(Title of the Thesis)*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HANDING OVER THE KEYS: INTERGENERATIONAL LEGACIES OF CARCERAL POLICY IN CANADA, AUSTRALIA, AND NEW ZEALAND by Linda Mussell A thesis submitted to the Department of Political Studies In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada April 2021 Copyright ©Linda Mussell, 2021 Abstract The impacts of criminalisation and imprisonment are felt throughout generations. Indigenous communities experience confinement on a hyper scale in countries that continue to grapple with colonial legacies, including Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Policy changes have not been mitigating this reality and in many cases exacerbate experiences of harm. Different forms of confinement including imprisonment in prisons have been experienced intergenerationally (within and across generations) by some families and communities. With a goal of transformative change, this dissertation asks: how should Canada, Australia, and New Zealand reconfigure policy approaches to address hyper imprisonment and intergenerational imprisonment in partnership with Indigenous communities? To answer the research question, this dissertation uses Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis (IBPA), a twelve-question framework that was developed by Olena Hankivsky et al. (2012) to aid policy analysts and researchers in using an intersectional lens to examine policy issues. My application of IBPA to this issue draws on literature and policy material and is grounded in 106 qualitative interviews with 124 Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in policy, frontline services, academia, and with those who have experienced imprisonment personally or as a family member of a prisoner. Participants report significant impacts of imprisonment on families and communities, which greatly impact Indigenous people over generations. Participants identified a diverse range of changes needed to address intergenerational imprisonment of Indigenous people. The policy priorities and societal objectives identified in the interviews guide my analysis of paths forward. I recommend “placing the keys” in community hands and adopting policy-making approaches that focus on the long-term effects of decisions made today. Placing the keys in community hands means acknowledging, resourcing, and supporting local initiatives to interrupt intergenerational imprisonment. It also means breaking down structures that criminalise people, and building up structures that keep people well and whole. An intergenerational, ripple-effect approach focuses on centring the long-term impacts of policy choices on individuals, families, and communities now, and mitigating harmful impacts on future generations to come. ii Acknowledgements It's not enough just to have different programmes and different pockets of things and chucking little bits of money and giving things Māori names, it's just not enough. They don't work. I'm always like, give us the key, as a people. Give us the keys, resource us to come up with solutions to the problems that were created by historical injustices. Resource us to drive the solutions that work for our people (Julia Whaipooti1 interviewed in Sophie Gray, 2017). While keys often refer to locks and doors, the nuts and bolts of confinement, my reference to keys in this dissertation echo how Julia Whaipooti speaks of them, as resources for those who are most impacted by carceral systems to drive transformative change. In other words, keys of change rather than keys of confinement. This dissertation amplifies what people who have experienced confinement over generations call for, and this work would not have been possible without their time and consideration. My acknowledgement to the Haudenosaunee (People of the Longhouse)2 and Anishinaabe (Original People)3 nations on whose traditional land I have lived, studied, and worked on in Kingston,4 Ontario. Before coming to Kingston, I was raised, studied, and worked in the Metro Vancouver Region of British Columbia, which is the unceded land of the Coast Salish people.5 In Australia, my acknowledgement to the past, present, and future Traditional Custodians and Elders of the Yugara6 in Brisbane,7 Queensland, and the Ngunnawal8 in Canberra (meeting place),9 Australian Capital Territory, 1 Whaipooti is a Māori justice advocate and descendant of Ngāti Porou. 2 Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tuscarora nations (Kahnawake Longhouse n.d.). 3 Potawatomi, Chippewa, Mississauga-Ojibway, Odawa, Nipissing, and Algonquin nations (City of Kingston 2015a). 4 In Mohawk: Katarokwi (a place where there is clay or where the limestone is), Ken’tarókwen (clay taken out of the water), Kanatókwen (town out of water), Tkaristó:ton (there are steel bars standing there) (Decolonial Atlas 2015). In Algonquin: Cataracoui (great meeting place) (City of Kingston 2015b). 5 Hwlitsum, Katzie, Kwantlen, Kwikwetlem, Matsqui, Musqueam, Qayqayt, Semiahmoo, Squamish, Tsleil- Waututh, and Tsawwassen nations (Metro Vancouver 2020). 6 Surrounding nations and groups: Turrbal, Noonucal, Goenpul, and Yugembah (NITV 2017). 7 The Aboriginal name of the city is Miguntyun (Latimore 2018). 8 Surrounding nation: Ngambri (NITV 2017). 9 See National Capital Territory (n.d). iii where I visited as part of this dissertation. In New Zealand, my acknowledgement to the Māori iwi (tribes) in Auckland10 and Wellington,11 where I also visited as part of this dissertation. I warmly thank the many groups, individuals, and families in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, who contributed their time and perspectives by participating in interviews for this dissertation. Your contributions guide the content and spirit of this dissertation. I thank the people with lived experiences in carceral systems who I had conversations with and worked alongside over the years. Your guidance has helped me in understanding, approaching, and interacting with issues of injustice. Many thanks to my peers in the Prison for Women (P4W) Memorial Collective, Abolition Coalition, Frontier College’s Community Justice Literacy Outreach, Canadian Families in Corrections Network (CFCN), Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group (SFPRIG) Letters to the Inside, Sexual Assault Centre Kingston (SACK), the Elizabeth Fry Society branches of Greater Vancouver and Kingston, and the newly formed Abolition City coalition in Kingston. I thank Margaret Little, Michael Orsini, Justin Piché, Kevin Walby, Olena Hankivsky, and Jackie Davies for their mentorship. I also thank my committee members Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond (Aki-Kwe), Lisa Guenther, Kathy Brock, and Danielle Delaney for their knowledge and guidance. Warmest thanks to my husband for his steadfast support from beginning to end of this dissertation. 10 The Māori name for the city is Tāmaki. The six iwi are Ngāti Pāoa, Ngāi Tai, Te Wai-o-Hua, Ngāti Whātua-o- Ōrākei, Ngāti Te Ata, and Te Kawerau-a-Maki (Te Ara 2015). 11 The Māori name for the city is Te Upoko o te Ika a Maui (the head of Māui's fish) or Te Whanganui-a-Tara (the great harbour of Tara) (Greater Wellington Regional Council 2018). The iwi are Ngāti Toa Rangatira, Taranaki Whānui ki te Upoko o te Ika, and Te Atiawa (Te Puni Kōkiri n.d). iv Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... iii Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... v List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. vi List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. vii List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................. viii Glossary ........................................................................................................................................................ x Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2 Conceptualisation ....................................................................................................................... 23 Chapter 3 Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 38 Chapter 4 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 77 Chapter 5 Interview Results ........................................................................................................................ 96 Chapter 6 Unpacking The Policy Issue ..................................................................................................... 135 Chapter 7 Policy Options .......................................................................................................................... 169 Chapter 8 Policy Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 227 Chapter 9 Conclusion