04/05/2026
DR MARISA PATERSON – THE NEW MINISTER OF CHERRY PICKING USING THE RATTENBURY PLAYBOOK
ACT Labor Minister for Policing and Corrections, Dr. Marisa Paterson, has happily taken on the portfolio of Minister of Cherry Picking in the ACT Government, now that former Green’s Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury is no longer in cabinet and retiring from politics.
In the last term of the Assembly, Rattenbury defended the performance of the ACT Justice system through cherry-picked statistics making apples and pear comparisons, that simply failed any standardisation or normalisation in the comparison with other states and territories.
He presented his apples and pears comparisons with the other jurisdictions around custodial sentencing, crime reporting and reoffending, and declared in his pronouncements the success of the ACT Justice system under his leadership.
Even when he promised data (for example a comparison of NSW and the ACT for culpable driving offence sentencing) it was never forthcoming, and he simply refused on some occasions to provide updates through the Question on Notice process of the Assembly.
I raised an Integrity Commission investigation into his and JACS obfuscation in response to their reporting obligations from the Dangerous Driving Inquiry which was held in late 2022. The Integrity Commission closed this complaint out, as apparently a Minister is allowed to provide his opinion, not evidence, based on the crude ABS statistics taken from each state and territory. I have often advised that this way of reporting is simply not evidence based, given there is no normalisation of the data, and we are allowing politicians to provide opinions, not evidence-based comparisons.
This behaviour now continues under Marisa. It is strange how winning a cabinet position and by no longer being a backbencher, she is happy to take the salary and promote crude figures that provides no context, whilst claiming success on behalf of this forever government. This is to support of the ACT Labor Government’s position that they are doing a great job (this has been their mantra on all public services under Chief Minister Andrew Barr).
On the 19th of March Deborah Morris raised the following concerns at the ACT Assembly.
That violent crime and perceptions of crime have gone up over 10 years from 2015-2016 to 2024-2025 where the ACT saw the largest shift in community concerns about crime in Australia, according to Roy Morgan research. This found that 51 percent of Canberrans were concerned about crime in 2024-2025, up from 34 percent in 2015-2016, a decade rise of 17 percentage points.
That offences against the person including homicide, assaults, grievous and actual bodily harm, sexual assaults and kidnapping have gone up by 29 percent over the decade, according to ACT Policing annual reports. This increase exceeds population growth. Sexual offences have increased by 42 percent.
That data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show the number of victims of assault in the ACT rose from 1,728 in 2014 to 2,482 in 2024.
In the same period, the Government commitment per person to policing has gone backwards over 10 years from 2015-2016 to 2024-2025. The ACT was the only Australian jurisdiction to decrease its expenditure on policing per person from $531.68 in 2015-2016 to $523.19 in 2024-2025, with the national average of expenditure on policing per person increasing to $652 from $574 in 2015-2016.
That the ACT Government decreased the number of operational sworn police per 100,000 people from 173 in 2015-2016 to 169 in 2024-2025.
Now an expert in Government denials and deceitful rhetoric (ably mentored by Barr, Steel and Stephen-Smith), Dr. Paterson pushed back against Morris’s characterisation of the system, suggesting that the opposition was engaging in "hysterics" or "hysterical" rhetoric to score political points, along with suggestions that Deborah Morris was “delusional” and “fear mongering” rather than engaging with the complexities of the law.
Marisa framed the opposition’s concerns as alarmist and damaging to public confidence in the mental health and justice systems (which this government has completely broken over the last 25 years). Paterson argued that the government’s approach was grounded in ‘Australian Bureau of Statistics’ evidence and understanding police operational needs, rather than the "fearmongering" she attributed to Morris. I would suggest the Minister hasn’t spoken to many of our sworn police officers recently, or those trapped in the criminal justice system.
How did Marisa defend the ACT Government performance over the last 25 years?
She quoted the crude figures pulled by the Australian Bureau of Statistics on Offender numbers.
She stated “This report demonstrates that the ACT had the lowest number of offenders, as well as the lowest rate of offending compared to all other jurisdictions” adding that “the long-term trend shows a decrease in the offender rate. In 2008-09 the rate of offending was 1,131.8 per 100,000 people. In 2024-25 the rate fell to 622.1 per 100,000 people—a decrease of approximately 45 per cent over 15 years.”
I warned Marisa, when she visited my home whilst on the backbench, about the dangers of using crude statistics in presenting success of the ACT justice system.
I shared multiple example cross Jurisdiction that demonstrated that sources of data need to be normalised before comparison. This included reporting on sexual assault sentencing. Rattenbury had point blankly refused under Question on Notice to produce 5 years of data. He claimed in his formal response it was apparently manual and labour intensive and could not be provided. I produced the same information requested for Marissa in a few hours, going through every judgement from the supreme court in a 5 year period.
Now Marisa is in Cabinet, it appears she has quickly forgotten the dangers of using crude data in promoting government success. It is much more important to support a Government position with opinion than with actual contextualised evidence.
It also appears she has forgotten that the ABS statistic are not an independent source of data (confirming success). On her Facebook post made the day before she responded in the Assembly, she responded to a comment I made stating “These are ABS statistics”. I had previously argued this point with Shane Rattenbury and advised Marisa of the ludicrousness of his statements on a number of occasions.
She failed to acknowledge or advise that the ABS statistics are not independently sourced. The ABS do not oversee some all-powerful audit or collection of information across the national police records. The source for the collection used by the ABS are the administrative records created and maintained by the state and territory police agencies. So in the case of the ACT this data is produced and is coming ACT Policing reporting in their annual reports.
Marisa posted the day before her outrageous Assembly performance the following ‘positive’ news on her page.
https://www.facebook.com/MarisaPatersonMLA/photos/-today-the-australian-bureau-of-statistics-released-the-recorded-crime-offenders/1624700795435960/
The ACT recorded both the lowest number of offenders and the lowest offender rate of all states and territories in 2024–25.
The ACT continues a long term decline in offender rates, decreasing from 1,131.8 offenders per 100,000 people in 2008–09 to 622.1 per 100,000 people in 2024–25.
In 2024–25, over 800 offenders were proceeded against by police for family and domestic violence–related offences, an increase of 14.3 per cent compared with the previous year.
Marisa clearly states in her post and alluded to in the Assembly “At the same time, it is encouraging to see the ongoing work of ACT Policing and partner agencies contributing to lower crime rates across the Territory”.
This is a wonton act of misleading the public and of the Assembly. I believe she should make a formal apology to all victims of crime for her statement and issue a retraction. If she is simply unable to comprehend the difference between reporting the number of offenders versus our actual crime victimisation, she either has a complete lack of understanding of what the crude data is reporting, or is being purposefully misleading, Either of these scenarios significantly impacts what confidence we can have in her role as a minister,
She fails to acknowledge or understand that the ABS standardise the data collected under the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC), 2011 and apply the National Offence Index (NOI), 2018. Using NOI, we only count an offender once, no matter how many crimes, or series of crimes they have committed. ABS do this by ranking all offence categories based on their perceived seriousness and determine the principal offence when an individual is involved in multiple criminal acts within a single reporting period. Multiple crimes but only one offender. Using crude offender rates to claim success in dealing with crime is quite simply wrong.
Marisa clearly has not considered we have some of the lowest apprehension rates in the country for several crime types. We are the lowest in many categories in bringing an offender before the courts and successfully convicting them (successful proceedings). We are regularly country leading in some of our property offences (burglary and robbery) and in sexual offence crimes. It also denies the basic fact when you have a lot less police than all other jurisdictions you catch less offenders!
We have the highest reoffending rates in the country, and one of the highest bail breach rates where we let people offend again and again and again. And we count the offender only once.
It is also miraculously that Marisa does not understand that Offender crude rates cannot be used to compare ACT with other jurisdictions, given we have the most “progressive” criminal law framework compared to the rest of Australia.
We are the only jurisdiction to have decriminalised illicit drugs and legalise cannabis possession in most cases, and we have also increased the minimum age of criminal responsibility (increased from 10 to 12 years during the 2023-24 reference period for the Australian Capital Territory).
Even the ABS advises not to compare data to earlier reference periods, which is exactly what Marisa has done in her rhetorical reply to Deborah Morris, claiming she is supported by “evidence”. Nonsense.
A very simple way to “normalise” this data is to compare the ACT’s "Total Interventions" against the Australian average and use a Population-Weighted Index.
This means for the ACT, the Normalised Rate adds back "Simple Drug Offence Notices" (SDONs) and other diverted proceedings that don't appear in standard ABS "Offender" counts for the ACT.
Therefore the Rate {Normalised} = {Police Proceedings} + {Civil Drug Infringements} divided by the Estimated Resident Population multiplied by 100,000.
This simple approach has us with a -1% variance on normalised crime than the national average, and worse than both NSW and TAS.
From the raw data, against national figures, the ACT charges for drug offences is the most significant outlier due to decriminalisation. This is not an indicator of lower drug prevalence.
According to the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) Report 25 (released April 2026) and through waste water analysis, the ACT is experiencing a significant surge in illicit drug consumption with a 30% annual increase in methylamphetamine use, substantially higher co***ne consumption in its capital city site compared to the capital city sites of most other states (with the exception of New South Wales and NT), M**A consumption rose by 20% over the last year, we have high urban concentration for he**in with a 30% annual increase in consumption (2024 figures) and worryingly the ACT consistently reports elevated levels of usage, contributing to a distinct regional profile where he**in and pharmaceutical opioids (like fentanyl) are more prevalent than in broader national averages.
The ACT's wastewater profile shows elevated presence of specific pharmaceutical opioids and emerging synthetic substances compared to the rest of the country. Clearly decriminalisation has not reduced consumption, supply and demand, or criminality that our policing are too under resourced to contain and address.
The crude data reported for drug offences is a direct statistical artifact of the transition to civil penalties, which are excluded from offender counts.
The crude figures also identify a Road Safety Gap (Division 13) where the ACT sits 29.5% below the national average for traffic proceedings. This indicates that the "Police Proceeding" rate (active stops and charges) is significantly lower than the national standard, even if automated camera fines are high.
For Violence Benchmarking (Division 02) we have a variance of only -1.1%, We can use Acts Intended to Cause Injury as the "Control Division” to compare us with other jurisdictions. This indicates that for crimes that are treated almost identically across all jurisdictions, the ACT tracks almost perfectly with the national average.
This normalised data is hardly something to promote as a success!!!!
Of all Australian cities and international regions compared in the OECD Regional Well-Being report (which compares 362 regions across 34 countries), the ACT has previously topped the global rankings for quality of life. The ACT has been ranked as the #1 region globally. We have the Highest Income with the ACT’s average income identified by the OECD as the highest of any of the 300+ developed nation regions. While all Australian states and territories rank in the top 20% of OECD regions for environment and civic engagement, the ACT consistently outperforms New South Wales and Victoria in categories like access to services and jobs.
We absolutely, given our demographic breakdown, SHOULD be a very low crime jurisdiction in comparison to other states and the NT, but the normalised statistics and control division indicates we are not doing any better than larger jurisdictions that have more social-economic disadvantage.
That is something the ACT Government should be ashamed of, not boasting about.
I call on Minister Paterson to refrain from using crude statistics to promote the success of ACT Policing or the justice system in general. I would also urge her, in future, when she meets victims of crime, to refrain from the usual expressions of empathy, condolences and sympathies. If as a minister you are in denial of the facts, these empty words mean absolutely nothing.
As for me, I will be shortly winding down my contribution to these matters after four years (the anniversary of the crime that killed Matthew is on the 19th of May). Four years or heartache, campaigning and for practically no actual outcomes.
After a life-threatening medical episode, I have come to accept that dealing with our politburo and Government Ministers is a totally pointless exercise.
It is impossible to pe*****te their belief system, politicking and rhetoric with facts and evidence which do not suit their narrative of the Utopia that they believe is Canberra.
I wish all who come after me every success in their efforts.
I will provide an update on Matthew’s anniversary and an update on the appeal against the sentence at the end of July, but for my own health and for the welfare of my family, I have accepted that seeking common sense change and an evidence based justice system from this forever ACT Government (supported in their progressive denials by the Greens and our independents in the Assembly), that I am well and truly beaten.
For those who wish to continue to push for real change and reform, I wish you all the best. However, remember the quote from Dante’s Inferno.
“Abandon all hope, ye who enter here”. This is Canberra after all.
