Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 73

Politics for the Imprisoned:

A self-awareness, self-empowerment & self-defence handbook


By

Craig W.J. Minogue

First Edition - 2012 This is a not-for-profit publishing initiative which is aimed at community education and personal empowerment. This book is not for sale and it will be distributed free to people in prison. The publishing of this book is made possible by private donations. An electronic version of this book as a PDF is freely available on Craig Minogue's website at: www.craigminogue.org for printing and distribution by and to any person. A Red Triangle Production, Melbourne Victoria which is published and distributed by: Dr Craig W.J. Minogue PhD PO Box 273 CORIO VICTORIA 3214. Copyright Craig W.J. Minogue. 2012 Craig Minogue asserts his right to be identified as the author of this work. Minogue, Craig 1962 Politics for the imprisoned: A self-awareness, self-empowerment & self-defence handbook. Bibliography. ISBN :000000000 1. Imprisonment. 2. Politics. 3. Australia. 4. Autoethnographic account and analysis of imprisonment and politics. 5. Memoir. 6. Craig Minogue. 7. Political activism. ebook by EBooks by Design www.ebooksbydesign.co

Contents
Forward Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 2 - The situation you find yourself in Chapter 3 - How you can help yourself? Chapter 4 - Engaging with the system and talking with the screws Chapter 5 - What is prison politics? Chapter 6 - What has politics got to do with you? Chapter 7 - What's 'Right' and what's 'Left'? Chapter 8 - The difference between Right and Left in Australia Chapter 9 - Political issues in Australia Chapter 10 - The role of the Church and religion in politics Chapter 11 - Blaming others and not the system Chapter 12 - Voting in State and Federal elections Chapter 13 - Political prisoners in Australia Chapter 14 - What is the story with Unions Chapter 15 - What is the story with jailhouse lawyers? Chapter 16 - What is the story with men in prison who think Nazis are "a good go"? Chapter 17 - The politics of pushing in line Feedback and future versions of this book Appendix A - How to Benefit From a Prison Sentence Appendix B - How to address an issue in writing Appendix C - 'Concept Unity' by Yskari Yero Douglas and 'How Consensus Works' from Critical Resistance Appendix D - What level of political knowledge do prisoners have? Appendix E - Craig Minogue v The Public Sector Union - a sad story of stupidity Glossary of terms and words used Further reading About the author Why the images? References

Forward
This book is written from the point of view of Craig Minogue who is a prisoner in Victoria and it relies on Craig's personal experience to show how politics is relevant. When the text says: 'I have done', or 'my experience is', then the 'I' and 'my' is Craig's voice. This book has a wider relevance than just what happens in Victoria since politics and the underlying issues for prisoners are much the same everywhere. There are, however, some differences from State to State. Craig hopes that in future versions of this book, men and woman from every Sate and Territory in Australia will make a contribution with Chapters of their own. What this book is about is made obvious by the title, Politics for the imprisoned: A selfawareness, self-empowerment & self-defence handbook. Why is this book published as an ebook when prisoners don't have access to the internet? The short answer is because of the cost. Craig does not have the funds to have this book printed and distributed in the normal way, and there is no incentive for a publisher in a free book. If the small individual cost of printing and postage is born by people who have family and friends in prison then there is a greater possibility of this book been read. So, if you know someone in prison, please feel free to print a copy of this book from the PDF version and send it to them. If you are thinking of having it bound, then please have it bound in a plastic spiral spine, and not a wire spiral spine as some prisons, especially high security management/punishment units do not allow the wire versions.

Page | 1

Chapter 1 - Introduction
With the exception of asylum seekers and refugees who are kicked around like a political football, politics makes more of a difference to our lives as prisoners, than to any other group of people in the community. Issues of crime and punishment are significant parts of most political campaigns because they are emotive issues which attract attention. Politics is important for our lives, but the best way to learn about it is not in a text book. Rather this book has been written with examples that are relevant for the prisoners who are reading it. This book is also a personal account of the things I have done in prison. People should write about what they know best, and that is their lived experience and the lessons they have learned from that experience. This is what I have done in this book. Our sources of knowledge about the world and our place in it are dumbed- down by the media and the politics of a sound-bite statement on the TV news. The media has us waiting to be spoon-fed knowledge and understandings about the world and our place in it, in little bitesize pieces that we don't have to chew, but just swallow. This easy to swallow diet leads us to living a fast food existence which has no substance. This is one of the reasons many prisoners think politics has nothing to do with them. And look where that's got us? Although this is not a text book like you would find in school, you are going to have to do a little bit of work when you read this book. There will be stuff that you will need to chew and not just swallow. You may not understand some words, but if you read the sentence it should make enough sense for you to go on. It is unreasonable for anyone to expect to know the exact meaning of every word in a book, but if you put in a little effort you will understand the meaning of what is being said. There is a list of words and their definitions at the end of this book called a Glossary which you can look up it there is a word that you don't know. This book, like everything else in life, will only benefit you if you put some effort into it. You will only get out what you put in. The more you put in, the more you will get out of it and the more empowered you will become. The titles of the Chapters say what they are about, it's not complicated so there is not going to be a long introduction talking about what the book is about or how it is laid out. Let's just do it! So, just start reading and working your way from one Chapter to the other and it will all make sense and come together. And hopefully be the end of the book you will become politically aware and empowered with knowledge to defend yourself and others.

Page | 2

Chapter 2 - The situation you find yourself in


This book aims to help you understand your situation, and with that understanding it is hoped that you will be able to improve your own situation. This book is all about helping you standup for yourself and to defend yourself. But there needs to be a willingness to take up what is offered, there needs to be a sense of social, political and human entitlement which says that it is possible to stand-up for yourself and defend your dignity. Human entitlement is about your rights as a person, rights which should be the same for you as they are for everyone else. Your dignity as a person is about you feeling that you are worthy of respect, and you having a sense of pride in yourself which others can and should respect. But we all know that we in prison don't get treated like everyone else. Of course we are in prison as a punishment, but this does not mean that we should be treated like shit. Human entitlement and dignity is about not taking shit. And let's face it, shit is not good, that's why they call it shit, because it is shit. No-one can give you a right not to be treated like shit. Personal rights need to be asserted by saying: "I am not taking that shit." You assert your rights by speaking-up and standing-up for yourself and saying: "You can't do that because ...." And you need to have an argument for why they can't do whatever they want to do to you. By doing some work and learning about the political, social and legal system in which you are trapped, you will be able to argue for your rights, your entitlements and your dignity. If you are willing to learn and to stand-up for yourself, or not, is all about the attitude you choose to have. "Do you think you should be treated better? Do you think the political, prison and social systems are unfair to you?" If "Yes", then the next question is: "Are you willing to do something about it?" If you do not think you should be treated lawfully and fairly, then you may was well just give-up and stop complaining because no-one is going to help you unless you show a willingness to help yourself. There is a lot of personal power associated with the attitude you choose to take about your situation, and this can be a negative or positive power in your life. In his book, Man's Search for Meaning, Viktor E. Frankl tells of his experiences as a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp during the Second World War. He says that: 'Everything can be taken from a man but one thing; the last of the human freedoms - to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way' (Frankl 2004 p.75). Victor Frankl says that there is a potential in life for an inner victory, even under the most miserable conditions; like being in a concentration camp where the guards are trying to kill you (Frankl 2004 p.81). Even in a Nazi death camp people had a choice about how they behaved, if they helped their fellows or if they only looked after themselves, if they survived, or if they died. All this depended in part on luck, but also it depended on their attitude and the choices they made every day. It's the same for you. Choices can always be made to help yourself and your fellows, or just vegetate and wait for the end of the sentence. Here is something to chew: If I quote from a book I will put single 'quote' marks around it and put a note in the text like the one I have just used about Viktor E. Frankl's book. If you look at the end of this book you will see a list of books and other documents which I have used in writing this book. In this way I am not passing off what someone else has written as my own work. However, you can read the book and just ignore the notes in the text - that is what most people do anyway. If you like the sound of the quotes and want to get the book Page | 3

yourself, the details are in the list. The 'Frankl 2004 p.81' may look confusing at first, but it's really not. In some places in this book I will suggest "how" you should do something, but I will write more about "why" than "how." My thinking is that if you know "why" you should be doing something and what you will get out of it, then you have enough street smarts to work out "how" to do it for yourself. And this book is about self-empowerment, and self-empowerment is about you having the strength and the confidence to defend yourself, not have someone else tell you how to do it. There is an old saying, that if you give a person a fish and he or she will eat for a day, but if you teach the person how to fish, then they will eat for life. But this saying presumes a lot, for example, it presumes that the person has: a. the fishing equipment; b. the cognitive skills to handle the equipment; c. a sense of social or human enfranchisement which says that it is possible for them to stand by the water and fish without being moved on by a person in a blue uniform; d. the will and motivation, and the opportunity to take several hours to learn and to allow someone else to teach them how to fish; and e. have the patience to fish, rather than just steal a fish, or wait for a handout or go hungry. Social or human enfranchisement is about feeling that you belong as an equal person in a society. An old meaning of the word "enfranchise" means to free a slave. Nowadays the word means to have the right to vote and it's called "the political franchise". Having the right to vote is seen as acknowledging that a person has control over their own mind and their own affairs and is entitled to have a say. If you have a vote you have a say in the Government which makes the laws. In the past women did not have the right to vote because male dominated society treated women like children who had to be told what to do - kind of like the way prisoners are treated to day. But to get back to the fishing example. In my experience many people in prison don't have the equipment or the skills they need to look after themselves. And they don't, because for a number of different reasons those things have been withheld from them, like the vote being withheld from women and certain people were held as slaves in the past. But women got the vote and slaves were freed because people fought for those rights. The situation prisoners find themselves in needs to be seen in light of the fact that many of us in prison have been told (one way or another) throughout our lives that we will never amount to anything. Many prisoners lack a sense of social or human enfranchisement. And this is reinforced every day by the way they are treated. And who can blame them? As a local example, look at the way the Ombudsman in Victoria behaves. The Ombudsman is the main complaints authority for prisoners, but the Ombudsman finds only one complaint about the prison system substantiated each year. If it is 600, 700 or 800 complaints in any given year made by prisoners - still only one token complaint is substantiated. By comparison, about 23% of complaints about police are substantiated (Minogue 2002). This does not mean that prisoners should not complain, or that their complaints are nonsense. It means that we have to press harder when we make a complaint. It means that we have to present as many facts as possible and say who the witnesses are, who will support our complaint and so on. And when Page | 4

the Ombudsman writes back and says: "Prison staff are lovely blokes doing a great job", we need to write back and say that is bullshit and point out how the Ombudsman has got it wrong. All this is hard work, I know. And many of our fellow prisoners think: "What is the point in complaining?" The point is the attitude which is being demonstrated - that you are not going to take shit. The point is that you are fighting for your rights. But many people in prison do not fight for their rights. Why is that? In ancient Rome, the lowest class of citizens were called the "proletariat." In Marxist political theory the term "proletariat" is used to refer to the mass of ordinary workers or working-class people. The political radical Karl Marx thought that there was a lower and more miserable class of person than the proletariat, he called these people the "lumpenproletariat." The Greek word "lumpen" means "rag." So what Karl Marx was saying is that the lumpenproletariat are a political limp rag, people who are pushed around by their economic, social and political circumstances without fighting back, without trying to improve their own conditions. The lumpenproletariat are people who are so miserable and so oppressed that they don't have the will to stand-up for themselves, or even to join with attempts by others to improve their own conditions and change society for the better. Every day we can see other prisoners who can't be bothered to complain or to fight for a better deal. These prisoners get pushed around by the system as if they are a lip rag, even if they work out in the gym every day and are quick to use violence on their fellow prisoners. Many prisoners have had their heads knocked off their shoulders so often, that they are afraid to stick them up again. Some prisoners think: "If we complain about that, they may take what little we have now." My answer to that is: "Well let them take it and we will complaint about that as well." If something is being held over your head to blackmail you, then that thing is not worth having. Some prisoners want someone to complain, but many of them are not willing do it themselves, because they don't have the skills or the belief in themselves that they can do it. Many prisoners behave like members of the lumpenproletariat. And these prisoners are dealt with by those with power over them as if they are no more than a dirty rag. That this situation exists, is not surprising when there is no popular effort to defend prisoners or to help them assert their rights. There are no prisoner rights movements in Australia like there are in some countries, and the prisoners themselves are not very organized because they don't have a political understanding of their situation. So, we can see the situation we are in. Now we need to think about how we can help ourselves.

Page | 5

Chapter 3 - How you can help yourself?


The situation which prisoners in general find themselves, has been outlined, so let's now look at how you can help yourselves. (If you are reading this book and you have got this far then you are well on the way to helping yourself). So, how can you help yourself and how can you become politically active? First, you need to inform yourself about what is going on in society as that relates to the criminal justice system and the prison. Then you need to take a position on what is happening, support what you agree with and oppose what you don't agree with. In other words, do something about it. Don't be passive. Speak-up, help others to speak-up and complain, stand-up for yourself and others. Of course it is not easy to speak-up and stand-up, it is not because the system is against you doing that. How many times have you heard the system tell prisoners to do their own time and keep their heads down? Unfair political relations, and the things you have done, have you positioned as the bottom rung of the social ladder. The political conversation that goes on about you is always aimed at trying to talk you out of sticking your head up. This is why Prison Officers are always telling prisoners they should keep their heads down and do their own time. Don't listen to them. When has the system, the ruling-class and their agents of law-and-order ever done the right thing by you? Why should you be giving them a free pass by not complaining, by not sticking your head up and defending yourself and others like you? When a Prison Officer tells you to "fly under the radar" and to "keep your head down and do your own time", do you think her or she is telling you that for your benefit, to make your time easier, or for their benefit and the benefit of the system? Does the system want prisoners who are complaining, and making waves, and sticking-up for each other as a group, or do they want isolated individuals doing their own time? I don't need to answer this question because the answer is obvious to every prisoner; you know the answer. Isolated individuals who are flying under the radar and not sticking their heads up, are politically limp rags who are being pushed around. Prisoners who make waves and stickup for each other as a group are acting politically and they are not pushed around as easy as a limp rag. Prison Officers don't fly under the radar when it comes to their union making demands for increased wages and better working conditions. Prison Officers stand together when they go on strike or run industrial action, or in any number of other situations. But they never stop telling prisoners not to stand together because they know that collective action is powerful as they use it all the time - that's one of the reasons they are all dressed in the same uniform. But we have a uniform as well, so we too can look to our common interests rather than being selfish and not politically engaged with trying to make our situation better. I said in the introduction that I was not going to tell you what to do, but despite that you may have expected more from a Chapter headed "How you can help yourself?" This book is designed to provide the opportunity for you to think about the ideas associated with political awareness, self-empowerment and self-defence. And once you start thinking for yourself you will develop your own ways of acting without being told what to do. But there are a few pointers about what to do, like that which is the subject of the next Chapter.

Page | 6

Chapter 4 - Engaging with the system and talking with the screws
The culture of violence and interpersonal terrorism which is directed at us by the prison and its staff is real. It may not seem like that from day to day and it does not look like that to people who are taken on guided tours around the more modern prisons by the staff. But we all know that we can be bashed and gassed (nearly to death) in a Management Unit at any time. If you don't believe it, then think for a moment of what would happen if you punched a Prison Officer in the face. The fact is, as we all know, that 'most prisoners wouldn't think of hurting a prison officer', but the use of interpersonal violence against prisoners by the by staff is accepted by most prisoners without formal complaint (Goulding 2007 pp.62,99). Most prisoners respond to the violence and interpersonal terrorism of the prison system by not 'talking with the screws' and 'minimising contact' saying: 'I don't like them and they don't like me' (Goulding 2007 pp.66-67). How prisoners interact with prison staff is a political and class issue. It is because poor and socio-economically disadvantaged prisoners don't have a middle-class sense of entitlement, they don't look on the prison staff as public servants and themselves as members of the public - albeit temporarily imprisoned. Many prisoners think: 'there is an invisible line ... there's an apprehension of actually approaching an officer and asking them for something' (Goulding 2007 p.68). That prisoners don't seek welfare or any other assistance from the staff must make the staff's day a lot easier. We all know that many prisoners think: 'prison officers aren't welfare workers ... how could an officer be a welfare worker when the next minute he could turn a key on you or put you in shackles ... it's a conflict of interests' (Goulding 2007 p.66). That is right, there is a conflict of interests between the role of the custodial officer, turning the key, using force and putting a prisoner in chains, and the welfare role. But prisoners have a choice in relation to how they deal with Prisoner Officers. Prisoners can let Prison Officers off-thehook by not dealing with them in the welfare role, so the Officers can do their custodial role and turn the key and all the other stuff without feeling the embarrassment of the conflict of interests. Or on the other hand prisoners can deal with Prison Officers about welfare issues, and make their custodial role more difficult. Prisoners should make it personal. Prisoners should ask for help and for access to support services and the assistance they need. Prison Officers work in a prison for the benefit of the prisoners. They have a legal responsibility for prisoners call a "duty of care." It is their job to provide access to services and support for us. Prison Officers are public servants and a big part of their role is to serve "the public", which includes us prisoners. Prison Officers are here for our benefit, we are NOT here for their benefit so they can have a job sitting on their arse all day. Accepting the "us and them" division between Officers and prisoners, and refusing to engage with Prison Officers in a welfare role, as most prisoners do, is counterproductive and leaves prisoners without the support that they may have needed. Why excuse the welfare role, so Prison Officers can fulfil their custodial role without an internal conflict? I don't get it. Prison Officers should feel conflicted when they do bad shit to other people, and this conflict can be highlighted by your engagement with them about personal and welfare matters. When prisoners get in their faces, and ask for personal help it makes it hard for them to treat that same prisoner like shit the next day. In some prisons in Victoria, prisoners are encouraged to call staff by their first names. There are prisoners who don't like this, they think it is crossing the line that should divide Prison Page | 7

Officers and prisoners. Let's think about this. If there is an interaction between me and a Prison Officer, my calling him "Mr Freeman" and him calling me "Minogue", then it is an interaction which lacks a personal element. Mr Freeman and Minogue are the objectified names of the social roles we occupy. But if I say: "Henry can you phone the property store for me and ask Graham if...", it is a more personal request made of the man and not the Officer. It is easier for a Prison Officer to be a hard-arse if he or she can hide behind the mask of: "I'm only doing my job" or some other excuse. I think this is a really important point for us all to think about. I believe that making it personal makes it more difficult for Prison Officers to do the wrong thing to us. This is not to say that prisoners and Officers should get too close, but being too distant makes it easier for them to act in the role of a sniper and take your head off your shoulders. It is more difficult for them if they are up close and personal with you and then to take your head off your shoulders while you are looking them in the eye and addressing them in the same way as their friends do. If you are making the effort to read and understand this book, you are in a good position to start working for yourself and for others to improve your conditions and change your situation for the better. Let me say again that this is not a "how to" book that will tell you what to do, rather it is a "why to" book which explains why you should be doing something rather than vegetating or cave dwelling and just waiting for the time to be over. This chapter can be a good starting point for a conversation between prisoners. Make a photocopy of this chapter if you can, or lend the book to others and have a conversation about it. There are politically aware prisoners in the system. People who make complaints all the time, jailhouse lawyers, people who do a lot of education and who can be seen doing a lot of reading. If you are not one of these people, then you can ask one of these types of people if they will help you, and it is my guess that you will find that they will help you if you ask them. The work you can do, like the work I do, is not going to change the world but it is a good start. It is work 'on a minor scale' as I have called it, but it will make a positive difference to your life and the lives of people you help (Minogue 2010). If you are not willing to do anything, if you think you don't have long enough and you are just waiting until you get out, or you have some other reason, or is it an excuse, for not doing anything. Then there is one thing you can do, and that is please don't make life hard for the people who are doing something. Don't make life hard for people who are standing- up for themselves and others. We all have different ways of coping with our time in prison, and some people need to agitate and stand-up for themselves and for others; this is how they survive. So, please don't make what it takes to survive for others harder than it needs to be - if you do that, then you are acting much like a Prison Officer who makes life hard for people. Just because the work prisoners do can be called political or being a jailhouse lawyer, does not mean that it is not personal. Feminists have a saying that: "the personal is political and the political is personal." Feminist academic Joanna Russ rightly says: 'whenever people talk about the difference between politics and personal life, I'm dumbfounded. ...I can't imagine a "political" stance that doesn't grow out of "personal" experience' (Russ 1985 p.37). And so it is political and personal when defending yourself and others in prison. Doing political work or being a complainer or a jailhouse lawyer is not a hobby, it's not something people do to fill in the time, it's personal, it's about who the person "is", not what they "do." I engage every day with the Prison Officers and the management here in prison, and a lot of men criticise me for that. When I was at Barwon Prison I was in what is called a 'long term honour unit' (that name is a bit of a wank) but I was with older men with longer sentences than most who had better living conditions in that particular unit. I heard some of the men say Page | 8

of me and my activities: "That fucking bloke is talking to the screws again!" But if there was an issue which impacted upon them, the same men would ask me to talk to the Officers, find out what the situation was, or if it could be resolved, and let them know what was happening. But, the next day it will be: "That fucking bloke is talking to the screws again!" At Barwon in 2007 one such instance arose and one of the loud-mouth thugs who made my life difficult, asked me as I was walking away from the Officers in the unit, if I had found out about the issue of the moment. I had, and I said: "Yes mate I have, but there they are (pointing to the Officers) you can go and ask them yourself, they don't bite." I thought his response was going to be violence and I had to watch my back for the next week or so. This man, and people like him, are members of the lumpenproletariat, they will not do any work to help themselves, but they want to benefit from my work, and to add insult they will not support my political work, in fact they shit-can me, and if I withhold the results of my work from them, then I'm an even-worse arsehole. These members of the lumpenproletariat do not have the communication skills, or the selfesteem or the confidence to speak-up for themselves or for others. The can't engage with the staff and management of the prison to defend themselves and others. So these members of the lumpenproletariat cover their lack of skills, self-esteem and confidence with their professed hatred of the screws and not engaging with them. More often than not, the lack of skills, selfesteem and confidence is covered with violence and big muscles. Communication skills, selfesteem and confidence can all be learned. It just takes the strength of character to admit that one needs to learn new skills and then to ask others for some help. And while I am talking about the issue of not breaking each others balls, lets get over the whole: "Do you think you are better than me because you use big words" bullshit. Knowledge is a tool to be used, and people should ask themselves how that tool is being used, rather than being jealous or resentful because they are too lazy to do the work to learn to use the tool for themselves. If a prisoner is willing and able to do political work for themselves and for other prisoners, if they are able to engage with Prison Officers and management on a level that is over the heads of the average prisoner, then that prisoner should be supported in that work rather than being judged as putting others on show by using big words. People who have so very little education and learning, like most prisoners, see education and learning, books and computers in a cell, as representing what they don't have. For many prisoners education represents their exclusion from a better life which education and learning can bring. But rather than realising that anyone can get on the educational band-wagon with some personal effort, and then asking how they would go about doing something for themselves, they wrongly blame the educated political prisoner. In other words, we see the lumpenproletariat in action again, they are not going to help themselves, and they are even going to make it hard for people who are trying to help their fellow prisoners. Generally speaking many prisoners are not able to help themselves because of the attitude they adopt (Minogue 2008c). And with this, we are back to the issue of the attitude we choose to have. It is worth repeating what Viktor E. Frankl said of his experience as a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp during the Second World War: 'Everything can be taken from a man but one thing; the last of the human freedoms - to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way' (Frankl 2004 p.75). Even in a Nazi death camp people had a choice about how they behaved, if they helped their fellows, or if they only looked after themselves. If they survived or if they died, depended on some luck, but also on their attitude and the choices they made every day. The same is true for people in prison here and now!

Page | 9

Despite the difficulties, the prison system, the ball breaking fellow prisoners trying to drag you down so they can raise themselves up, those prisoners who are able to help themselves, are morally obligated to try to help and educate others. But they also have a right not be dragged down to the miserable depths of the lumpenproletariat. If you have read up to this point, then you have well and truly taken the first step. The next step is up to you. This book can be photocopied and given to others. You can write to the publisher and get more copies free of charge. Or you can get someone on the outside to print a copy from my website and send it in to you or others. And you can start a conversation with yourself, or better still with others and talk about what you can do to improve your situation. You can get yourself a copy of Viktor E. Frankl's amazing little book Man's Search for Meaning, and see how the lessons he learnt about how to survive in the Nazi death camp apply to your situation in prison today. As part of thinking about the next step, ask yourself what issue is important to you and to the people around you, and how can you chip away at that issue? What contacts can you make to help you in your work on the inside and on the outside? How can you learn more? How can you make yourself more aware? How can you empower and defend yourself and others for a better life? You will find some answers to these questions for yourself if you read on and continue to educate yourself on politics for the imprisoned.

Page | 10

Chapter 5 - What is prison politics?


If you are reading this book in prison, then you are in a highly charged political relationship with the society in which you live. Crime and punishment, what is judged to be right and wrong conduct by the law, and the reasons for your situation, are all political in one way or the other. With the exception of your family and ex-prisoners, the way in which every other person in society views you and treats you is shaped by the politics of crime, imprisonment and punishment. Of course, there are also many personal issues associated with why and how you ended up in prison, but they are for you to deal with since this book is about the politics of your situation. One thing needs to be put straight from the outset, and that is what prison politics in NOT about. Prison politics is NOT about one prisoner not liking another, and shit-canning the other behind his or her back. Prison politics is NOT about a crew of prisoners who have a conflict with another crew of prisoners who are both trying to get on the same rort. Prison politics is NOT about who is getting what job, or ongoing arguments about access to the washing machine, or someone being a phone hog, or who goes in the gym at what times, or any bullshit like that. These petty issues are about interpersonal relationships, not politics. Fighting with each other, stabbing each other in the back (some times literally) gossiping, and spreading rumours, is some-times called prison politics. But this is not right. Politics is associated in the minds of many prisoners with this petty crap and for this reason politics has a bad name in prison. What prison politics is really about, is thinking through and then acting on the issues associated with the moral and legal relationship with the society in which you live. It is about how prisoners are treated by the media, the Courts and the prison system and how they react to that treatment. When prisoners stand together and say to the system: "We are not taking that shit", then this is prison politics in action. When prisoners don't stand together, don't talk amongst themselves and don't try to form a consensus and try to make something happen to benefit all of them, then this is a failure of prison politics. A failure of prison politics happens because people don't understand the political theory associated with the fact that our society should be one in which everyone is treated fairly, and they don't understand that because they have not been treated fairly. If society and our relationships with others and the community in general is seen as "everyperson for themselves", then what happens is that everyone ends up on their own and outnumbered by the gang of people in the blue or black uniforms. If there is no solidarity, then you can't defend yourself and you will get done-over by people with power over you every single time. And after they have done you over once, they will be back time and time again because you become an easy target. You become someone who can be blamed for all that is wrong with society; people don't feel safe in the street because the media is beating up the risk of crime - so it's time to kick the prisoner's head in; insurance premiums are being increased because of crime - so it's kick the prisoner's head in. And on it goes, this is prison politics in action and you are the one getting your head kicked-in ! To think that politics has nothing to do with you means you are failing to engage with the wider circumstances of your life and what is happening to you. Not understanding or engaging with politics because of the petty crap that some people carry on with in their Page | 11

interpersonal disputes which they call "politics" is a cop-out, and let's face it, anything that has the word 'cop' in it can't be good. So, what politics is not about is now really clear. What politics is and what it has got to do with you is what the next Chapter is about.

Page | 12

Chapter 6 - What has politics got to do with you?


Politics is personal, but it is personal in a significant sense and not in a petty sense. Politics is personal in that it is about our relationship to our society and how we ethically (or otherwise) respond to Otherness. The term 'Other' and 'Otherness' with a capital 'O' is used to indicate that what is being talked about is that which is seen as making another person different from us. We are all individuals, we see and understand the world from our own points of view. Then there are Others who stand with us, or next to us or in opposition to us. The most obvious form of Otherness is gender. Men and women are obviously different, we have a different biology and a different psychology. The problem with differences is that they can cause conflict if they are given too much importance by someone who is looking at the Other to find a difference, and then use that to defend or assert their sense of Self. When I write about a 'sense of Self with a capital 'S', I am referring to that thing which makes you who you are as an individual person. For some people this is the soul or the mind, whatever you call it, Self is that thing which is expressed when a person says "I am ...". In the way I am using the term, having a sense of Self is more than saying who and what you are, it is about having a confident and centred sense about who and what you are as a person, as a being who exists with Others. Issues of Self and Other are moral and philosophical issues, and they are about the understandings we have about ourselves and our attitude towards Others, and how we bring those understandings and attitudes to our judgments about Others. And the judgments we make about our own actions as they effect Others and ourselves. Moral and ethical philosophy basically says that if we look hard enough, the differences of the Other are really not that different after all. We all feel pain and we all suffer. We all want to be free from unnecessary pain and suffering. We all want to live good lives and have the company of good people around us, people who support us and who we love and who love us in turn. These are important common interests in life which are the same for all of us. I have used the term 'moral' a few times up to this point. When I started to study philosophy I did not like the words 'moral' and 'morality' because I thought it was an out-of-date term that was 'mainly designed to stop people having fun' (Singer 1993 p.l). But the time has come to claim the term morality back from those that have a world view focussed on prohibitions, mostly to do with sex. I have up to this point used, and I will continue to use, the term and the concept of that which is 'moral' and 'morality' to be a mental activity which gives a framework to the making of judgments about the actions of moral agents, as those actions make a difference to the significant interests of Others. The consequences of actions as they impact upon Others are those which are in the moral realm and can be judged to be good or bad. Along with avoiding pain and suffering, the moral philosopher Peter Singer has identified in his Practical Ethics, the 'significant interests' of 'developing one's abilities ... in enjoying warm personal relationships, in being free to pursue one's projects without interference' as relevant moral considerations (Singer 1993 p.31). The concept of 'interests' is used by Peter Singer in a significant sense and not in the sense of the interest that one has as a supporter of a particular football team. From these significant interests it can easily be imagined how being put in prison makes a negative difference to a person being able to fulfill their interests. But there is always a balancing act required when considering what is right or wrong, or good or bad. Being in prison is bad, but so too is being the victim of a crime. The person who Page | 13

commits a crime has, by the very nature of what is generally agreed upon to be a crime, done a wrong. The past bad of committing a crime however, does not change the present or future preferences and significant interests of a person, or the quality of pain and suffering that a person is capable of suffering. But what has all this got to do with politics? Politics is the way in which we manage our society so that everyone's significant interests are considered and given as much weight as they are due. If our society was not managed like this then it would be every person for themselves and "might would be right." An example of might is right is the way in which the prison treats prisoners. The prison has the legal and the moral authority to do pretty much whatever it likes to prisoners. Life threatening levels of force are used against prisoners whenever the prison decides that such violence is needed (Minogue 2005). The prison uses violence on prisoners because they can. The prison has the power to do what they want because of the politically powerful position of the prison and the politically powerless position of the prisoners. So far, the focus has been on politics of crime and punishment and how that is applied to you, and how it effects you here in Australia, but it is not just local politics which is important. The American invasion and occupation of Iraq is an important political event for prisoners here in Australia. Let me explain. The Iraqi people are "the Other" to the "us" of the Americans and their allies like Australia, and prisoners need to pay attention because when people are talking about those Others, the enemy, the blacks or the Jews, they are talking about the marginalised people of a society; and that's you. It is important to understand that what happens in prisons today, is transferred out to war zones, and then back again with more extreme violence than before. The American Army tortured all of their Iraqi prisoners in Cell Block 1A in the Abu Ghraib Prison, and they even killed some of them. It turns out that the American Army Reservists who were in the Military Police Unit running the prison, were Prison Officers in their civilian lives. One of soldiers who was convicted of torturing prisoners, a man named Chip Frederick, said: 'The Christian in me knows it's wrong, but the Correctional Officer in me just loves to make a grown man piss himself ' (Greene 2004 p.l). So, what has politics go to do with you? Everything. In his book Black Skin White Masks, Frantz Fanon wrote At first thought it may seem strange that the anti-Semite's outlook should also be related to that of the Negro-phobe. It was my philosophy professor, a native of the Antilles, who recalled the fact to me one day: "Whenever you hear anyone abuse the Jews, pay attention, because he is talking about you." And I found that he was universally right - by which I meant that I was answerable in my body and in my heart for what was done to my brother. Later I realized that he meant, quite simply that antiSemite is inevitably anti-Negro (Fannon 1967 p. 122). The point that Frantz Fanon is making is an important and relevant one for people in prison. And that is, the person who talks of "the Jew", or "the blacks", or "the rag-heads", or "sandniggers", is asserting their sense of Self by oppressing another person, so they can suffer in their place. This is about Otherness. And it is about politics. The racist is an anti-Semite, that is a person who hates Jews, the same person is a bigot or a racist, that is a person who is prejudiced in their views and intolerant of the opinions of Others. When people talk about Others as being the problem, watch-out because they will be

Page | 14

talking about you next. People in prison are marked as the troublesome Other who should be made to suffer. This book is a self-defence manual against the rising tide of racism and fascism, and people who are looking for Others to blame. And the Other who is going to be blamed is you, the prisoner, the criminal offender. So, the people who are going to need to defend themselves are prisoners, because prisoners are at the sharp end of oppression in the name of security, public safety and order. When political leaders in the Government and community leaders talk about "law-and-order" they are really talking about kicking the prisoners's head off his or her shoulders, and it's your head that is being lined up because you are an Other. The general public will be made to feel good it your head is kicked-in and this will be a political win for the person doing the kicking, but it wont be good for you. Blaming the Other is an easy answer, even we do it. The cops set-me-up, my co-accused gave-me-up, or "the lawyer fucked me" as Andy Dufresne says in The Shawshank Redemption (1994). Blaming the Other is a clichd moment that we all buy into at some stage. In The Shawshank Redemption as each man joins the table in the mess hall, they are asked: "What happened?" The answer, from one man to another is "The lawyer fucked me." Oppressed people have been misled to believe that some Other person or group of Others is to blame - "If it were not for the Jews, or rag-heads, or blacks getting everything, then there would be more for me." People who hold the power in society are happy to respond to that bigoted nonsense, and take more away from those minority groups and make more repressive laws. But what always happens is that this 'taking away' from Others and making of new laws does not stop with those Others. It works like this: You don't support child sex offenders, do you? No. Of course you don't. So you would agree that they should be kept in prison after their sentence ends because we think they are a danger to the community? Yes. Good. Now, lets look at people who have committed violent offences and serious drug offences, perhaps they should be kept in prison as well if we think they are a danger to the community? It is difficult for you to disagree with keeping violent and serious drug offenders in prison past the end of their sentence, when you have agreed in the case of the danger supposedly represented by sex offenders. The same issue is at stake, does the person represent a danger? In criminology it is said that if a person would do a burglary on a family home, then this violation of social norms and privacy and the sense of Self that is represented by the sanctity of one's home would mean that they would most probably commit rape, and if they would commit rape then they would most probably commit murder. A person's home is their castle. The "sanctity" of one's home means that the personal safety and security it represented it has the "ultimate importance" to individual people and society as a whole. So, it is argued by some criminologist and law-and-order lobbyists that a person convicted of burglary on a family home represents a danger to the community in much the same way as a convicted sex offender does. Almost every State in Australia now has some type of preventative detention laws, or Parole laws which allow people to be paroled to an accommodation that is inside a prison. When people talk about the Other, the sex offender, the Jew, the person of colour or the rag-head or Page | 15

any other group or individual, and they want that persons head kicked-in, then pay attention to this political discourse as your head is the next to be kicked-in. If you point the finger at the Other, and blame the Other, it will come right back at you. This is why politics for the imprisoned is important, because all this stuff about the Other is politics in action. When people blame Others, rather than seeking to improve themselves and their situation, they are engaged in a self-destructive exercise that will lead to their own downfall. As a prisoner you are the Other, you are the victim of your own actions which have got you to this point and what you need to get yourself out from under this situation, is a political understanding. And the first place to start to get a political understanding is to know what's 'Right' and what's 'Left' in politics which is the subject of the next Chapter.

Page | 16

Chapter7 - What's 'Right' and what's 'Left'


It is important to understand the Right and Left of politics. Lets start on the Right. The "Right" in politics is also know as "conservative" and as "reactionary." The term "conservative" means a person who does not like to change their ideas and who believes in traditional values of personal and social conduct. Conservatives are opposed to same sex marriage, decriminalising drug use, safe injecting rooms, needle exchange programs as so on. Conservatives favour free enterprise, private ownership, and socially conservative ideas which look back to previous generations for ideas of a better life. The term "reactionary" is a person who opposes political or social progress or reform. Reactionaries look back to a supposed golden age, usually of the 1940s or 1950s. The conservative Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who was a dominating political force for over a decade, made it very clear that his sense of a national and political identity, was focussed on the First World War (1914-1918) as the defining event. The Right focuses its economic and its social policies towards improving the conditions for individual people and businesses to increase the profits people gain from their activities. The thinking of the Right goes like this:

If wealthy individuals and businesses receive tax cuts and favourable conditions to make more profit, then they will employ more people thus giving the working-class employment so they can pay their own way. If people can pay their own way then the State will not need to provide as many social welfare services like public health, public transport, unemployment benefits and so on. And if not as much social welfare is needed, then wealthy individuals and businesses will be able to get even more tax cuts, and the size of Government can be cut back as well. In short the economy will run things if Government let's it. The Right thinks that big business is better at making a profit and running things than Government, so if there are few regulations of business activities then big business can get on with the job of what it does best and then there will be more jobs in factories and shops and service industries (waiters, cooks, cleaners) as people with money will spend it, which will in turn create more jobs.

This is called "trickle down economics." If the wealthy business people are looked after, then it will gradually benefit the poorest as a result of the increasing wealth of the richest who will spend their money and this will trickle down. This can be seen as poor people waiting for the scraps from the rich person's table, but that is a Left-wing view. Trickle down economics is a pretty tough way to go about things. In the process of getting on with the job of big profit-making business, some workers will be sacked when a machine is built to do their job, or an overseas worker is imported from China to do the job at half the wages, or the executives of the company want to pay themselves millions of dollars a year in bonuses. Yes, workers will be injured and sacked and have their lives ruined, but you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet, and it will benefit everyone in the long run as the money trickles down.

Page | 17

The people serve the State in Right-wing politics and the State serves big business. And big business is ruled by "the free market." The "market" is the world economic system. For the Right, the market is in the best position to decide what is a good practice and not Government policy, or regulation or the people through their elected representatives. If big business is making a profit, then it must be a good practice. But as was seen with the ongoing Global Financial Crisis, big business like banks and stockbrokers, get up to all sorts of tricks and dishonesty like turning a debt into an asset and borrowing money on the debt like they did with the sub-prime housing crash in the USA. When the amount of profit which is made each financial year is the sole motive, time and time again we see companies being run into the ground and workers sacked to keep the profits high. Maintenance work on infrastructure to keep the enterprise running eats into the profits, so it is not a priority. Then the trains break down because the system has not been maintained, or the power lines spark together and cause fires which kill people and destroy thousands of homes. The private companies which now own and operate the public transport network and the power lines, then ask the Government for hundreds of millions of tax payers money to prop-up the crumbling infrastructure, with the threat that they will walk away from the public services like transport and power because they are not profitable enough. The insanity of this was demonstrated when ticket sellers and railway station staff were sacked in Victoria and replaced by a ticket machine with a security guard standing next to it all night so it did not get vandalised; this is a Right-wing idea in action. Fewer jobs for people, but more profits from big business. And when the big business goes bad, the Government bails them out because they are too big to fail and vital social service are tied up in the businesses. When over a billion dollars was spent on a new electronic ticketing system for public transport that does not work in Victoria; this is a Right-wing idea in action even though it was a Left-wing Government who did this. Rather than jobs for people selling tickets for the public transport system, private companies are given bucket-loads of money for the sake of economic progress; this is a Right-wing idea. Rather than jobs for people staffing the public transport system and providing a service, those people are sacked and police are deployed with guns and other weapons to police the transport system which is unsafe because no-one is staffing the stations. These are Right-wing ideas in action. The Right-wing State provides the conditions and laws for employment and property ownership, and then the people are free to take care of themselves in the capitalist free market system, so in times of trouble, the people are obligated to help the State; not the other way around. The Right is not the friend of the imprisoned person or the working-class person. The Right of politics is harder on law-and-order issues than the Left. Most of the vocal members of the law-and-order-lobby are politically of the Right, but if they are not Right-wing, then there is a personal issue which is a driving force for their law-and-order stance. More police powers and longer prison sentences are all worse under a Right-wing Government that a Left-wing Government. The Right will spend $80,000 a year to keep a person in prison rather than spend $8,000 on drug rehab or mental health services, because the ideology of the Right says if people have a problem they should get a job and pay for these services and take care of themselves. And let's not forget there are private prison operators who make a profit out of locking people up. Are you starting to get the picture and where you fit into this political landscape? The "Left" in politics is also know as a "progressive" political outlook. The term "progressive" is used to describe someone who favours social innovation and social reform. The Left can also be referred to as "socialism", but the political and social reality, and Page | 18

the hold that capitalism and the free market has on most people's thinking means that socialism is effectively impossible, but it is important to know what the term means. Socialism is a political and economic theory which seeks to organise society so that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned and or regulated by the community as a whole. The term "the means of production, distribution, and exchange" means the trade and commerce (the making of consumable items), business, banking and finance. And these things should all be controlled by the people as a whole. Remember that the Right-wing thinks that there should be the very least amount of control and regulation over business, banking and finance by the people through their representatives in Government. The Right thinks private individuals and companies should be given a free hand to do what it takes to make profits. The Right works from a "top down" or "trickle down" approach which looks after the wealthy so they will look after the working-class with jobs and buying their labour through services they use. The Left, in theory, should do the opposite of this. If working-class people are well paid for their work, if they of good health and with leisure time on their hands, and not burdened by high prices for the basic necessities of life, then they will spend their money and stimulate the economy, and big and medium size business will do well catering for them as the working-class are the largest group in society. The thinking of the Left goes like this:

The State serves the people by regulating the economy and big businesses so that the larger mass of people and their interests in having a good life, are not put ahead of the personal wealth of a few mega-rich people and companies. If the State serves the people, then the people will be willing to help the State in times of trouble. The mass of working-class people in society will be catered for by the dominant social system, so there needs to be laws and policies which protect the human, social and economic rights and significant interests of minority groups. This thinking is also called pluralism, and it is also referred to as majority rule while respecting minority rights.

The term "pluralism" is used to describe a political and social system of power-sharing among a number of political parties and the existence or tolerance of a diversity of ethnic groups or differing cultures and views within a society. Of the Right-wing, I said they were not the friend of the imprisoned person or the workingclass person. The Left-wing is not necessarily a friend, but at least we are not the enemy to the same degree as we are to the Right. The Left of politics should not be as hard on law-andorder issues as the Right of politics is, but there is not that much difference these days. On criminal justice issues the Left believes individual rights and the natural differences between people and their circumstances should be considered and taken into account by judges hearing a matter. The Right-wing favours mandatory sentencing. The people who are involved in social justice and human rights work which is concerned with imprisoned people, not that there is very many of them in Australia, are mostly politically of the Left, and if they are not Left-wing, then it is their personal motivation for the position they take. But what is real difference between the Right and the Left in Australia? This question will be answered in the next Chapter.

Page | 19

Chapter 8 - The difference between Right and Left in Australia


What is the difference between the Right and Left in Australia? Answering this question is going to be the shortest Chapter in the book. The answer to this question is: Not very much at all. In the 2007 election campaign, Kevin Rudd, the Left-wing Labor leader, did not offer 'different' leadership from the conservative leader John Howard. Kevin Rudd made it very clear that he only offered "new" leadership, "younger" leadership, but basically it was the same leadership. In early 2012, during leadership turmoil in the Labor Party, Julia Gillard, a supposedly progressive Prime Minister, said she drew on John Howard's example of psychological toughness to get her through the tough times. John Howard is a Right-wing conservative and his political model has become the measure in Australia. Politics in Australia is mostly a politics of the "centre" where the major parties try to appeal to as many voters as possible by sitting either side of the political fence. The best way to illustrate this is with a diagram.
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

The difference between the major political parties in Australia is very small, it is the difference between the Centre Left and the Centre Right. Within each party there are small and sometimes large groups called factions. The supposedly Left-wing Labor party in Australia is dominated by a faction called the NSW Right. In Australia, the progressive Greens are the only political party which offer a real political alternative to the centre version of popular politics which we have today.

Page | 20

Chapter 9 - Political issues in Australia


My motivation for writing this book is found in:

a desire to empower people; the lack of political awareness and analysis by my fellow prisoners; and the troubling fact that many prisoners can be heard talking far Right- wing political rhetoric about kicking-in the head of the Other.

I hear my fellow prisoners talking about refugees and asylum seekers who arrive by boat without valid travel documents, they say: "People who arrive here illegally should be loaded straight on a plane and taken back to where they came from, and thrown off the plane at the other end." And worse things are said, I have heard men say that refugees and asylum seekers who are trying to come to Australia: "Should be machine-gunned to death by the navy and have their boats burnt at sea, because that would stop them coming!" What is this about? Prisoners who speak-out against refugees and asylum seekers who arrive by boat without visas, seem to be saying that the administrative provisions of the Immigration Law in relation to the need for valid travel documents must be respected and enforced without mercy and even with a murderous level of force. If men, women and children don't have valid documents then they should be given short-shrift and dumped back where they came from, or summarily killed by the border protection police. This is an extraordinary extreme Rightwing position. Even if people don't really mean this, why are they saying it? Prisoner who talk of deporting and dumping people or killing them, don't, however, talk in the same terms of hard-arsed law enforcement when it comes to the crimes they commit. I have never heard prisoners talking about the need for people like them who commit actual crimes to be forcibly transported to another country and dumped there, or shot and killed on the spot by the local police if they are suspected of committing a crime. It needs to be appreciated that entering Australia without valid travel documents is not a "crime" at Australian law. At international humanitarian law every person has the right to leave their country and seek asylum in another country if they are being persecuted, and they can do this by arriving on a Qantas 747 with or without a passport or by a leaky boat with no passport. But of course the political discourse on this issue is dominated by John Howard who said: "This is our country, and we decide who comes here, and under what circumstances they come." Read between the lines, what is really being said here by a conservative politician? What thinking and what political ideas are being appealed to about who these people are? An aside: John Howard left politics in 2007, but his conservative and reactionary views against refugees and asylum seekers who arrive by boat without visas, remains a powerful political force in Australia and Left-wing Governments have tried to outdo John Howard hard-arsed policies ever since. They have tried so hard that the High Court of Australia has found the hard-arsed laws they have tried to make to be constitutionally invalid. This issue is about "Otherness", they are not like "us", so they can have their heads kicked-in to score a few political points. Judged by international standards, Australia has a very low intake of refugees and asylum seekers. Many more people arrive by plane with travel documents and overstay their visas and become "illegal" than have ever arrived by boat. But of course, most of these "illegals" are white or English speaking people. There are over 100,000 foreign students in Australia Page | 21

every year, and there are hundreds of thousands of tourists, and tens of thousands of people on working visas, but no-one notices them. But a few thousand desperate people seeking shelter, help and respite from persecution who arrive by boat are presented and perceived in the political and social consciousness of this country as a crisis which threatens the nation. This is a political issue and these people have had their lives turned into a political football to be kicked back and forth to score a few points. This is a shitty way to treat people. Issues of crime, punishment and the criminal justice system is also a political football which is kicked back and forth to score a few points - and our heads are the football. The status of the prisoner is not that different from the refugees and asylum seekers who arrive by boat without visas. If fact the prisoner is worse off than the refugees and asylum seekers as there are social movements in Australia which seek to advocate for their rights. When refugees and asylum seekers are treated "like prisoners" it is seen as an outrage that human being can be treated in such a way. If a single prison van transports refugees and asylum seekers in one compartment and prisoners in another compartment, the treatment of one group is an human rights violation, and that other group get the human rights abuse they deserve. I don't need to tell you which group prisoners belong to, do I? Australia can very easily absorb the small number of refugees and asylum seekers who seek to come to this country. And their applications for asylum can be processed in the community like most other developed countries do. Locking-up traumatised people who have risked their lives to escape terrible circumstances in mandatory detention for years is an unjust and unnecessary act of bastardization which panders to racist and bigoted elements in Australian society. Fear of the Other, fear of the "yellow peril" as Asian people were called 40 years ago, fear of the so called "rag-head" and "sand- nigger" terrorist today, is the politics of fearing the Other. (The events of September 11 demonstrated that terrorists arrive in business class with valid travel documents, not by leaky boat). Refugees and asylum seekers are an Other, they are different from us, they represent a threat to the "us" of the dominant culture and the only way to deal with them, for us to be safe, is to put them in prison camps. Putting people is prison camps can never be the right answer to any problem. The reality is that over 95% of the people who do arrive without valid travel documents by boat are found to be genuine refugees and resettled here or in New Zealand or some other country. So only a very small number of people who arrive by boat, that is a few hundred at most, are considered not to be genuine refugees. All of the effort, the billions of dollars, and all of the time that is taken up in a national debate about a few hundred people every year is ridiculous and completely out of touch with the reality of the situation. But it does score political points, and there are points in kicking the heads of people who arrive by boat was started by the conservative politician John Howard - the man with a persona, political and social frame of reference which was founded in the First World War (1914-1918). In Chapter 6, I wrote about Frantz Fanon and the time his philosophy professor said to him that 'Whenever you hear anyone abuse the Jews, pay attention, because he is talking about you' (Fannon 1967 p. 122). The same applies here. When a person is talking about refugees and asylum seekers, and how they should be sent back to where they come from and dumped out of the plane, or they should be shot and killed, or they should be locked-up in prison camps for years and years, these people are also talking about you. Because you are an Other just like the refugee and asylum seeker is an Other, your Otherness comes from your being in prison for committing a crime. The refugee and asylum seeker is the differentiated Other, just like prisoners are. If the refugee and asylum seeker is thought to be so very different in some way, or because they have arrived without travel documents, then they can be abused. Today it's the "the Jews", or Page | 22

"the blacks", or "the rag-heads", or "sand-niggers", or any Others, but tomorrow the same reasoning can be used against you the prisoner because you are also the Other. This is why I have called this book a "self-defence manual", because when a rising tide of racism, bigotry and fascism infects public and political life, it is not long before people are having their heads kicked off their shoulders by Government policy and their various police and law enforcement agencies. And make no mistake, your head is in their sights. So, it is in your own self- interest not to buy into the Right-wing political ideology and rhetoric about refugees and asylum seekers. The short history of Australia as a modern nation State, which is only 220 odd years old, is one of immigration. The first poor white people arrived here by boat as the outcasts of their society. And after that, wave after wave of people from other countries and ethnic groups came here, but the country has never been swamped, and it will never be swamped. After an initial social resistance towards the newcomers, the Others who seemed so different at first, who it was said would never integrate, came to be part of the mainstream social fabric. People who leave their extended families, their culture, their language, their national history and everything they have ever known to move to a totally foreign country are highly motivated people who want to make a better life for themselves. If these people arrive after risking their lives and the lives of their families, then they are even more highly motivated to escape the circumstances which are making their lives miserable. And on arriving in a safe haven they will be grateful for being rescued and they will be motivated to build a better life for themselves and will contribute to the life of the wider community and economy. These people are an asset to this country and the more of them we give a fair go to, the richer all of our lives will be. At first, these people are found working the 11 at night to 7 in the morning shift in the Qick-E-Mart. They are found working all the crappy jobs with long hours and low pay. But within a generation they find social mobility and before long they are an integrated part of society and the prejudices against them when they first came here are shown to be founded in an irrational fear. I have experienced this in my own life in relation to the Vietnamese people. But still the politicization of the issue continues because of the Rightwing politics of Self and Other, us and them can be used to manipulate peoples feelings.

Page | 23

Chapter 10 - The role of the Church and religion in politics


When people talk about "the Church" they are talking about the wider institution of the Church and the position which it takes on social issues rather than matters of religion as such. For example, some individual parishes run programs for homeless people, drug users, alcoholics and so on, but others do not run such programs. The leaders of these parishes may come out and support safe injecting rooms for drug users as a public health and social justice issue. When they do these activities they are acting in the wider social justice role of "the Church." The role of the Church in a secular (that is a non religious) society is to be separate from Government and to keep a watching brief on the Government and the impact of its policies on what should be a just and fair society for all. Australia is a secular society because elected politicians run the country rather than religious leaders. A theocratic society on the other hand is one where religious leaders run the Government or have a strong influence over Government, like they do in Iran and they did in Afghanistan under the Talaban. (As an aside: The influence of religious leaders over American politics, especially on Right-wing, conservative and reactionary politics, is much more significant than in Australia where it is very unusual for politicians to talk about their religious faith). The role of the Church in a secular society is not to join with Government or to be silent of Governmental wrong doing. But of course the Church, or elements of it, can be Right-wing or Left-wing. In the past, conservative Right-wing Governments which turned into totalitarian dictatorships, like those in Nazi Germany, went about their business of genocide with little criticism from the Protestant or Catholic Church. This silence at the time of the crimes of Nazi Germany is a historical fact, which the Catholic Church is still embarrassed about. But it is not just the Catholics who did not speak up. A German Protestant minister of religion named Martin Niemoller, famously said: When Hitler attacked the Jews I was not a Jew, therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialist, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then, Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church - and then there was nobody left to be concerned. The loudest voice in the public discourse in Australia is the Right-wing convicted racist, and most widely read columnist in the country, Andrew Bolt. A tactic of the Right-wing is not to allow space in the public discourse to talk about issue of concern. The public discourse is the way in which political issues are spoken about in public. As an example of not allowing space in the public discourse through the use of ridicule, Andrew Bolt writes in a column headed 'Labor's God Squad', that if we Mix conservative politics with religion and we're told the sky's falling in. But when the church spruiks for the Left, its progress (Bolt 2005 p.23). Convicted racist Andrew Bolt is using ridicule here, because we all know the sky can't fall in. Ridicule is an empty argument. He is making fun of people in the Church and the Left when they become involved with progressive causes. Andrew Bolt is also saying that it is a problem if the Church becomes involved in criticising conservative Right-wing Government. There is a good historical reason for being concerned about this type of discourse, but of course Andrew Bolt is not interested in history. Page | 24

To say a person is afraid the sky is falling in, is to make a reference to the cowardly cartoon character "Chicken Little." But who is Chicken Little and why does he think the sky is falling in? The character Chicken Little had its origins in the United Kingdom in the 18th century, where the expression Chicken Licking meant that a person was lacking in courage. Young chickens are known to be extremely timid, and they return to the hen or coop at the slightest alarm. The phrases "chicken-hearted" and "chicken-livered" also came into usage and have currency with children as a schoolyard taunt to this day. The modern currency of the chicken who is afraid the sky is falling in at the sight of the first cloud, was coined on 17 December 1933, when the Right- wing ratbag Walt Disney released a cartoon directed by Clyde Geronimi, as part of Disney's support for Nazi Germany and his fascism ain't so bad propaganda campaign. The character Chicken Little was born and has become synonymous with cowardliness. In the cartoon, Chicken Little would peer out from the coop with part of its still wet shell on its head, which incidentally looks like a yarmulka, the cap worn by Jews, and on seeing a cloud cries out: "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" and darts back into its coop to hide from the world. The December 1933 cartoon needs to be put in context. Adolf Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933. On 23 March 1933 the Enabling Act established a dictatorship which meant the Nazi Government could make laws without the Parliament. On 10 May 1933 the first and most public of the book burnings were held in Berlin. On 14 July 1933 the Nazi Party was the only legal political party in Germany. So by December 1933 it was very clear what type of regime Hitler and the Nazi Party were going to bring to Germany, and then the world - a Right-wing fascist dictatorship. The Chicken Little character was drawn by Walt Disney from the use of the expression by Right-wing politicians in Britain, who were at the time defending Hitler and the Nazis and making fun of people who were warning of the dangers of Nazism. The use of the term was very clearly meant to suggest that those who were foretelling of the horror of the murderous Nazi regime in Germany, were Chicken Little type cowards who lacked moral resolve to do what needed to be done to restore economic prosperity to Germany. In the years after 1933, those who were explicitly warning of the Jewish holocaust were derisively referred to by Right-wing politicians and commentators as "Chicken Little's" who were claiming that "the sky is falling in." The insult that another's concerns about a situation amount to "the sky is falling in" is a personal attack suggesting the person making the claim is cowardly; it is a tactic designed to undermine the issues raised as being so ill- founded that it is not worth discussion. The historical fact of the coinage of this phrase in 1933 to apologise for the Nazis, needs to be kept in mind when a commentator today uses the phrase to suggest that things ain't so bad after all, in defence of Right-wing social and economic policies against criticism from the Church and progressive politicians. The Right-wing racist nonsense of Andrew Bolt's position is found in his own words, words that were coined, used, and given currency, by people who were apologists and deniers of Nazi mass murder.

Page | 25

Chapter 11 - Blaming others and not the system


When a person blames the Others and not the system, they are over personalising their problems and not politicizing them, and when people do this, they are letting the system off the hook. A good example of blaming others is found in the anti-Semite, the person who talks about "the Jews" and claims that "the Jews" run the world and are responsible for all of the problems in the world. For a start, there is no such things as "the" Jews. An old saying goes, if you have 2 Jews in a room you will have 3 different opinions. Jewish culture is centred on learning, interpretation of sacred texts like the Bible and their relevance in the live's people lead. Like Islam, Judaism has no central person or institution which decides on issues associated with the interpretation of the sacred texts and the lives people live. There is no Pope in Judaism, there is no organized Church like the Catholic Church. So to talk of "the" Jews is nonsense. As I have said a few times now, when the anti-Semite is talking about "the Jews" you should pay attention because he or she is talking about you. Just like when the racist is talking about a particular race he or she does not like; he or she is talking about you. The anti-Semite and the racist has an "us and them" world view, and they want to join with some all powerful "us" against the Other. Working-class people feel as if they are the Other in a culture which measures the personal value of people by their accumulation of financial wealth and the status symbols of that wealth. Being the Other is not a good feeling, and so powerful is the ideology of Otherness, that it is used as a self-defence strategy. What happens is that people who have some attribute of difference, like being a prisoner, which singles them out as being a problem for society, defend themselves by turning that back on some other minority like the Jews, the blacks, the Asians, the rag-heads and so on. Blaming the Other and putting people down to raise oneself up, is a strategy which the Right of politics does not discourage. It does not because some attribute of difference can always be identified and used as an excuse for oppressing people. A classic example of this is the lowly status of sex offenders in the community and in prison. The public discourse accepts that sex offenders are liable to be the victims of assault and worse in prison. Many people on the inside and the outside say that a sex offender gets what is coming to him if he is bashed in prison, and it is mainly a "him". This does not prevent the person who bashed or killed the sex offender being charged, convicted and sentenced for their crime. The contradiction is obvious: "Thanks for doing that to the sex offender, but now there is the issue of the serious crime you have committed." The working- class people and prisoners are co-opted by the Right-wing political discourses of Otherness, and in effect, they are willing to put on the blue or black uniform and do the bidding of the powers that be, as long as they are not on the receiving end. But when the prisoner does the bidding of the powers that be, they do so against a person who is singled out as the Other. We saw how this worked against sex offenders in Chapter 6 and it is worth repeating. You don't support child sex offenders, do you? No. So you would agree that they should be kept in prison after their sentence ends because we think they are a danger to children? Page | 26

Yes. Good. Now, lets look at people who have committed violent offences and serious drug offences, perhaps they should be kept in prison as well if we think they are a danger to society. And before you know it, the preventative detention laws include you. This situation comes about because of a lack of a political analysis and because there is also no space allowed for alternatives in this politic discourse. In their self-interested ignorance, prisoners and workingclass people are sucked into the role of assisting in the system which is oppressing them. Every time one prisoner bashes or kills another, it is a victory for the Right-wing system, and it supports a political ideology that would like to see all of us killed. In reality the person who is a vocal anti-Semite, racist, sexist, or bigot, is most often the Other of the dominant society, and they are trying to get themselves out of that position by joining with the same type of unjust political ideology that made them the Other. The antiSemite, racist, sexist or the bigot is usually a marginalised person who is trying step on and over Others to advance themselves socially, rather than fighting against the idea of stepping on Others. This is politics in action. Some of the thinking goes like this: "If I only had more money. If only those Others can be put down, then things would be better for me, and I'm just the person for the job." In this way, the victim of an oppressive and unfair social system looks to the way their oppressors operate for a solution. Rather than oppose the unjust system, they go for more of the same. The anti-Semite and the racist thinks: "Perhaps if the Jew or the rag-head is seen as the cause of what is wrong with society, then I will be treated better, perhaps I will be given a gun, the baton, instruments of restrain, the chemical and eltro-shock weapons, and then I will be the person exercising power, and not having it exercised over me." The squads of prisoners who made up the Special Komando in the Nazi concentration camps, who fed the dead bodies of their fellows into the ovens, were themselves occasionally killed and replaced by a new squad. Being a member of the new squad was a short lived promotion, but it is one that the racist, the bigot, and the anti-Semite aims at achieving. And make no mistake, you are the one that will be fed into the oven, be that literally or via some repressive laws that see you kept in prison for ever.

Page | 27

Chapter 12 - Voting in State and Federal elections


It is easy to feel that your vote does not count for much, so why bother? A lot of prisoners probably think this, so those votes will add up and this means it does matter if you vote or not. But who can vote? If you are serving a sentence of less than 3 years in any State or Territory you can vote in Federal Elections. In Tasmania, if you are serving a sentence of less than 3 years you can vote in State Elections. In Victoria, if you are serving a sentence of less than 5 years you can vote in State Elections. In New South Wales, if you are serving a sentence of less than 12 months you can vote in State and Local Government Elections. In the Australian Capital Territory you can vote in the ACT Legislative Assembly Elections regardless of the length of your sentence. If you are in prison outside the ACT, but are on the electoral role in the ACT, you can vote by postal vote. Mobile polling facilities are provided in all detention and prison facilities in the ACT. In Queensland, you cannot vote in any State or Local Government Elections while in prison. In the Northen Territory, if you are serving a sentence of less than 3 years you can vote in NT Legislative Assembly and Local Government Elections. In Western Australia, if you are serving a sentence of less than 12 months you can vote in State Elections. In South Australia, you can vote in State and Local Government Elections regardless of the length of your sentence. If you want to vote, you need to be enrolled to vote. "Enrolled" means your name and address are recorded on the Electoral Roll. If you are not enrolled, you can enrol while you are in prison if you are not doing too long and are allowed to vote, but you will be enrolled in the electorate were you where last living. In most States, prisoners who are eligible to vote, do so by a postal vote, but sometimes and in some places, like the ACT, a Polling Station is set up in the prison. If you are doing too long to vote now, you can re-enroll to vote when you get out.

Page | 28

Chapter 13 - Political prisoner's in Australia


The standard definition of a 'political prisoner' is someone who is imprisoned as a direct result of their political activities, and because their views are counter to the dominant political power. On this standard narrow reading, there are few, if any, political prisoners in Australia or anywhere else for that matter. In Australia, politically motivated protesters opposing governmental policy who battle the police in the street, are imprisoned through the framework of the criminal and other laws they allegedly break. Being imprisoned for an offence against the law does not mean that a person cannot be a political prisoner. To make a judgment about the political nature of a person's imprisonment, the facts of the persons situation, and their motivations for action need to be examined. Obviously, the narrow definition breaks down under its own unthought through assumptions. This fact however, does not seem to be understood by the Left in Australia. In the US, the native American leader, Lennard Peltier, who is imprisoned for the murder of an FBI Agent, is widely understood to be a political prisoner. So too is Mumia Abu-Jamal, another convicted criminal, and when Angela Y. Davis visits Australia people from the Left flock to hear her speak. The political prisoner status of Angela Davis comes from a few months on remand for a criminal conspiracy; she was acquitted. Furthermore, what is recognised in the US is that the way one conducts oneself in prison, and on release from prison, also contributes to a broader idea of what it is to be a political prisoner, rather than a focus on the crime one was imprisoned for in the first instance. It is this broader conception of political prisoner which I have suggested the Left in Australia needs to come to terms with (Minogue 2008a & Minogue 2008-2009). And prisoners themselves need to come to terms with this issue, and take on the role of being a political prisoner. The academic and founding member of Critical Resistance, Dylan Rodrguez, quoting from an interview with imprisoned Black Panther, Marshall Eddie Conway, suggests a conception of a political prisoner that I have adopted, and which I will argue for here, and that is a person who stands up to injustices, a person who for whatever reason takes the position that this or that is wrong, whether they do it based on ideology or they do it based on what they think is morally right . . . people become political prisoners, become conscious and become aware and act and behave based on that awareness after they have been incarcerated for criminal activity ... (Rodriguez 2006 p.6). But who are prisoners? Over 50% of the 4,000 prisoners in Victoria are serving less than two years for non-violent property offences; 14% are imprisoned for offences against good order and Govt/security/ justice procedures offences, this last category of prisoner is the fastest growing group increasing by 4% since 2002 (Statistical Profile 2007 pp.26-27). Over 90% of Victorian prisoners have not completed primary or secondary schooling, and have no technical, trade, tertiary or other post secondary qualifications, and more than 60% were unemployed when imprisoned (Statistical Profile 2007 pp.37-38). Over 70% suffer from the public health problem that is drug addiction and 9% commit acts of self-mutilation or attempt suicide in prison (Kirby 2000 p. 11). It has been reported in Queensland and NSW, up to 50% of prisoners suffer from a diagnosable mental illness, and most are not treated (Hockings 2000). Page | 29

Despite their origins in unpolitically motivated criminal activity, there are men and women in Australia's prisons, mostly those serving long sentences, who conduct themselves in a political way, and their imprisonment becomes politicised. They become political prisoners. The political branches of Government know this, and respond in turn by overseeing the management of those on the various "Political Lists" which they create as administrative classification of a small group of prisoners. In Western Australia prisoners on the "Political List" are classified as 'Special Profile Offenders' by the Department of Corrective Services and have special provisions applied to the management of their case. In Victoria a special unit called the Major Offenders Unit ("MOU") has been established by Corrections Victoria to respond to the concerns of the political branches of Government about a small group of prisoners. The MOU manages all aspects of the imprisonment, parole, and community corrections involvement of 'prisoners who represent a danger to the State'; down to the very small issues like their 'access to: programs, educational courses, cell property, computers, employment, including community work sites and interactive activities' (Sentence Management Manual 2007, s.4.3, pp. 10,11). The political reality is that those prisoners who represent a danger to the State are those who have a 'High Public Profile' and who 'attract significant and ongoing media attention' (Sentence Management Manual 2007, s.4.3, p. 10). 'High Public Profile' is an MOU classification. An important role of the MOU is to provide 'Ministerial Briefings and possible Parliamentary Questions pertaining to these offenders' during or after their time in prison (Sentence Management Manual 2007, s.4.3, p. 13). The MOU monitors prisoners on its list when they are in prison, released on parole and when they have finished their parole despite Corrections Victoria (the prison) not having any lawful jurisdiction once a prisoner is released, the MOU retains a watching brief for the political branches of government. Prisoners live in the face of conditions where the system has total control and surveillance over them. These unequal power relations that cannot not be imagined by a person who is not confronted with life threatening levels of force every moment of one's existence, like that which can come from being attacked with a chemical weapon by a Prison Officer. These conditions of total control and surveillance are being extended out into the community after a prisoner is release and even after they have finished parole. To the political prisoner, this imposition of power calls by its very nature for a judgment to be made about the rightness or wrongness of its application in particular instances, and then for a resistance of what is wrong. Long term political prisoners in Australia resist by working directly with their fellows; by advocating for those who can't do it for themselves, and by educating and helping others develop the tools to help themselves deal with the unjust social and legal system that is mounted against them. This book is an example of the work of a political prisoner. Of course, politics does not end in the prison when Prison Officers conduct surveillance and exercise control of people on the MOU Political List after their release. Conditions of working on the outside are also a political matter, so let's look at what the story is with Unions.

Page | 30

Chapter 14 - What is the story with Unions


To understand what the story is with Unions, you need to know a little bit about the history of Unions in Australia. An 8-hour working day and a 40-hour working week, came about because of Unions flighting for worker's rights. Before the 8-hour working day, how long the worker was required to stay at work depended on the boss, and this could change from day to day. And just because you had to stay for 10 hours to get the particular job done, did not mean you received any more money. In the 1960s and 1970s Unions fought for equal pay for women and Indigenous people. Safety at work, workers compensation for injuries at work, and better working conditions, were all fought for, and won by Unions. Social issues have also been tackled by Unions, such as better public housing, free education and health care, the limiting of police powers, and so on. Environmental issues were also fought by Unions 20 years before they became as popular as they are today. Unions imposed so called 'green bans' when they refused to do work that damaged the environment and the community. Unions were against national service and people being forced to serve in the armed forces to fight in World War One, and they pressured the conservative Right-wing Government of the day to pull out of the Vietnam war. The first act of the newly elected Left-wing Government of Gough Whitlam in 1972, was to order the Australian troops out of Vietnam. But the Labor Government in 1972 of Gough Whitlam was much more Left-wing than any Labor Government since then. In the past it is fair to say the majority of the Australian Union movement projected and promoted a progressive direction for Australian society, by campaigning for an egalitarian program. "Egalitarianism" is a social, political, and moral principle, which says that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities. In its heyday, the Australian Union movement offered organisations which encouraged politically active members to become involved in shaping the direction of Australian society, while helping them to protect their economic interests. The Union movement also encouraged members to forge links of solidarity between workplaces, other Unions and communities. There was also a democratic spirit which involved members in the selection of shop stewards and officials, which made a connection with the Union member and allowed him or her to feel they had a stake in the democratic processes of their Union. But since the late 1970s, and with the rise of Right-wing politics, cheap imports from Asia, anti-Union activities, anti-union laws by Government, and less people working in the manufacturing sector of the economy belonging to Unions; it is fair to say the power and achievements of Unions have decreased. In the early 1980s, Union membership was around 60%, now it is as low as 17%. This decline happened in part because large manufacturing companies took their business to other countries, where workers were paid much less, and had much worse working conditions. With the loss of manufacturing jobs also went Union members. Another problem is the Union movement in Australian has very close ties with the Australian Labor Party, the ALP, which has influence over the Unions. This may sound like a good thing, but you will recall that politics in Australia is a "centre" version that appeals to the socio-economic middle. Most people who need the support of a Union are not in the socio-

Page | 31

economic middle of Australian workers, but those in the poor working-class on the margin of society. But Unions still do have a useful role that can benefit you. Being a Union member is still preferable to not being a member. Being a member helps you and your work mates to collectively defend your wages and conditions on the shopfloor or work site, while experiencing the power solidarity brings to an individual. Basically, a Union is an association of people working in a particular place, or more likely in a particular industry. At Australian law, you can't form your own Union without the permission of the Unions which cover the sector or the Australian Trade Union Council (ACTU), or the State and Federal Government. If you did try to form your own Union, this would be an illegal association and the full force of the law would be brought down on you. This is of course, a politically loaded situation. This of how the prison authorises would react if prisoners formed a Union! To belong to a Union, you have to pay membership fees which are also called "dues" are taken from your wages each week, or paid by cheque or money order 4 times a year. Unions provide services to their members like:

Superannuation schemes; Credit co-operative schemes Legal advice; Insurance brokerage; Access to cut rate holiday flats owned by the Union; and Discount cards for some businesses.

Every 3 to 5 years there is a bargaining period. Most Unions have officials called organisers who provide guidance and advice during the bargaining period when your wages and conditions are being reviewed. But some Unions have outsourced the service of organisers, and you can find yourself talking to someone in a call centre who is reading from a script if you want some information or advice. Unions, like everything else, will require you to put some work in to get the most out for yourself. And you put the work in by speaking-up, by standing- up, by making complaints, and by asking questions.

Page | 32

Chapter 15 - What is the story with jailhouse lawyers?


A "jailhouse lawyer" is an imprisoned person who uses the processes of the law to actively defend themselves and others. The key phrases here are "actively" and "others". Most people in prison simply give-up and buckle-under the overwhelming physical power which is brought to bear on them, and against them. The reality is however, the legal and social justice system in a liberal democracy requires individual people to play an active part in the structures and mechanisms of social life - that is to play a part in politics. I have the knowledge, skills and resources to help my fellow prisoners with their many legal and personal problems. I have learnt these skills along the way by making the effort to learn. But what have the problems of other prisoners in here got to do with me? Are there not the systems of law and justice, Legal Aid services, statutory accountability mechanisms, common law rights, human rights, and various Non Government Organisations ("NGOs") overseeing the observance of the rule of law and the principle of equality before the law? Yes there are, but how effective and accessible are these things for the average prisoner? And what about human rights? Do they apply to prisoners in Australia? No they don't and I have run cases in the Federal Court, the High Court and in the UN to prove it (see: Minogue 2002; Minogue v HREOC [1998]; Minogue v HREOC (1999); Minogue v Williams (2000); Minogue v Australia 2004). Will the Courts oversee and intervene in what is going on in prisons? No not really, they will pretty much let the prison do what it likes (Edney 2000). The reality is Legal Aid services are underfunded to the point they cannot properly fulfil their role, so they will not be of much help. Agencies like the Ombudsman operate more like public relations agency for the prison, rather than properly dealing with complaints. Prisoners need to stand-up for themselves and help themselves and their fellows rather than thinking that help will come from the outside without having to battle for it. You will only get help, if you first help yourself by standing-up for yourself, by educating yourself. The law and its administration is not supposed to be a one-sided contest against people. Individual people are entitled, as a matter of law and common fairness, to a defence, and to be treated in a lawful and fair manner. If this was not the case then there would be arbitrary arrest and imprisonment and your neighbour could make an allegation against you and that would be enough to seal your fate. In a Right-wing totalitarian Police State, like Nazi Germany, or in a Left-wing totalitarian Police State like the Soviet Union under Stalin, this is what happened - if an allegation was made that you were an enemy of the State, you were taken away and never heard of again. Jailhouse lawyers; men and woman who have the literacy skills, and the knowledge of the law and its practice and procedures, use this knowledge to help their fellows in a meaningful way; to actively participate in the process as they are required to do by the law and social system that should be operating here in this country. Jailhouse lawyers agitate issues for the general benefit of the prison population. This agitation can by through Court cases against the prison, or human rights test cases which embarrass the country into saying that prisoners really don't have any human rights (Minogue v HREOC [1998]; Minogue v HREOC (1999); Minogue v Williams (2000); Minogue v Australia 2004). Agitation by jailhouse lawyer can be via local and administrative law complaints to agencies like the Ombudsman (even thought this avenue is not very productive). People who have knowledge of the law and the skills and resources for engaging with the system, but are wrapped up in their own case and have little to no time for others, are not worthy of the jailhouse lawyer title. Page | 33

The Minogue v HREOC, Minogue v Williams and the Minogue v Australia cases were my attempts to enliven a human rights jurisdiction at Australian law, in relation to the actions of State as opposed to Federal agencies, and to protect myself and prisoners in general from human rights violations. I have never been criticised in any way by any Court for bringing a matter to Court. I have never had to pay the costs of any proceedings. Every Court matter I been involved with, including my prison litigation seeking a judicial review of decisions, have raised legitimate legal and factual disputes which I had made significant efforts to resolve beforehand. All of the cases I have brought to the Courts have received the support from the legal establishment; like Community Legal Centres, the International Commission of Jurists, and legal academics (Edney 2005). My website, www.craigminogue.org has a page which details my Human Rights test cases and Prison Litigation - these pages can be printed from the site if you have someone on the outside who will do this for you. People who are in prison should be treated lawfully and fairly. Just because a person has committed a crime does not mean that crimes can be committed against them, nor can they be treated unfairly and unlawfully, because if this were the case, then might would be right as it is in a totalitarian Police State. When a person commits a crime, they act unlawfully and unfairly against a person or the community in which they live. The criminal offender is not "taught a lesson", and he or she does not receive "poetic justice" by being made to buckleunder the enormous power of the police, the Crown, and the prison. When people are made to buckle-under, the lesson which is learnt is the might is right, not a respect for law and fairness. The jailhouse lawyer advocates for all people to be treated lawfully and fairly and by this work the lesson which is imparted is one that speaks to a system of rules and laws that should apply equally to all people, and not just a system to be used by the powerful. When I started the first law library in an Australian prison in Pentridge in 1991, a prison Governor said to me: "I don't know about this, we don't want the law to fall into the wrong hands." For him, the law was a large dusty volume that he could use to beat prisoners over the head, like the police once beat people with phone books so they don't leave any marks. For this prison Governor, the law was there to protect and empower people like him, and to be used against people like us. The law for this prison Governor was like a membership in a private club; he did not understand how the club worked, but he had a membership card that allowed him to do as he pleased. There is criticism of the work of jailhouse lawyers do for a number of reasons:

Prisoners fear the prison will retaliate against them if they complain and stand-up for themselves or for their fellows, and therefore, the best strategy is to keep their head down, fly under the radar and say "Yes Sir" to any shitty thing the prison or any particular Officer wants to do; Prison staff don't want to be accountable for their actions, and they want to do what ever they want; and Many, but not all, lawyers are lazy and don't want to do the work. The bad and lazy lawyers want to keep their privileged positions as holders of knowledge that the prisoner does not have.

The activities of the jailhouse lawyer is a problem for the status quo of fearful prisoners, Prison Officers who abuse their power, and lazy lawyers who want to have it over their clients. Lets look at an example of the fearful prisoner and the lazy lawyer, which happened as I was writing the first draft of this book. Ann, I don't know her second name, from the Geelong Page | 34

office of Legal Aid Victoria, told a client that he could not abandon an Appeal by lodging a Form, but had to go to the Court in person on the day. The man was at Marngoneet, a prison in Lara outside Geelong. He was due to be sent on escort to Port Phillip Prison just outside Melbourne, to then be transported back to Geelong on the day of the Appeal hearing, as it was at the Geelong Court house. He was due to be released the day after the Appeal was set for a hearing, so he wanted to abandon it rather than being uprooted and put through the hassle of being transferred between prisons, and his people from Geelong having to drive to Melbourne to pick him up when he was released. So the man came to me on the day he was being transferred! Yes he leaves it to the very last moment because he does not want to cause any waves; he is flying under the radar, but now that he is about to be stuffed around really badly, so he comes to me at the last moment. He tells me the story and I draft a Notice of Abandonment of Appeal and the prison staff agree to fax this to his lawyer; who told him two weeks previously there was no Form. He is then allowed to get on the phone and make a welfare call to his lawyer, as his phone account has been cut-off for his transfer. I give him a script to read on the phone to give the lawyer instructions, but I underestimated the extent to which Ann will go in telling lies so as not to have do her job. Ann claims the Court Rules say an Appeal can only be abandoned by lodging a Form within 28 days of the Appeal originally being lodged. Ann at the Legal Aid Office in Geelong is lying. Rule 3.05 of the County Court Criminal Procedure Rules 2009 states that an Appeal can be abandoned by lodging Form 3D with the Registrar of the Court, who can make an order striking out the Appeal up to the day before the hearing (Rule 3.05(2)). But if the Notice of Abandonment of Appeal is lodged on the day of the hearing, the order for striking out the Appeal must be made by a Judge (Rule 3.05(3)). But either way, the prisoner is not required to attend. By the time the man comes back to me with the latest set of lies from his lawyer, it is too late. So, he is transferred to the maximum security transit Port Phillip Prison for his last week in prison, sent back to Geelong to sit in the cells while the lying lawyer lodges the Form she should have lodged weeks ago, and she will then claim she has worked some miracle and got him out of having to go into the Court himself to abandon the Appeal. Then he is transferred back to PPP from Geelong to be released to go home to Geelong, or worse he is released from the police station and his property is stuck at PPP, and that is the next drama he will have to deal with. This man was stuffed around because he did not come to me weeks beforehand, no doubt he only had a short time to go and he did not want to make waves. He wanted to fly under the radar and all the rest of that nonsense. Well look where it got him? If he had come to me a few weeks before, the lawyer would not have been able to get away with lies. The County Court Criminal Procedure Rules could have been quoted to her in a letter of instructions, and if she would not act, she could have been sacked and the man could have lodged the Notice of Abandonment of Appeal himself by sending it in the mail - I had already drafted one in a few minutes. This example of the fearful prisoner who flies under the radar, and the lying lawyer who does not want to do any work, is a typical situation. In another example of the work I do, a man I know was saving up the small novelty items that one finds in packets of potato chips to send to his children. I had a large A3 size heavy duty envelope. So I worked with the man and I made a large address label; one side of the label was pink with the girl's name on it, with feminine toys in clip art around her name, and the other side was blue with the boy's name and boy's toys decorating it. I put the labels on upside down on the front of the envelope, and on the back I put a large colourful label saying Page | 35

"from Dad" with a large arrow saying "this way up" and another arrow pointing to the rip pull device for opening the envelope. The label and the "this way up" arrows ensured that the rip pull device was at the bottom so when the children opened it, the hundreds of silver packets of toys would cascade out of the envelope and on to the floor at their feet. When the man went to post the envelope, a particularly nasty guard said it was "not allowed". The guard said he had to put the toys in his property box or throw them away. The unit Supervisor would not overrule the bullying guard as might is right in the prison system and the first guard to say "no" rules the day. The man was distressed, but I told him not to worry as I knew I could challenge the decision that prisoner's children can't have toys. I wrote a letter of complaint under the man's name to the Ombudsman and enclosed one of the toys. I made the argument that the toys from the chips were his property, and he was allowed to send out his property. I also explained the absentee parenting issue, and he was trying to maintain contact with his children by sending the toys. I made a legal argument around the law in the Corrections Act and the Corrections Regulations in relation to dealing with prisoner property and communicating with the outside world. There are processes and procedures to be followed, and any restrictions on prisoner property and communication with the outside world must be for a reason at law, and not one made up on the day by a nasty Prison Officer. Every decision by an Officer under the Corrections Act or Regulations (Victoria), is subject to the Administrative Law because every Officer is acting as a Statutory Authority and or a Tribunal. Despite judicial, legal and private opinion to the contrary, Corrections Victoria is not a Private Club. A Statutory Authority is a body or an individual, who is entrusted by statute with functions to be performed in the public interest or for public purposes. A Tribunal, and by implication a Statutory Authority, for the purposes of Administrative Law, is a body: charged with the performance of public acts and duties by way of statutory permission. When making a decision adverse to the interests of a prisoner in relation to, as an example, not allowing a prisoner to send out their property to their children, is a decision which is made pursuant to the power given to the Officer in the Act and Regulations. And the decision not allowing the man to send the toys to his children did not take into account the things the Act said it should. I argued the decision demonstrated on its face, that there was NOT a lawful decision making process which observed the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness, and other matters. The welfare of prisoners is a primary factor to be taken into account in the management of individual cases and the prison in general. The Corrections Act gives Officers a lot of power over prisoners, and when power is given to one class of people over another, at law, there needs to be a balance between the exercise of power and the accountability mechanism, and the rights of the disadvantaged group, to prevent an abuse of power. One way to protect the people over which power has been granted is to build into the enabling statute, the principle that their welfare is to be considered as a primary function right along side, say the functions of safety, security, management and good order. The 'welfare' provisions in the in Corrections Act are found in sections: 1 (a) in relation to the 'purpose' of the Act, 8A(2)(a), 8A(3) in relation to the responsibilities of the Commissioner, 20(2) in relation to all Officers who are in charge of prisoners, 21(1) in relation to the Duties of the Governor, and 22(1), in relation to all Officers. The 'welfare of prisoners' is not a platitude, it is a clear legislative intention in relation to 'the purposes of the Act and it should be given the widest meaning. The legislative requirements of the Act in relation to welfare Page | 36

needing to be met are further enforced by the retention of all common law rights that are not lost by necessary implication of imprisonment, see s.47(2). Common law rights like the expectation of a lawful decision making process that observes the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness holds for all decisions made by Prison Officers. The word "welfare" means: 1. The health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group. 2. An action or procedure designed to promote the basic physical and material well-being of people in need. That the welfare of a prisoner be protected means in this context that their legal right to lawful decision making processes, which includes fairness, are respected. The Ombudsman contacted the prison and the man received a letter of apology from the Governor and he was allowed to send the toys out to his children. The Ombudsman formally investigated this complaint (the only one formally investigated for that year) and he found that the man should be allowed to send the toys out to his children. The Ombudsman in Victoria will very occasionally, usually once a year, formally investigate and substantiate a complaint from a prisoner. This issue was about an unreasonable administrative decision making and abuse of power which negatively impacted upon a man's expectation that he should be allowed to maintain contact with and emotionally support his children from prison. This is just one instance of the hundreds of actions I have taken as a jailhouse lawyer. It is also illustrative of how the work needs to be done from a basis in law. But most of my fellow prisoners don't ask me for help, as most of them are so disenfranchised as citizens, as members of the community or even as human beings, that they don't feel as if they can speak-up for themselves, or stand-up for themselves, without being further beaten down, so they don't think they can help themselves. What they do, is harm themselves by self- medicating and acting out in frustration. What they do is put the Other down to try and raise themselves up. And this means their situation becomes worse. The correctional system comes down hard on them for their so called inappropriate behaviour, and their disenfranchised world view is brutally reinforced in punishment and isolation cells, and when they are gassed and bashed. When those very few people come to me and ask for help with a significant matter, I can't turn them away in good conscience. I feel I have a moral responsibility to help. At the start of this Chapter, I asked "What have the problems of other prisoners in here got to do with me?" What it has got to do with me is my moral responsibility to help others when I can. Some people in here are critical of me when I act as a jailhouse lawyer; a term that I may wear with pride, but it is one which is meant by many people as a negative term. Even some of my fellow prisoners resent the shelves full of academic and law books in the cell as they represent knowledge and an aspect of civil society from which they are excluded. Some prisoners resent me as an agitator because they feel: "If we all kept our heads down they won't take anything more off us." But on the other hand, every day, prisoners and even prison staff ask me for advice about the prison, the prison system, the law, and other issues. The argument against the jailhouse lawyer by the prison is: "It's up to us to look after the welfare of the prisoners, not you!" But what if they will not properly act in accordance with their responsibilities for prisoner's welfare, through ignorance or wilfulness? What then, is a responsible person expected to do? What the prison system would like me to do is to have a selfish attitude, and let the people around me sink or swim on their own in relation to their human dignity and their rights at law being respected. Correctional managers hint that this is what they want me to do because it is what they want to do, but they know that I will ask for this direction in writing before acting on it. Corrections will not draft a document saying I am Page | 37

not to help other prisoners, or write letters for people, or support them with information and the rules and processes of the prison. They will not do this as they know I would resist such a thing and that resistance may well end up in the Supreme Court via a judicial review of their administrative action pursuant to their powers in the Corrections Act. And they do not want outside scrutiny. If considering the interests of the people around me is wrong; if feeling empathy for the difficulties that poorly educated, vulnerable, disenfranchised and marginalised people have got themselves into, and then acting to help when I have the knowledge, skills and resources to help, is wrong. If my being a jailhouse lawyer is wrong, then I have a real problem because I have taken the wrong lesson from the last 26 years of imprisonment. Or perhaps I have not taken the wrong lesson from my experience after all. But perhaps I have got it right, and the people who opposing my work are an example of a contradiction between the way they want the system to look, and the way it is in reality.

Page | 38

Chapter 16 - What is the story with men in prison who think Nazis are "a good go"?
One of my motivations for writing this book is my personal experience of a political awakening in the first few years of my imprisonment, and the low level of political awareness and knowledge amongst my fellow prisoners generally. Another reason is that there are some prisoners who express extreme Right-wing views without understanding the reality of what they are saying. Right-wing political talk sounds kick-arse and hard-cuntish, so these people, especially men in prison also think Nazis are a good go. I believe these people are putting on an outward show of hardness because they don't have a strong sense of Self. In my opinion, an appeal to Nazism is really a show of personal weakness, and the need for a hard persona to show off to other people in place where having a sense of Self relies on external signs. But leaving to one side, the philosophical issues about a sense of Self, the facts will show that Nazis are not a good go. The Nazi regime in Germany was a single political party, authoritarian and totalitarian Police State. The law was strict and there was no room for interpretation. Under such a system, sentences are fixed terms set by the political branches of Government, firstly by legislation and then as things got worse the police Minister or some other politician effectively said how long an offender will get after reading the Government sponsored newspaper account of what an arsehole the offender is. In Nazi Germany, the SS were the special police force, their job was to police personal behaviour so the people were subservient to the aims of the State and its leader. If you did not serve the aims of the State or the leader, say, you were a person convicted of a criminal offence, or a drug user, or had a mental or physical illness, or you were a gay or lesbian person, then you were an enemy of the State, and as such you would be worked to death or just killed because you were of no use to the State. So prisoners who advocate a Nazi ideology are advocating for a Police State, which will lead to their own death and for the rest of us to be killed as well - What's that about? In a politically progressive liberal democracy, the State and its agents, like the police and the prison, are supposed to serve the interests of the people, and prisoners should be considered to be members of the community, albeit temporally incapacitated because of imprisonment. In a politically progressive society, the law is favourable to individual rights and freedoms which promote individual liberty, free trade and an ongoing state of moderate reform of the law. In a progressive liberal democracy, the interpretation of a law should not be strictly literal, for example there should not be fixed sentences, as a sentence should be for the independent judiciary to decide, not the political branches of Government. A progressive liberal democracy is a pluralist system, pluralist means having many political parties and the tolerance of different ethnic groups or differing cultures and views within a society. The word 'liberal', should NOT be read in the sense of the Liberal Party of Australian politics, but the real use of the word which comes from the Latin meaning "suitable for a free man." It is obvious that no progressive liberal democracy is an ideal State, political or social system, but at least it is based on the ideals of individual liberty and freedom. A Nazi-like authoritarian and totalitarian Police State on the other hand, is based on the ideals of personal subservience to the State, a lack of freedom and liberty, and strict obedience to the law which is policed with the penalty of death hanging over your head. Ask yourself: "Where would I prefer to live?" And: "What's the story with Nazis?" Page | 39

I have used a lot of terms and words here which many people may not be familiar with, so what do the Right-wing words that I have used in this Chapter mean? Nazi means: (Historically), a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, and in a derogatory sense, a person with extreme racist or authoritarian views. Authoritarian means: Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to the authority of the: Government, police, army, prisons and so on. Totalitarian means: Of a Government that is centralized, dictatorial, and requiring complete subservience to the State. Subservient means: A person who obeys authority unquestioningly, and someone who is less important and subordinate to the person they are obeying. Subordinate means: A person who is lower in rank or position, of less or secondary importance, a person who is under the authority or control of another. Police State means: A totalitarian State in which political police secretly supervise and control all of the activities of its citizens. SS means: The Nazi special police force, SS is an abbreviation of German Schutzstaffel, meaning defence squadron, and what is being defended is the State and the subservience of the people to the State. What do the Left-wing words that I have used here mean? Liberal means: Willing to respect and accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own. A society or law which is favourable to individual rights and freedoms. In the interpretation of law, not being strictly literal but taking into account the individual circumstances. Progressive means: Favouring innovation and a continual social reform where individual rights are better promoted with each change. Democracy means: A form of Government in which the people have a voice in the exercise of power, typically through elected representatives, and respect for minority rights (the majority is looked after due to the fact it is the majority as society is naturally oriented to the majority). Liberty means: Being free from oppression or imprisonment, and the power to act as one pleases as long as it does not harm other people or the community in general. Pluralism means: A political and social system of power-sharing among a number of political parties, and the existence or tolerance of a diversity of ethnic groups or differing cultures, and views within a society.

Page | 40

Chapter 17 - The politics of pushing in line


Imagine the scene, a line of men or women waiting for medication or meals, or the canteen, or the washing machine, or any other place. Then one person pushes in at the front line. We all know this happens far too often. So what is the thinking here of the person who pushes in the line? The person who pushes in line must think their time is worth more than anyone else's time. They must think that getting their medication, meals or canteen, is more important to them than it is to the other people in the line that they have just pushed into. Let's think this through. Are they right? Are their interests in getting their medication, meals or canteen more important than they are to the other people lined up? They can't be so sick that a few more moments in the line before getting their medication is going to bowl them over, so that's not a good reason. They can't be starving so they are not going to drop from hunger if they have to wait while the others already in the line are served their meals. The same reasoning goes for the canteen or the washing machine, or any other place were prisoners line up and wait, and where some others push in the line. The interests of the person who pushes in are not of more weight than others, just because they are their interests. So there must be some other reason why they think it is alright to push in. The person who pushes in must think: "I don't care about you others!" They must think: "My time is much more important than yours! Because I am more important than you are!" And: "I don't care that you are all looking at the back of my head and thinking I'm a rat for pushing in!" But worse than all of this selfish thinking is the fact that the person who pushes in knows it's wrong, but he or she is using the threat of others losing their Parole, getting kicked off programs, having to do more time in prison, or going to the slot. The people who push in a line do all of this as part of their petty standover tactic of pushing in. They are prepared to risk no-one standing up to them because of the negative consequences of becoming involved in a conflict in prison. In a way the person who pushes in a line in front of other prisoners is using Prison Officers and the prison system as soldiers in their stand-over of other prisoners. It is almost like threatening a lefthand drop. This is the case because if anyone says anything to the person who has pushed in, they have to take the risk that person could react in a way that a violent conflict is caused. And the person who pushes in a line can't be worried about the consequences for themselves or the other person's Parole or visits or anything else. Again we see the lumpenproletariat in action. And then there are the shit-talking excesses: "So-and-so was holding a spot for me." This is bullshit, a person is either in the line or they are not! "I forgot my ID card and had to go and get it, but I was at the fount of the line." This is more bullshit, a person is either in the line or they are not! "I had to make a drink, or get my Ox, or have an Ox, I was doing laps", or any of the other rubbish people come up with. These are all weasel word excuses; they are lies told to justify pushing it. Placing a bag at the fount of the line and then going away for hours and expecting to be at the fount of the line is also pushing in. It really is simple: A person is standing in the line, or they are not in the line. The person who pushes in is prepared to throw away a basic courtesy to others for their own petty interests of getting served a few moments sooner than if they had waited in line. It needs to be asked: How would you feel if this person was associated with you in here? Page | 41

Because let's face it, how are they going to behave when they are released? Would you want them coming into contact with your people on the outside? Considering the way the person who pushes in a line thinks, you would have to feel worried. If their time is worth more than others. If they are willing to push in a line and not care what others think of them in here. If he or she is willing to do this in front of everyone in here, then what would they do if they were in trouble with the police? If they would push in a line in front of people in prison, then ask yourself: "What would they do in the privacy of a police station interview room?" Perhaps someone else, anyone else who's time is not as important as theirs could take the blame and do the time for them. Let me be blunt about it. If a person would push in a line in prison in fount of people because they think their time is more important than others and they don't care what people think, then they would make up a story and tell the police so someone else would do the time for their crime. There was a German philosopher named Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) who said that a true estimation of a person's character is found in the small things which they think are unimportant. For it is in these small things that their true character comes to the surface. When dealing with big important things, people are on their best behaviour to do the right thing. Like the small matter to them of pushing in a line; what a person is really like comes to the surface in this act. If a person would push in line in here, then you would need to ask yourself if they can be trusted. The answer is so obvious, I don't need to say it.

Page | 42

Feedback and future versions of this book


I hope that this book will be a living resource and that I will be able to update it and publish the updated version from time to time. As part of keeping this book up-to-date I ask for your feedback. Any and all feedback will be welcomed.

Are there any typos? Are there any parts which are hard to understand? Do more words and phrases need to be included in the Glossary? Do you want to hear more or less about a particular matter?

If you think that I have missed something and you would like to contribute a Chapter about that, then please feel free to write to me and suggest something. In future versions of this book I would like to include Chapters on the political perspective of prisoners in every State and Territory of Australia. This book is written from my male perspective in Victoria, and this is a shortfall which needs to be addressed. My snail mail address at the time of writing this is: PO Box 273 Corio Victoria 3214. But if you would like to check with someone on the outside and have them look online, my current address will be listed on the Home Page of my website which can be found at: www.craigminogue.org I look forward to hearing from you.

Page | 43

Appendix "A"
How to Benefit From a Prison Sentence
This book has been about ideas and promoting political thought. But this appendix is included for those who want to make the most of their prison experience. It's an opportunity not an obstacle Like everything in life, a prison sentence can be an opportunity to learn if you look at it that way. The reality is that you can turn a sentence into an experience which benefits you. How you do a sentence, and what effect it has on you, is to a large extent, up to you the individual. Prison is not a good place to spend your time, and lets face it you will be surrounded by a lot of people that you don't like staff and prisoners. But you can make the system work for you, that is if you put a bit of work in to how you do your time. You will only get out what you put in, so if you don't put in, you will get nothing out of being in prison. When you are in you are in For those people who have only just arrived, let me say that the sooner that you come to terms with the fact that you are in prison, for however long it is going to be, the better off you will be. Pinning your hopes on appeals almost always leads to disappointment. Very few appeals are successful, and a lot of your time, energy and money can be lost in the appeal process. If you are going to appeal, then that is fine, but you should not let the idea of the appeal run your life, or use it as an excuse for not dealing with the reality of your situation. So how do you deal with a sentence? Firstly, you accept it as best you can. That is not to say that you should be happy about it, but accepting of the reality. Secondly you have to ask yourself what you want to get out of it. For whose benefit do you want to be in prison? What's in it for me? There are basically three things you can get out of a prison sentence, and they are (1) education, (2) work skills and (3) self betterment. You can learn to use a computer, improve your reading and writing skills, or learn how to cook, or other worthwhile activities. And once you have learned these activities, no person can take them away from you. Positive things you learn are a value you can add to your life, which is yours alone. If you apply yourself to doing things in prison, you will also learn life skills in being active and productive for your benefit and the benefit of the people you care about. TAFE education courses Each prison has a TAFE education centre. TAFE has courses in:

Certificate of General Education for Adults English as a Second Language Computers, Windows, Word Processing Spread Sheets, Data Bases and Graphics Industrial Cleaning Forklift Operations Reading and Writing Page | 44

Maths Commercial Cooking (the best food you will get in prison) Occupational Health & Safety Horticulture Engineering, and more

If you start one of these courses at one prison, you should be able to carry it on at another prison. TAFE courses are standard across the State. It is no excuse to say that you will wait until you get settled some place before you start. Start as soon as possible, and carry it on at the next prison you go to. Start as you mean to go on, and you set the pace, you take control of your life as much as the circumstances in prison will allow. These courses can benefit you in a number of ways. First, if you were on the outside you would have to pay for these courses. (Most of the above courses are free, with the exception of the forklift driver's licence). And most people in prison would not be likely to make the effort and attend courses on the outside. So there is a benefit to being in prison in that you will have access to education, training and information that you would not realistically get on the outside. Information and knowledge are the currency which the world runs on, and the more you have, the better off you are going to be. You need to have the tools to do the job, and education gives you a better chance. The more you can educate yourself, the easier your passage through life will be. You will be able to do everything better. You will be able to present yourself better, and be able to achieve your goals. If you improve your reading and writing skills, and learn how to use a computer, you will be able to produce documents, and write letters which will help you achieve whatever it is you want to achieve. If it is help from a Government agency, or whatever, if you can produce a professional looking document to support what you want to do, then you will be treated in a more professional way by people receiving the document. See Appendix "B" How to address an issue in writing. Educating yourself, is about how you want the world to deal with you. If you want to be treated with more respect, if you want to be treated in a professional manner, if you want people to help you, if you want to achieve the things you want to, then educating yourself will help you along the path. The reality of life is that the better an education a person has, the less of a chance there is that they are a fuck-up and an arsehole, so as a rule of thumb, if you want less people in your life who are fuck-ups and arseholes, then apply yourself to education and learning and you will be able to get away from those people who drag you down. This is what is called 'social mobility'. The more effort you make the further you will go in social terms, and if you want to get away from fuck-ups and arseholes, then you need to use the opportunity that education gives you to make your life better. Every TAFE course listed above is about learning skills which can be turned to your advantage. If you can't see any direct relevance now, it does not mean the course will not be relevant at some time in the future. You never know what opportunities will present themselves. If you are prepared by educating yourself, then you can get the job done and benefit yourself. Accessing educational courses in prison is getting more difficult as the days, months and years go on as funding is cut. The reality is that the more education you have the less likely Page | 45

you will be coming back to prison, but the public discourse about crime and punishment does not care about that. The media and people with a vested interest in the politics of crime and punishment don't really care about the victims of crime who are created when people commit crimes when they get out of prison with no prospects. For the people with the vested interests, every recently released prisoner who commits another crime is a story they can use for their political agenda associated with longer sentences and worse prison conditions. Educating yourself, despite all the obstacles that will be pout in your way in prison, is an act of political resistance against those who are trying to do you over and keep you in prison Personal development courses Most prisons run personal development courses in things like: Drug and Alcohol Education and Relapse Prevention Programs

Being in a Group Coping with Anxiety Grief and Loss Koori Programs Anger Management Depression Management Coping with Trauma Absentee Parenting

I know that some of this stuff can be a wank. But you never know, you may get something out of it if you put something into it. What benefit you get out of these types of courses is up to you. Even if it is a shit course, you may still get something out of it. They may just help you in making your Prison File read well, which will help you in relation to moving around the system and so on. They may just help you get Parole when the time comes. And they may just help you in the way they are intended to help if you put in. You will never know unless you give it a go. Ask yourself, "What have I got to lose in doing the course?" The answer is you have nothing to lose, but everything to gain. It can be for your benefit You should look upon the correctional staff, the education staff, the health care staff and the others who are delivering programs, as being there "for you You are not in prison for their benefit - they are there for your benefit! And you should be asking yourself one question each day, and that question is: "What can they do for me today?" The system is there to benefit you, but if you do nothing but lay on the bed and watch TV, or play cards, or chase drugs all day, then you are letting the system off the hook. If you do that, you are playing into the hands of a system that will just let you rot in prison. You need to do some work to make the system work for you. And the way you do this is through programs, education and work. Work in prison Working at a job in prison, is like every thing else in life, it is what you make of it. You can look upon work in prison as slave labour for very little money, and you can be pissed-off every day, or you can ask yourself: "How can I make the situation benefit me?" Page | 46

If you are working in the gardening gang, ask about doing a TAFE Horticulture course. If you are working in the kitchen, ask about doing a TAFE Food Handlers or Cooking course. If you are working in the laundry ask about doing the TAFE Certificate in Textile Care. Other jobs have relevant TAFE courses as well - ask what they are. Work in prison will also help pay for your canteen, it will put money on your phone account, and it means you don't have to ask your family or friends for money all of the time. Work in prison means you can support yourself. Work in prison keeps you occupied, and it can get you into better accommodation with fewer people snipping tobacco and chasing all the time. The IMP File and the caseworker system Each prisoner has an officer who is assigned to them as a caseworker. This officer writes comments in your Individual Management Plan ("IMP") File about what you are doing in the unit and in relation to education, programs and work. (This is what they call it in Victoria). Ask the unit staff who your caseworker is. You need to work at having a good relationship with your caseworker. Once you find out who your caseworker is, you need to let this person know what you are doing. As soon as you start a program, say to the caseworker "Can we sit down and make an entry on my IMP File sometime today please?" Tell the officer you have just started such and such a course and you are "looking forward to it." In a few weeks time, ask again to sit down with the officer and you could say you have finished the course, and you can comment on how you found it. Take this opportunity to put a copy of the certificate on your IMP File and tell the caseworker what you are doing next. Needless to say, positive urine tests and hassles in prison in relation to your behaviour will be recorded on your IMP File and this will not help you. You will end up like this guy on your way to the slot. (Image of a person in handcuffs) Please note that in Victoria you are allowed to read what is written in your IMP File by your case worker, just ask - if they say "No", ask to see a supervisor about it. Your IMP File can support you getting Parole when that time comes. All the good things you have been doing in relation to programs, education, work, and other rehabilitative efforts will help you in the long run. If your IMP File reads well, it will support you in getting what you want. You can drive the IMP File system for your own long term benefit if you do something positive with your time. How your IMP File reads is something which you can have a good deal of positive input into. If you do the right thing in prison, if you put in the work, you will get out of it what you want, you can make your time in prison work for you. There are things called Local Management Plans in the IMP file, and it is your role to say what you want to achieve and have it recorded in the Local Management Plan. Let's say you want a lower security rating so you can do work outside of the prison, then tell your Caseworker you want to put that in you Plan. Drugs in prison One way to get your mind out of the prison space is by the use of drugs. The problem with this is that you have to pay for them one way or the other. And when you use drugs, you are putting yourself at risk of the system having a go at you. If you use drugs, you are giving the system the ammunition to shoot you with. The prison system uses the drug issue as its excuse to search visitors and their cars, ban people from contact visits, restrict your access to programs like contact visits, fine you, conduct strip searches, urine tests, and lots of other

Page | 47

things. When you use drugs, you are giving the prison system power over you and your family! And fuck that man! When you use drugs in prison, you are strengthening the hold the system has over you. If you test positive for drugs after a piss test (which they do all the time), and if you want to get your visits back sooner, then you will have to do a drug course. So, you have put yourself in a position where the system is telling you what to do. You should be telling them what you want them to do for you. In other words, you should be empowering yourself, and dissempowering the system and you do this by not taking drugs in prison. As we all know, drug use can have a lot of down sides, and it can impact upon your social circumstances, your self-esteem, and your health. Drugs can end up running your life for you. Using drugs makes you an easy target for people to have a go at. Ask about the drug treatment courses in prison, and when you do those, ask about being referred to a course, program, or support group for when you get out. Don't wait around to get on a course or program, push this issue and ask every week about it. Don't take no for an answer. Whatever happens to you in life, there are things you can do to help yourself, and there are people and agencies inside and outside that are set up to help you. It may not be easy to get these things happening, and you may have to fill out the same form 3 or 4 times to get on a program or to do a course. But the more you put in, the more you will get out. The more you do for yourself, the more people will do to help you. The more effort you put into asking people to help you, the more you speak-up for yourself, the further you will get. To a large extent, it is up to you to make the system work to your advantage. In conclusion The message is, you can make it work for you, not against you. You can make it work for you if you make the effort. So:

Be involved in programs, work, and education, and do this with a positive attitude! Make the prison experience benefit you! Ask yourself "What can they do for me today?" Ask yourself "How can I make the prison experience benefit me?" Participate in improving yourself and your chances of success when released! And don't just sit around like a mug letting the prison system waste your time.

Page | 48

Appendix "B"
How to address an issue in writing.
If your reading and writing skills are not very good, you should ask someone for help. If you can, buy yourself a dictionary. Ask a friend to help. Try not to be too embarrassed if your reading and writing are not very good. Do not let problems with your reading and writing skills stop you from defending yourself and advocating for yourself. You should try to be as brief as possible, but on the other hand, do not leave anything out. There are a few general rules which are listed below in point form. You should try to address each of the points below in a paragraph on its own. The general points are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Who you are, and why you are writing; Specific details of the problem; Previous attempts to fix the problem (if any); What can be done to fix the problem; Who should take action to fix the problem; Why they should take action; When they should take action; and What would it mean to you, if they did not take action to solve the problem.

The issue does not have to be a "problem" for the above rules to apply. It could be something you want to do, something that is needed or suggested by you. For example:

Point 2 becomes: "what you need"; Point 3 becomes: "your other attempts to get the help (if any)"; Point 4 becomes: "what can be done to help you"; Point 5 becomes: "who should help you"; Point 6 becomes: "why they should help"; Point 7 becomes: "when should they help"; and Point 8 becomes: "what would it mean to you if they did not help."

Whatever the subject matter is, the above rules will serve you well in addressing an issue in writing. You should keep a copy of any letter you write, even if you have to write it out twice, and if they don't respond within 14 days, then you should write back and ask when they will respond. And if you have any questions, show this part of this book to someone you talk with and ask them what they think. Note: Appendixes "A" and "B" have been taken from my book Dealing With The Criminal Justice System: A Practical "How To" Handbook which was published by Darebin Community Legal Centre Inc., in 2006 and by Students in Free Enterprise (Monash University Chapter) in 2007. A PDF copy of Dealing With The Criminal Justice System

Page | 49

which can be printed, can be found on the Community Legal Education Publications page on my website www.craigminogue.org The chapters of Dealing With The Criminal Justice System have been made available to thousands of men and women in custody through my efforts and as part of the Community Education outreach program of the Darebin Community Legal Centre. Some chapters are reproduced by the Faculty of Law at Monash University and used as part of the course material in the Professional Practice Course, and they form part of the Court Readiness Program which is facilitated by Monash academics and students for prisoners. Some chapters are also reproduced and made available as part of the course material in the Sociology major, and a unit dealing with imprisonment, at Monash. The Chapters in Dealing With The Criminal Justice System are:

How to Address An Issue in Writing; Communicating with Your Lawyer; How to Take Notes; How to Prepare for Your Defence; How to Prepare Yourself and Your Lawyers for A Committal Hearing; How to Deal With: Telephone Intercepts, Listening Device Material; What to Do At the Trial; How to Plead Guilty (How to Run A Plea If Found Guilty); How to Understand Sentencing; Appealing A Sentence?; A Guide to Resisting Deportation From Australia; How to Benefit From A Prison Sentence; How to Get Parole; Appendixes (Blank Forms for You to Photocopy and Use)
o o o

Chronology According to Witness Phone, Conference and Court Notes Instructions on Telephone Intercepts and Listening Device Material

Page | 50

Appendix "C"
'Concept Unity' by Yskari Yero Douglas and 'How Consensus Works' from Critical Resistance (Reproduced from The Abolitionist (A publication of Critical Resistance), Issue 15, Summer 2011, p.5). 'Concept Unity' by Yskari Yero Douglas H-64600, Pelican Bay State Prison, CRESCENT CITY CALIFORNIA 95532, USA. Unity is the state of being one. Most of us want it, but do not know or quite understand how exactly to bring it about. There is a lasting truth in the saying that in unity there is strength; as well as in united we stand, divided we fall. Yet, there is more to unity than just wanting it, or even in just coming together,. Unity is not that simple; if so, we'd have it already. Unity is not ready-made it is a process. It involves both dialogue and commitment: dialogue around the issues where we plan to struggle, and on points of strategy; and commitment to the decisions and resolutions agreed upon, as well as commitment to a common set of principles and values developed in common, and to making unity a success. Unity involves genuine camaraderie with those whom you plan to unite with. The acquaintance or relationship must transcend the superficial or surface. An understanding of permanent or standing positions must be established. Unity is possible without having uniformity. In a coalition of a unified front type of situation there may exist differences in perspectives or ideology, yet for unity to work, there must be unity or purpose, and consequently, unity of action. It must be emphasised that unity in strategic approaches to accomplishment and reaching goals/objectives must accompany unity of action. Here are a few key ideas to making unity work: 1. 2. 3. 4. Always follow a majority vote in decision-making; Always view collective interests as being more important than individual interests; Always struggle to understand the focus of unity; and Always struggle to make unity a success.

Finally, adhere always to the principle laid down by those in the struggle that came before us, all for one and one for all. It should be our aim to have unity, but not simply for unity's sake. Let it be to set and reach goals. Let our unity be to win whatever battle we take up! As one, we will win!

'How Consensus Works' from Critical Resistance.


While we agree with the overall sentiment expressed in this submission, Critical Resistance's decision-making process relies entirely on the Consensus Mode, rather than a majority rule. While achieving consensus can be time-consuming and difficult, it is central to CR's nonhierarchical vision and principles. The consensus process enables and develops greater participation from members and ultimately helps to align our visions for a different and better world.

Page | 51

How Consensus Works: 1. 2. 3. 4. Present Issue: State clearly what we need to decide. Background: Presenter should have something short prepared, then Q&A. Discussion: Have a clear time limit. .Proposal/Test for Consensus: Someone offers a proposal, facilitator restates it, asks for clarifying questions. Test for consensus. 5. Concerns: People with concerns share them, then a time-limited discussion about them (you don't need to offer a revised proposal immediately). 6. Revise Proposal and Deal with Concerns: Someone offers a revised proposal that incorporates the concerns as much as possible. Test again for consensus. If there are still concerns, go back to step 5.

Table: or send to a small group to think through or pass, or put on later agenda with more time or declare block. How we motion (vote)
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

Thumbs up: Yes! We should support this motion.


The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

Thumbs down: BLOCK. We should not support, & why.


The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.

Sideways thumb: I'm unsure, & my concerns are ... Blocks v stand-asides: If a decision goes against one of our collective goals, block it. If a decision doesn't do this, but violates a personal principle/goal, standing aside is appropriate.

Page | 52

Appendix "D"
What level of political knowledge do prisoners have?
In the week before the State election in Victoria on 27 November 2010, I surveyed 35 men in prison at the Marngoneet Correctional Centre in Victoria and I asked them 8 questions in relation to their knowledge of political matters. Responding to a question designed to gauge their political awareness, 15 men said they "were interested in politics", and 20 said they "were not interested". Then 24 men said they thought politics "did make a difference in their lives", but 11 said they thought politics "did not make a difference in their lives". That half of the men saying they were interested was a good start, so I then asked what they knew of political ideologies? Nine men said they "knew the difference between the Right and Left in politics", and 17 said they "did not know the difference", while 12 men said they were "uncertain" as to the difference. What about some more general terms? Seven men said they "did know the difference between the Conservative and Progressive in politics", and 6 said they "did not know the difference", while 13 men said they were "uncertain" as to the difference between Conservative and Progressive. This knowledge of ideologies needed to be checked, rather than relying on their selfassessment of political knowledge. So, when I asked if "State control of trade and industry" is a Right-wing or a Left-wing idea, or if they were uncertain, 4 said it was "Right-wing", 3 said it was "Left-wing" and 28 said they were "uncertain". Then, when asked if "Medicare and the provision of public health services" is a Right-wing or a Left-wing idea, or if they were uncertain, 5 said it was "Right-wing", 5 said it was "Left-wing" and 25 said they were "uncertain". This is a good point to pause for some analysis. Considering the way in which the other questions were answered, it is doubtful that most of the men understood these ideological questions, and the equal numbers for Right and Left cause me to wonder if the men were just making a guess. On further analysis, I recalled two respondents asked at this point about the Government currently in power, which indicated they were thinking that whoever was in power controlled trade and industry, rather than the ideological theory which underpinned the question. When I looked closely at the individual responses, I found that two men who thought Medicare was a Left-wing idea said they thought State control of trade and industry was a Right-wing idea. I have concluded that only 3 respondents answered the questions designed to 'checking knowledge of ideologies' correctly, out of the group of 35 men. Of these 3 men who correctly answered the questions designed to check their knowledge of political ideologies, I believe only 2 understood the ideological differences and one took a lucky guess. But what are the personal perspectives of prisoners? When asked which political system is better for prisoners, 5 answered "Right-wing", 6 answered "Left-wing", and 24 said they were "uncertain". Now for the big question which seems to play so heavily in the mind's of some on the outside, the so called political franchise and the right to vote. When asked, if they had the opportunity, "would they vote in the State election?" 20 men said "Yes" and 15 said "No". Many more people said they would like to vote than I had thought when I was contemplating the survey, so there is some encouragement to be found in that. The reality is however, many prisoners are excluded from voting (see Chapter 12), but if they were to have the vote, this Page | 53

may well make them feel a little more included in society, but the survey results make me wonder about the political value of that vote when as a group, men in prison have so little political knowledge. This was a very small survey as it represented around 11 % of the total number of prisoners in one small prison in Victoria, but from my experience I believe the results are representative of the level of political knowledge by prisoners in general in Victoria. This lack of a political understanding is profound and it desperately needs to be addressed, and this is the aim of this book.

Page | 54

Appendix "E"
Craig Minogue v The Public Sector Union - a sad story of stupidity The following story illustrates my political practice in action. On 21 December 2011, the Public Sector Union in Victoria introduced 48 Work Bans in the Victorian prison system which were to be implemented by the prison staff from midnight on 21 December. These bans effected prisoners in that newspapers were not going to be delivered, it was TV guide day, and the men were upset. The Work Bans also involved not allowing visitors to drop off property on the visits, it was Christmas time and the men were upset. And the prison staff were not going to process property via the mail either, it was Christmas and the men were upset. These were the bans which were going to most directly effect the prisoners. I asked the head Union Representative at Marngoneet, for a list of all the Work Bans, and he passed that request on to the Union and they refused to give me a copy of the list. Prisoners came to me about their feelings of discontent about how the Work Bans were effecting them. I thought the Bans effecting prisoners were designed to incite trouble and that trouble would then be used as leverage against the Department of Justice with little thought of the collateral damage done to prisoners. I recalled how the Public Sector Union in Victoria used the disruptive reaction of prisoners to Work Bans in 2004 when I was at Barwon; they said: "Look what our members have to put up with on a daily basis" as they read out a summary of the incidents, but they did not say they were causing the unrest and disruptions. I was not going to be used like this again, so I wrote a letter and gave it to the head Union Representative at 8am on the morning of 21 December 2011. I wrote: To whom it may concern from Craig Minogue re Industrial Action - 21 December 2011 Let me start by saying that I am all for workers taking Industrial Action; all for workers receiving a better deal. But I have a problem with some of the Work Bans that are being put in place. I have a strategy which I can deploy and which I think Corrections Victoria, the Department of Justice and the Government could use to derail the Industrial Action. Now, I do not want to be siding with CV and the DOJ, but nor am I going to put up with the current Work Bans. So this means that you are going to have to work with me to change your Work Bans or I will deploy my strategy. Before you scoff and say: "Who does this Minogue think he is!", let me tell you my strategy. I will draft an affidavit saying: 1. I have been in prison in Victoria since 1986. In that time I have become well known as an activist who assists my fellow prisoners with equitable access to the Courts, information about the law, educational programs and health services. I am well known in the prison system in Victoria as the "go to guy" for help with prison issues. 2. In 1986 I was functionally illiterate, but I have since educated myself and I completed a BA with First Class Honours in 2005. I have been involved in many community education projects and delivered educational courses in prison. I have designed the training and written the manual for the training of Health and Infection Control Peer Educators in the Victorian prison system. I am currently finishing my PhD in Applied Ethics, Human and Social Sciences.

Page | 55

3. I have published papers on prison issues, the law and human rights in professional journals like: the Alternative Law Journal; Social Justice; the Freedom of Information Review; Charter; Punishment and Society, Journal of Prisoners on Prisons; The Human Rights Defender; and Foucault Studies. My academic papers have been delivered by other academics at conferences at: the University of Tasmania in Hobart; Kings College in London; the University in Padua, Italy; and at the University of Ottawa in Canada. I have a well received chapter in the principal text on human rights law and prisoners in Australia. 4. I am considered to be an expert in matters associated with imprisonment in Victoria. 5. .It is my belief that some of the Work Bans which have been put in place as part of the current Industrial Action are specifically designed to target prisoners. The effect of this targeting of prisoners makes it certain that at some point there will be disruption and unrest in the prison system and there will be verbal, or perhaps even physical conflict between prisoners and prison staff. 6. It is my belief that some of some of the Work Bans are directly aimed at inciting disruption and unrest in the prison system with the goal of then using that situation to put pressure on Corrections Victoria, the Department of Justice and the Government. 7. From the attitudes and reactions of my fellow prisoners who have come to me about this matter it is my belief that some of the Work Bans are a threat to the security and good order of the prison and the welfare of the prisoners. 8. I feel as if my health, safety, wellbeing and welfare are being put at risk, and that Corrections Victoria and the Department of Justice is failing in its duty of care to me by allowing instability to fester in the prison system because of the effect some of some of the Work Bans are having, and it is foreseeable that they will have. [ End of Affidavit ] I will obtain half a dozen Affidavits from Prisoner Representatives supporting my Affidavit. I will then give this sworn evidence of the threat to the security and good order of the prison and the welfare of the prisoners to CV and the DOJ. They are not very smart, but they can add 2 + 2. And let me tell you what I think will be the outcome of that equation. CV, the DOJ and the Government will say to Fair Work Australia: We have sworn evidence that some of some of the Work Bans are seen by prisoners as targeting them and that they feel as if they are being incited to act in such a way that will cause disruption and unrest in the prison system and this will lead to a threat to the security and good order of the prison and the welfare of the prisoners. Plus We have sworn evidence that some of some of the Work Bans are seen as causing a risk to the health, safety, wellbeing and welfare of prisoners and that because of this we have been accused of not meeting our duty of care by allowing instability to fester in the prison system. Plus The duty of care for prisoners and the security and good order of the prison and the welfare of the prisoners must come first (see s. 1 (a) of the Corrections Act). Plus To secure the security and good order of the prison and the welfare of the prisoners and to ensure that we can meet our duty of care, we need to lock-out our workforce and lock-down the prison system until this industrial action is resolved. Page | 56

- Equals An application to Fair Work Australia that all Industrial Action cease and the parties are ordered into negotiations. [ End of the equation ] Perhaps you and your Union want to get the other side to the stage where you are ordered into negotiations, or it is my guess that you want to soften them up with 6 months of Work Bans first. Let me say again that I am all for workers taking Industrial Action and getting a better deal. But I am not going to put up with Work Bans targeting prisoners. Your choice is: work with me to change your Work Bans or I will deploy my strategy. You have a matter of hours to respond, not days. Yours faithfully, Craig Minogue. [ end of letter ] Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the industrial landscape in Australia would see the red kangaroo hopping all over that letter as it is the same underhanded strategy that QANTAS used against their workers! But it seems that the Union Representative and the Public Sector Union officials could not see it. My aim was to have the Union to rethink the bans which effected prisoners; I did not want to derail their Industrial Action. I suggested to the Union Representative that he send my letter to his higher ups in the Union. He scanned the letter and at about 8:10am emailed to his Union boss, and to prison management. Yes you read that right, he sent it to prison management! He did this for two reasons: One, he read my letter as 'a threat', and Two, he thought it helped his cause as the Union could use the evidence that the Work Bans are disrupting the prison system and making it unsafe to bring the Government to the negotiating table. He told me that Union officials were going to take the letter to Government and say: "Look the Work Bans are making the prison unstable and unsafe so you need to negotiate with us." The Union Representative could not thank me enough, he kept giving me the thumps up and laughing. He said: "Your letter has shortened the dispute by months." On the day, he clearly thought that I did them a great favour; he just did not get it. Not for one moment did I think the Union Representative would give the strategy to derail their industrial campaign to the other side; perhaps he is a double agent, or just plain stupid. The General Manger of the prison advised me in a meeting 10:30am that she had sent the letter straight to the DOJ, and it turns out they are smarter than I gave then credit for. I asked "Why in gods name would he have given you a copy of the letter?" The General Manager laughed and rolled her eyes to the sky and shrugged. By 11:45am on 21 December there had been an application to Work Fair Australia for hearing on Friday 23 December because, and your not going to believe this, there is evidence that the Work Bans are disrupting the prison system and making it unsafe. Who would have thought? The DOJ/Government put pressure on the Union to suspend its Work Bans because there was evidence that the Work Bans are disrupting the prison system and making it unsafe and impeding the ability of the DOJ to meet its duty of care. The Union agreed to suspend the bans. At 1:30pm on 21 December the newspapers were delivered to the men and they were not so angry, the TV guide is good, and lets face it, it was Christmas after all. I would always want to support the workers and Union over the boss and the Government, but when the workers and Union are so very stupid there seems there is no helping them. So by the end of the day I had the affidavit signed and witnessed and I had given it to the management of the prison as I had to make good on what I said I would do if they did not get back to me with an offer about changing their Work Bans.

Page | 57

A staff member who is particularly engaged in the industrial issues later said to me: "Who do you think you are?" I said: "I think I was the person with a thought through position which gave me some leverage because of the strategy I had developed. So rather than talking with me and dealing with me, or telling me that he needed to take it to the members for a response, your Union Representative told the other side of the strategy that they could be used against you. So who do I think I am? I think I am a person who would want much better representation than that." Early the next day, 23 December, I spoke with a person in prison management and I asked if my letter and avadavat had influenced events. The person said: "No, the DOJ and the Government were already thinking of doing what you said in the letter. It's just a coincidence." Late on 23 December, I am told that all of the Work Bans have been suspended, but I was not told why. The bans were due to be reinstated on 13 January 2012 if they can not reach an agreement before then. As I write this it is June 2012 and there has not been a word in the public prison system about industrial action. In the days after these events the Union Representative still thought that I did them a favour, and that I had it wrong in thinking that CV and the DOJ are not on the side of the rank and file Union members. I explained that it was my understanding that industrial action processed like this: the rank and file make it hard for CV and the DOJ through the Work Bans and because of this CV and the DOJ go to the Government and encourage them to come to a settlement because life is being made hard by the Bans. The rank and file put pressure on CV and the DOJ and then they put pressure on the Government. But, no. He says I don't understand how it works. Pressure is put on the Government when Prison Officers don't deliver the newspapers for the prisoners, or process properly left by prisoner's visitors and so on. And the Government cares about this why I wonder? Please note that I have no direct evidence of what happened in Fair Work Australia on Friday 23 December or what the Union boss or CV and the DOJ did with my letter and affidavit. And I really don't know what part my letter played in it all, if any part. What I do know for certain is that we went from the Union and the prison staff declaring that they were dug-in, fortified and intrenched with a wall of Work Bans to defend their position for the long haul, to all of the Work Bans being suspended and the industrial situation seems to be drifting within a few hours.

Page | 58

Glossary of some of the terms and words used


Anti-Semite - This means a person who hates Jews, or is hostile or prejudice against Jews. The Anti-Semite is also a 'bigot' or a 'racist'; that is a person who is prejudiced in their views and intolerant of the opinions of 'Others'. Authoritarian - A person with an 'authoritarian' view favours the enforcing of strict obedience to authority: the Government, police, army, prisons and so on. Capitalism - This term is used to mean a system under which the means of production, distribution, and exchange, are in large measure privately owned and directed. 'Capitalism' is an economic system where money and power are progressively concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. Class - The term 'class' is used to describe the division of people in a society on the basis of their social or economic status. Class is a political issue because the people who make the laws and govern the society in which we all live, are not poor working-class people. The people who hold important positions in society are not poor working-class people or people of a minority race or minority culture. Conservative - The term 'conservative' means a person who does not like to change their ideas and who believes in traditional values. A conservative favours free enterprise, private ownership, and socially conservative ideas which look back to previous generations for ideas of a better life. Conservative people are generally older and more wealthy people who hold positions of social, cultural, and economic power. Conservatives favour free enterprise, private ownership (that is 'capitalism') and socially conservative ideas which look back to previous generations for ideas of a better life. Democracy - A form of Government in which the people have a voice in the exercise of power, typically through elected representatives and respect for minority rights (the majority is looked after due to the fact it is the majority as society is naturally oriented to the majority). De-regulation - This is a term used to describe the Right-wing policy of taking away the rules and oversight of Government and the law of profit- making business like banks and financial institutions. It is thought that free market 'capitalism' will dictate what is a good and right practice without the need for rules and regulations. The Global Financial Crisis is a result of Right-wing 'de-regulation' Egalitarianism - This term refers to the social, political and moral principle which says all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities. Left - The 'Left' in politics is also know as a 'progressive' political outlook or as 'socialism'. And it has a social and economic reform agenda aimed at benefiting the majority of people in society who are represented by the working-class. Public housing and public health services provided by the Government for people who can't afford them, is a Left-wing idea. Liberal - The first thing that needs to be kept in mind is that the word 'liberal', should NOT be read in the sense of the Liberal Party of Australian politics, but the real use of the word which comes from the Latin meaning 'suitable for a free man'. And people who are free should be willing to respect and accept behaviour or opinions different from their own,

Page | 59

because this is part of what make a person free. Liberal also means a social and political system which is favourable to individual rights and freedoms. Liberty - The term 'liberty' means being free from oppression or imprisonment, and the power to act as one pleases, as long as it does not harm other people or the community in general. Lumpenproletariat - In ancient Rome the lowest class of citizens was called the 'proletariat'. In Marxist political theory, the term 'proletariat' is used to refer to the mass of ordinary workers or working-class people. The political radical Karl Marx thought there was a lower and more miserable class of person than the proletariat, he called these people the 'lumpenproletariat'. The word 'lumpen' means 'rag'. So what Karl Marx was saying is that the lumpenproletariat are a political limp rag, people who are pushed around by their economic, social and political circumstances without fighting back, without trying to improve their own conditions. The lumpenproletariat are people who are so miserable and so oppressed that they don't have the will to stand-up for themselves, or even to join with attempts by others to improve their own conditions and change society for the better. Majority rule - This means that the greater number of people should exercise the greater political power. But see 'minority rights'. Middle-class - This term is used to describe the social group between the upper-class and the working-classes; usually semi-professional and small business people. Minority rights - A 'democracy' must respect minority rights. This is so because the majority is looked after due to the fact it is the majority and all democratic societies are naturally oriented to serving the needs and respecting the rights of the majority. It is right that the majority should hold the political power, but to be fair, there needs to be an element of pluralism, see 'Pluralist'. Other - The term 'Other' and 'Otherness' with a capital 'O' is used to indicate that what is being talked about is that which makes another person different from us. We are all individuals, we see and understand the world from our own vantage points. Then there are 'Others' who stand with us, or next to us or in opposition to us. The most obvious form of 'Otherness' is gender. Men and women are obviously different, physically and mentally we are different; we have a different biology and a different psychology. The problem with differences is that they can cause conflict if they are given too much importance by someone who is looking at the 'Other' to find a difference and then use that to defend or assert their sense of 'Self'. Police State - This term is used to describe 'totalitarian' State in which political police secretly supervise and control all of the activities of its citizens. Nazi Germany was a police State. Progressive - The term 'progressive' is used to describe someone who favours social innovation and social reform so as to include equally in the benefits of society to everyone in the society. Also see 'pluralist'. Proletariat - In ancient Rome, the lowest class of citizens was called the 'proletariat'. In Marxist political theory, the term 'proletariat' is used to refer to the mass of ordinary workers or working-class people. The way Karl Marx used the word, is the way it is used and understood today. See also 'lumpenproletariat'. Pluralist - A progressive 'liberal' 'democracy' is a 'pluralist' social and political system. This means that the social system should encompass power- sharing with many political parties, all of which are tolerant of different ethnic groups or differing cultures and views Page | 60

within the society. A pluralist social and political system should be one of 'majority rule', while respecting 'minority rights'. Racist - A person is a 'racist' if they believe the characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race can be used to discriminate against or favour people of that race. Reactionary - The term 'reactionary' is a person who opposes political or social progress or reform. Reactionaries hark back to a supposed golden age, usually of the 1940s or 1950s. The 'conservative' Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who was a dominating political force for over a decade, made it very clear that his sense of a national and political identity was focussed on the First World War (1914-1918) as the defining event. Right - The 'Right' in politics is also know as 'conservative' and as 'reactionary'. The 'Right' focuses its economic and then its social policies towards improving the conditions for individual people and for businesses to increase the profits a selected few people gain from their activities. The 'Right' focussing on the development of the capitalist free-market system, see 'capitalism'. Ruling class - This is term used to describe a small group of people who hold long term political and economic power over a particular society. The 'ruling class' in Australia is not an obvious social group as it is in Brittan, but there are families in Australia who have been involved in politics and big business for many decades, and who have an undue influence over society. Self - The term 'Self' with a capital 'S' means that thing which makes you who you are as an individual person. For some people, this is the soul or the mind. Whatever you call it, 'Self' is that thing which is expressed when a person says "I am ...". In the way the term is used, is to mean more than saying who and what you are, it is about having a confident and centred sense about who and what you are as a person, as a being who exists with Others. Sense of entitlement - An entitlement is a right to do something, and the phrase a 'sense of entitlement' is generally used in a negative form to mean a person thinking they should get something for nothing. Saying someone has a 'sense of entitlement' is to put down their claim to be treated in a cretin way, or to receive a certain benefit. In 'conservative' American politics, public health care and public housing are thought to be a privilege by the 'Rightwing' and a poor person saying they have a social right to public health care and public housing could be put down as having a 'socialist' sense of entitlement. A Left-wing person would think that poor people are entitled to public health care and public housing. Socialism - The term 'Socialism' is used to describe a political and economic theory which seeks to organise society where by the means of production, distribution, and exchange, should be owned and or regulated by the community as a whole. The term 'the means of production, distribution, and exchange' means the trade and commerce (the making of consumable items), business, banking and finance. And these things should all be controlled by the people as a whole. Socio-economically disadvantaged - A person who is 'socio-economically disadvantaged' is a person who has a low social status such as an unemployed person or a prisoner. With this low social stasis comes less opportunities to earn a living and to be financially secure. Subordinate - This term is used to describe a person who is lower in rank or position, of less or secondary importance; a person who is under the authority or control of another. Subservient - This term is used to describe a person who obeys authority unquestioningly and someone who is less important and 'subordinate' to the person they are obeying. Page | 61

Totalitarian - This term is use to describe a Government that is centralized, dictatorial, and requiring complete subservience to the State. Working-class - This term is used to describe the social group which consists of people who are employed for wages, especially in manual or industrial work. A self employed person running a small business and employing others, is not 'working-class'. A person working in a big business as a manager who receives wages, a bonus, company shares and other benefits, is not 'working-class'. The person working in a factory or on a building site is 'workingclass'.

Page | 62

Further reading (in this order if possible)


Victor E. Frankl: Man's Search for Meaning. Richard Wilkinson & Kate Pickett: The Spirit Level. Art Spiegellman: Maus: A survivors tail (volumes 1 & 2). Michael Rather & Ellen Ray, Guantanamo: What the World Should Know. Naomi Oreskes & Erik M. Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a handful of scientist obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Peter Singer: Writings on an ethical life. John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath. Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth. Edward H. Carr, What is History? Frantz Fanon, Black Skin White Masks. Alfred L. Rowse, The Use of History. Dee Brown, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of The American West. Primo Levi: The Drowned and the Saved. Peter Singer: How Are We to Live? Georg Orwell, Animal Farm. David Brown & Meredith Wilkie (eds.), Prisoners as Citizens: Human Rights in Australian Prisons. Joy James, ed. The Angela Y. Davis Reader. Neil J. Kressel, ed. Political Psychology: Classic and Contemporary Readings. Paulo Freire: Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Franz Kafka, The Trial. Jude McCulloch, Blue Army: Paramilitary Policing in Australia. Rod Settle, Police Informers: Negotiation and Power. All of these books will suggest further reading by reference to authors and titles if you are interested. And if you look you will find a path into the world from your prison cell. Some of the books listed here may be beyond your appreciation on the first reading, as some are written in an academic or post-modern style, which will not be easy to penetrate at first. For example, many people find Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish, and the books by Paulo Freire and Primo Levi hard going, but they pay off in the long run. As you read other material, you will come across many references to Michel Foucault and his work, and to Paulo Freire and Primo Levi. It will take time, but you will get there. As you move through the list, and as you take your own side excursions, you will start to see how the ideas are linked. With each new link that comes into view you will understand more of the texts you have read in the past - you may even return to a work to read it a second time. Secondhand books can be bought via the internet, and sites like Amazon.com who act as an agent for thousands of private individuals and book shops selling secondhand books all over Page | 63

the world. It is a fast, cheap, and reliable service. Much better than going to a bookshop and waiting weeks and paying triple the price. There is also a company in the UK called The Book Depository which sells new books really cheap with free postage and very good service. The person on the outside who orders and pays for the book gives their details as the 'billing address' and your address as the 'shipping address'. You will have the book within ten days from anywhere in the world. (To receive a book in the mail, the sender does NOT have to be on your visitors list. This is not the rule and it has NEVER been the rule in the prison system in Victoria. Regulation 17 of the Corrections Regulations 2009 clearly intends to 'cover the field' in relation to receiving parcels in the mail. The Local Operating Procedures, Instructions or ideas of prison staff, do not override Regulation 17, so if they come that bullshit then you should resist and make complaints until you receive the book. To get the most out of your reading you should try to make notes of what you read, or write reviews or essays about the books you read. Craig W.J. Minogue, somewhere in the carceral archipelago. PS: If you want to know what the carceral archipelago is, then you will need to read Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison.

Page | 64

About the Author


Dr Craig W.J. Minogue BA(Hons) PhD was born in 1962 in Sydney Australia. He has survived in prison in Melbourne since 1986. Craig completed a Bachelor of Arts degree with a First Class Honours degree in 2005, which was his first formal educational achievement. Craig's BA from Deakin University was a wide ranging inter-disciplinary degree with three major sequences of study in the fields of: Philosophical Studies; Comparative Studies in Art, Science and Religion; and Literary Studies. Craig's Honours degree in Philosophical Studies focussed on analytical philosophy and the construction of Self from a cross-cultural aspect. His Honours thesis examined Aristotle's thesis of the ethical limit of personal wealth and the consequentialist utilitarianism of Peter Singer and what it is to live the good life in the age of self-interest and the primacy of the idea in popular culture that material wealth is an ends to happiness and a meaningful life. Craig then completed a Certificate IV in Training and Assessment from the Gordon Institute of TAFE. The Cert.IV in TAA is a vocational, education and training course which is about designing, teaching and assessing training at a post-secondary level. In February 2012, Craig was awarded a research based Doctor of Philosophy Degree (PhD) specialising in the field of Applied Ethics and Human & Social Sciences from La Trobe University. His research examined how a sense of a good Self and a bad Other emerge through representations of disciplinary power-relations about the criminal justice system for offenders, victims and the public. These power-relations include the learned discourse of the law, the courts and the prison, and the accompanying popular public discourse about crime and punishment by the law-and-order lobby (victim's advocates) and the public at large as that discourse is represented in the media. At the time of submitting my thesis for examination 20% of my original research had been published in professional journals such as: Foucault Studies; the Alternative Law Journal; the Journal of Prisoners on Prisons; and Zadok Papers. Craig is a prolific writer and in addition to his contribution to community legal education projects, he has 39 publications and academic conference papers in the fields of literature, criminal law, human rights law, prison and social justice issues. In 2007, Craig published a self-help how to manual for prisoners dealing with the criminal justice system (see the Community Legal Education Publications page on his website). Craig works directly with his fellow prisoners as an educator. In 2007, Craig co-facilitated the presentation of the units from the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment to other prisoners with the TAFE service provider at Barwon Prison as part of demonstrating competency for an additional elective Unit in his already completed Cert.IV in TAA. In 2007- 2008, Craig was the presenter of the education component of the Barwon Integration Program. In 2008-2009, Craig redesigned and then presented Marngoneet Correctional Centre's Vocational Services Orientation Program when he worked in a support role, called a Prison Service Worker, in the Education Department at that prison. In 2010-2011, Craig worked with Hepatitis C Victoria, a public health NGO, and he designed a program of training for Health and Infection Control Educator's in Victoria's prisons. He then wrote a manual for the delivery of the training program which he had designed. In December 2011, Craig was appointed as the Health and Infection Control Educator at Marngoneet Correctional Centre. This position requires Craig to: Page | 65

Provide information to prisoners and liaise with staff in relation to issues of diseases, health conditions, and infection control measures in the prison; Ensure leadership by modelling respectful relationships with custodial, clinical, and vocational staff; Promote the idea of community, and working together co-operatively; Assist other prisoners by helping them to deal with problems and challenges in a constructive way; and Encourage other prisoners to become involved in therapeutic programs.

In 2010, Craig designed and then presented two six-week courses called: "What the hell is modern art all about?" in the arts and craft room at the recreation department of Marngoneet Correctional Centre. In early 2011 at Marngoneet Correctional Centre, Craig created and facilitated a program of five artworks in the prison's Recreation Centre. This program provided the opportunity for Craig and other sentenced prisoners to critically reflect on subjects such as: time; the role of colour in their lives; their sense of Self; their circumstances and behaviour; and their future in a peer initiated way. Craig is a social justice advocate who assists his fellow prisoners with equitable access to the Courts, information about the law, and educational programs, as well as being an unofficial volunteer crisis and acute mental health care worker. Craig also creates art when he can and he has a number of works hanging in public buildings in Melbourne. Please feel free to contact Craig about this book, or any other aspect of his academic and social justice, or educational work. The snail mail address of Craig's current prison location will be listed in the Home Page of his website, which can be found at: www.craigminogue.org Ask someone on the outside to have a look for you and get the address if you want it. At the time of writing Craig's snail mail address was: PO Box 273 Corio Victoria 3214.

Page | 66

Why the images?


I have a Chapter in a book by edited by David Brown and Meredith Wilkie called Prisoners as Citizens: Human Rights in Australian Prisons. I am the only prisoner whose contribution is properly named and I am the only prisoner who has a chapter long contribution. Brief comments from other prisoners are only attributed as 'Victorian male prisoner' and 'male' or 'female prisoners' from various other States in Australia. Prisoners as Citizens is the principal peer reviewed academic work on the subject of human rights law and sociology in Australia. The philosopher Paul Ricoeur aptly made the point in his Onself as Another that 'the privilege accorded the proper names assigned to humans has to do with their subsequent role in confirming their identity and their selfhood', but Prisoners as Citizens does not achieve this most basic confirmation of personal identity for anyone other than me (Ricoeur 1992 p.29). If a person's proper name confirms an individual Self/identity, then it is their visage which is the entry point of that Self/identity into the world with Others. The face is the site from which a human person projects their Self to Others and says "I am . . .". Even without words, the face acknowledges Others and can be acknowledged in turn. The face is even the site where we examine ourselves as persons when we look into a mirror. A slap in the face is a rebuke of Self in the way a slap to any other part of the body is not such a rebuke. Far too often prisoners are portrayed cliche like in silhouette or in the shadows, or from the backs of their heads, or they are seen from their shoulders down as if they don't have a head or a face. Prisoners as Citizens has a front cover design of human figures posing in various positions as silhouette outlines. If people are in the shadows then they don't have a fully recognised social character or status. A faceless person is a person who can more easily be diminished in moral consideration by Others; out of sight is out of mind. The symbolism of Prisoners as Citizens works against it's explicit textual aims of including prisoners as equal and responsible citizens. It is presumed, in a paternal like fashion, that people in prison would want to conceal their names and their visage. Yes, being in prison for a crime against other people or against the well-being of the community in which one lives, is to have one's conduct publicly denounced by the sentencing processes, there is no glory in being in prison and it is nothing to be celebrated. However, being imprisoned is something which I think needs to be owned up to, and not hidden from. Of course, a balance needs to be struck between an individual's personal and public responsibility for wrongdoing, or hiding from the reality of one's conduct in the shadows, or having oneself turned into an undignified spectacle. When prison administrators in Australia allow a view inside their institutions, they dictate the terms, and prisoners do not have a choice if they are properly named, properly seen or properly heard. The extent to which prisoners are allowed to be confirmed as recognisable human persons is almost always limited by pseudonyms, shadows, headless and faceless bodies. This is personal politics in the extreme. I think it is important that all people are given a free and equal opportunity to be heard to speak in their own names and to be seen as real people facing the world, even if their past behaviour has been morally flawed. For these reasons I have included my image in the about the author entry, and if I add other chapters by prisoners in other States of Australia I will do the same if possible.

Page | 67

References
BROWN, David and WILKIE, Meredith, (eds.) Prisoners as Citizens: Human Rights in Australian Prisons, The Federation Press, Annandale NSW. BOLT, Andrew. 2005. 'Labor's God Squad', Herald-Sun, 13 July, p.23. EDNEY, Richard. 2001. 'Judicial deference to the expertise of correctional administrators: The implications for prisoners rights', Australian Journal of Human Rights, Vol 7(1), pp. 91133. EDNEY, Richard. 2005. 'Importance of administrative transparency in the correctional context: Knowing the rules; Australian Journal of Administrative Law, pp.163-174. FANON, Frantz. 1967. Black Skin, White Masks, Trans. Charles Lam Markmann, Grove Press, New York. FRANKL, Viktor E. 2004. Man's Search for Meaning, Rider Books, London. GOULDING, Dot. 2007. Hawkins Press, Sydney. GREENE Judith. 2004. 'From Abu Ghraib to America: Examining our Harsh Prison Culture' Ideas for an Open Society, Vol.4 No.l, p.l. HOCKINGS, B.A., M. Young, A. Falconer, and P.K. O'Rourke. 2000. Queensland Women Prisoners' Health Survey. KIRBY, Peter. 2001. Department of Justice, Victoria, October. MINOGUE Craig. 2002. 'An Insider's View: Human rights and excursions from the flat lands', in BROWN, David and WILKIE, Meredith, (eds.) Prisoners as Citizens: Human Rights in Australian Prisons, The Federation Press, Annandale NSW, pp. 196-212. Available on www.craigminogue.org MINOGUE, Craig. 2005. 'The Use of a Military Level of Force on Civilian Prisoners: Strip Searching, Urine Testing, Cell Extractions and DNA Sampling in Victoria', Alternative Law Journal, Vol.30, No.4, pp.170-173. Available on www.craigminogue.org MINOGUE, Craig. 2008a. 'Political Prisoners in Australia?', Journal of Prisoners on Prisons, Vol.17, No.2, pp.53-57. Available on www.craigminogue.org MINOGUE, Craig. 2008b. What's it got to do with you? A defence of the jailhouse lawyer, extracts of my essay were read by Colm McNaughton on 'Inside China's Prisons: Swinging open China's cell doors to hear who's inside, and why', syndicated through the Radio New Internationalist, 20 July 2008, see http://www.newint.org/radio. Available on www.craigminogue.org MINOGUE, Craig. 2008c. 'Assumptions, war stories and the inability of prisoners to say what is really going on', a review essay of Recapturing Freedom: Issues Relating to the Release of Long-term Prisoners Into the Community by Dot Goulding', Alternative Law Journal, Vol.33, No.2, September 2008, pp. 185-187. Available on www.craigminogue.org MINOGUE, Craig. 2008-2009. 'Political Prisoners and the Left in Australia', Arena Magazine, No.98, December-January, pp.11-13. Available on www.craigminogue.org

Page | 68

MINOGUE, Craig. 2010. 'A pedagogy of resistance: A hidden history of mass work on a minor scale', Review of Education, Pedagogy & Cultural Studies, Vol.32, Issue 3, July, pp.323-336. Available on www.craigminogue.org Minogue v Australia 2004 UNHCR 52 (11 November 2004). Minogue v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1998] Vol. 54 Administrative Law Decisions p.389; and at (1998) Vol. 84 Federal Court Reports p.438. Minogue v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1998) Vol. 166 Australian Law Reports, p.29; and at (1999) Vol. 57 Administrative Law Decisions p.23. Minogue v Williams (2000) Vol. 60 Administrative Law Decisions p.366. NSW Chief Health Officer. 2002. Report of the NSW Chief Health Officer: Prisoner Health. RICOEUR, Paul. 1992. Onself as Another, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London. RODRIGUEZ, Dylan. 2006. Forced Passages: Imprisoned Radical Intellectuals and the U.S. Prison Regime, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. RUSS, Joanna. 1985. 'Not for Years but for decades' in Magic Mommas, Trembling Sisters, Puritans and Perverts - Feminist Essays. The Crossing Press, New York. SINGER, Peter. 1993. Practical Ethics, 2nd edn., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge New York. Sentence Management Manual. 2007. Department of Justice Victoria. Statistical Profile of the Victorian Prison System. 2007. Department of Justice Victoria. The Shawshank Redemption (1994) Castel Rock, Columbia.

Page | 69