Fact check: Criminal activity is higher under labour and than under the conservatives

1. Summary of the results

The analyses reveal mixed and insufficient evidence to support the claim that criminal activity is higher under Labour than under the Conservatives. The available data presents several key findings:

Crime Rate Comparisons:

• London, which has been under Labour leadership, actually shows lower crime increases compared to Conservative-controlled areas, with an 18% increase versus 35% across England and Wales ^[1]
• The UK has experienced a substantial and sustained increase in direct violence over the past decade ^[2], though this spans multiple government periods
• Only 5.7% of crimes in England and Wales lead to charges or summons, indicating poor crime resolution rates ^[3]

International Context:

• Canadian sources show that under Liberal government, violent crime increased by 50% and human trafficking by 84% ^[4], with murders rising by 43% and gang-related homicides by 108% since 2015 ^[5]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original statement lacks crucial temporal and geographical context:

Missing Timeline Analysis:

• No specific time periods are defined for comparison between Labour and Conservative governance
• The analyses don't provide comprehensive historical crime data spanning multiple government transitions
• Conservative politicians and supporters would benefit from promoting narratives that Labour is "soft on crime" to gain electoral advantage

Policy Approach Differences:

• Labour's approach includes plans for increased neighbourhood policing and justice system reform ^[6]
• Conservative criticism focuses on Labour's plans to scrap prison terms under 12 months, framing this as giving criminals a "get-out-of-jail-free card" ^[7]
• Law enforcement unions and private prison companies may have financial interests in maintaining higher incarceration rates

Geographical Variations:

• Crime patterns vary significantly by region, with London showing better performance than national averages ^[1]
• The statement fails to account for local versus national government responsibilities in crime prevention

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement contains several problematic elements:

Oversimplification:

• The claim presents a false binary between Labour and Conservative crime records without acknowledging the complexity of crime causation
• It ignores that crime rates are influenced by economic conditions, social factors, and long-term policy effects that transcend individual government terms

Lack of Evidence:

• The statement provides no supporting data or specific metrics to substantiate the claim
• Available evidence actually contradicts the assertion in some cases, particularly regarding London's crime rates ^[1]

Political Motivation:

• The framing appears designed to serve Conservative political messaging rather than present objective analysis
• Conservative Party strategists would benefit from this narrative during election campaigns to position themselves as the "law and order" party

Methodological Issues:

• The statement fails to control for external variables such as economic recessions, demographic changes, or global trends affecting crime
• It doesn't distinguish between different types of criminal activity or consider reporting rate variations over time

The analyses suggest that crime trends are complex and multifaceted, making simple partisan comparisons misleading and potentially harmful to informed public discourse.