Figures used by the two Conservative candidates for Reading in an attempt to ‘prove’ an increase in violent crime are misleading and must be withdrawn, say Labour’s Anneliese Dodds and Naz Sarkar.

Anneliese Dodds explains: “Before 2002 the decision on whether an incident was a violent crime was taken by police. After 2002, officers were obliged to record all incidents as violent crimes if the alleged victim said that is what it was. The aim was to stop police fiddling the figures and to get a better picture of violence. The obvious consequence was to send the raw numbers shooting up.

Reading’s Tories are comparing figures for 2008-9 with those for 1999-2000, which was before the change was made.  So they talk of a doubling in violent crime over the last decade when by most estimates it has gone down by over a third.

Iain Duncan-Smith admits his party’s claims are bogus.  Mr Cameron claims to be bringing honesty to politics, all he’s bringing to it is spin.”

Naz Sarkar adds: “The man who has master-minded this con trick is Chris Grayling, who came to Reading West last month to launch the Tories’ manifesto.  This sort of trickery, Mr Grayling, is something Reading can do without.”

And Cllr. Tony Page, Labour member of the Police Authority, adds: “The worse thing to me was Alok Sharma’s statement that Labour had launched a great many initiatives which have made little difference.

The reality is that with greater police numbers, the introduction of PCSOs and neighbourhood policing, over the last five years crime in Reading has been slashed by a quarter. The Tories ought to be congratulating the police, the Council and the public on that, rather than pumping lies about crime into the ether.”