raid.

However, as investigations develop, incidents that weren’t initially logged as ram raids can become so - meaning the number of ram raids reported to have occurred during this coming March, for example, may change depending on when the data is requested from police in April compared to September.

That helps to explain why some figures used by Mitchell could be out of date, but it also throws Hipkins’ claim into question again.

When Mitchell requested the number of ram raids from August 2022 from then Police Minister Hipkins in September, he was told there had been 67 ram raids across the country.

However, the most up-to-date figure shows there were actually 116 ram raids that happened in August 2022.

The Spark store in Takanini south of Auckland was significantly damaged in a ram raid. Photo / Hayden Woodward

This is also true of the statistics for June 2022. Mitchell’s data given to him in September says there were 41, when the latest update says there were 62.

Some of Mitchell’s claims appears to be informed from data supplied soon after the month to which they apply, meaning the numbers he used to calculate the 5 per cent decrease could be out of date.

But it doesn’t mean that Hipkins is in the clear - his figure for February (39) is likely the most recent update he’s received from police on how many ram raids occurred in February.

Given the number of ram raids has been shown to increase as more incidents are correctly logged as a ram raid, it is quite possible there were more than 39 ram raids in February which means the percentage decrease in ram raids between August and February might not as large as Hipkins claims.

This provides a telling example of politicians using statistics to their advantage in a way that arguably does not help the public understand how many ram raids are occurring.

Hipkins used the figure from August (116) instead of the figure from June (67), which is when he took over the police portfolio and was the context of Luxon’s question. In doing so, the resulting percentage decrease in ram raids is larger, which is a more flattering way to communicate the Government’s success in reducing ram raids.

Mitchell, on the other hand, does not provide the relevant context about how his numbers are likely to be out of date when he is quoting old data, something which risks diluting his message that the Government, in his view, is not doing a good job at reducing ram raids.

At the centre of the issue is how police record ram raids and whether it is possible to create a “ram raid offence” so the data is less vulnerable to manipulation.

The Herald has requested the most up-to-date monthly ram raid figures and will publish them accordingly.