Statistics also provide some insight into what is actually going on in the community and behind the scenes of policing.

In a practical sense, police managers use statistics to help determine operational tactics to address crime, public order and road safety issues. However, statistics alone do not drive police activities.

Effective information and intelligence systems coupled with practical experience, job knowledge and judgement are also fundamentally important in determining the what, how, where, when and why of policing.

Understanding exactly what these statistics mean in the context of public perception and the practical reality of what is really happening in our community is a real challenge.

Careful analysis is undertaken on a daily basis to ensure statistics are properly understood and applied in the context of practical policing.

However, informed community perception is at risk when inaccurate assumptions are made and incorrect conclusions are drawn from solitary statistical data and without the knowledge and understanding of the array of complexities, variables and intangibles that exist in the modern day policing environment.

Adding to this complexity are nationally agreed 'counting rules', which in some cases are not tailored to inform or shape community perceptions at a local level. For example, one of the key statistical measures is the recording of total offences.

While a rise in total offences may create the illusion that crime is on the rise, the total offence figure includes every single offence, in each crime event.

Police may only be called to one crime scene, but that crime scene could involve an offender committing multiple offences, which then drives up the statistics.

So, one home burglary where property has been stolen and say, a garden shed has also been forcibly entered on the property with property stolen from it, technically amounts to four separate offences - aggravated burglary of the house, stealing of property from the house, burglary of the shed, stealing of property from the shed.

The same applies when recording complex fraud or stealing matters committed by one offender involving multiple complainants. Situations involving damage caused by one or two offenders such as a 'spate' of car vandalism at a car park also causes multiple offence reporting.

The reality is the actual number of reported crime events is much less than the total number of offences, which paints a much more favourable statistical scenario.

However, on the flip side, we know that not all crime gets reported for a whole range of reasons and usually at the discretion of victims. So the question begs as to whether or not the real extent of crime is properly known or understood within our community. It is a similar situation when we look at how the serious crime category is perceived. When we talk about a rise in serious crime, we are not just referring to those crimes that typically generate media attention - serious assaults, firearms offences and robberies. It is those types of crimes that invoke fear within the community.

In reality, though, serious crime statistics cover a wide range of offences, including high value property offences, arson, fraud, deception and blackmail; all of which were reported to police in varying forms over the past month. Whilst serious in their own right, they may be perceived by some as less confronting when compared to other serious crimes.

The categories of total offences and serious crime are but two of well over two hundred statistical reporting measures published in the monthly Tasmania Police Corporate Performance Report; many of which have distinct nuances and variables that can paint different pictures after further analysis than at first glance.

In attempting to provide some insight and balance in understanding where statistics fit in policing, there is always the risk of sounding like a well-known former prime ministerial aspirant trying to simplify the workings of GST using a solitary birthday cake. Unfortunately, both situations have similarities.

Making assumptions and drawing definitive conclusions from raw statistical data can be risky. At best, police statistical data provides a useful guide to inform discussion and generate questions, which as an organisation, Tasmania Police welcomes in the interests of transparency and accountability. Of course, not providing this type of information for public scrutiny or in a manner inconsistent with nationally agreed guidelines is unacceptable and would certainly draw criticism.

Modern day policing is much more complex and demanding that it once was. The perception of what police do and how they do it is not often the same as reality. Statistics are an example where perception and reality can differ.