Member's statement: Prisoners: Tuck Money
Member's statement by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 1 October 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Prisoners: Tuck Money
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4562239
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In the past year, prisoners in Northern Ireland have received £1,445,283 of tuck money: that is, pocket money for privileges or "sweetie money". To be clear, the Department of Justice, on top of providing meals and facilities, gives prisoners in Northern Ireland one and a half million pounds of pocket money for privileges every year. I find that shocking. Who does not get one and a half million pounds a year for privileges? The children in our schools. Parents are regularly asked to contribute towards basic school supplies; PTAs are under pressure to fundraise; and teachers are paying for stationery supplies, tissues and other things. One and a half million pounds would go a long way in enhancing our children's schools' budgets. In Health, one and a half million pounds would employ 40 nurses a year. In policing, just recently, the Chief Constable of the PSNI was so exasperated over the lack of policing budget that he appealed to our UK Government and was criticised by the Department of Justice for doing so. I am sure that the £1·5 million pocket money for prisoners would be welcomed in the policing budget by the Chief Constable. Just a couple of weeks ago, it was established that the Department of Justice was spending more than £13 million on a new prison kitchen and cafe for criminals, whilst, up and down the country, schools struggle with substandard canteen facilities. They are outdated, there are no counters, and children wait outdoors in all weather. Yet, the Justice Department has prisoners in brand new canteen facilities. Criminals are in prison for a reason. I do not believe that many people would appreciate prisoners being treated better than children in our schools. The Justice Minister was quick to criticise a mobile phone pilot scheme brought into schools by the Education Minister at a cost of £250,000, despite it being a proven issue with need. Yet, here we are exposing the fact that she spends six times as much every year on pocket money for prisoners' privileges. It is shocking. I did not quite believe the scale of this until I uncovered the details. The people of Northern Ireland deserve to know where public funds are being spent, especially in times of such extreme budget pressure, and to challenge the priority of others. The Alliance Party needs to clarify its priorities. Does it prioritise prisoners over the children in our schools, our health workers and even our police? It is outrageous, and that question needs to be answered.
421 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.16 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.87).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.95).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.10 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.15 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.16 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.11 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.16 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.95 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.05 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.92 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.02 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.02 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:15 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.