Generally speaking, there is little opposition to Government's introduction of the Alternatives to Incarceration scheme, which aims to keep drug users out of prison and in rehabilitation schemes.

But what about the people, especially violent and sexual offenders, who are rightly in prison? Don't they need rehabilitation too?

That is the message from Charles Richardson, who should be a symbol of the success of prison rehabilitation, but who instead seems to be an example of someone who has succeeded in spite of the lack of rehab.

Mr. Richardson was jailed more than seven years ago for his part in a shooting in a nightclub. Once he entered prison, he started studying the law and emerged earlier this year with a law degree.

Now he has reported on some of the problems within the prisons, and his story helps to explain why more inmates have not followed his path.

It appears that the problems he discussed in yesterday's newspaper suggest the problems lie more in the process than in the actual size of the budget.

In essence, prison officers and professionals need to change their mindsets. They need to stop being guards and become active participants in the process of making sure inmates never return to prison.

The only prison psychologist, who was overburdened to begin with, has left and has not yet been replaced.

Thus instead of having more than one psychologist, there is none. And sexual and violent offenders who could been helped are instead left.

It would be naive to believe that every single inmate can be rehabilitated and turned into a productive member of society.

But Mr. Richardson has proven that not every inmate should be written off. With guidance and support, inmates can be helped to turn around their lives.

Without support, many inmates will be doomed to fail, as Mr. Richardson says:

"Now, there is a problem because of the (parole) backlog. People who are eligible for parole will just be put out there without the benefit of work release. The inmate being put out there without a job, without any resources, is doomed to fail. I was lucky because I had the benefit of family support.

"(The prisons) had a psychologist - they don't have one any more. He was doing the sex offenders classes and the violent offenders programme. It was difficult to get into the violent offenders programme because there was only one psychologist and so many people needed services.

"But the main thing is that they don't have the right people in place with the right attitudes. In the seven years and five months I have seen some improvements, but I just wonder if they are coming too little too late for some of the inmates. Most of the staff I encountered were just going through the motions.

"When you are talking about modifying behaviour, you cannot just be going through the motions. It's not a formulaic exercise, it's a deeply introspective and caring activity - and if you don't possess those inherent qualities, then you should not be there."

Mr. Richardson is right. ATI and all the millions spent on prisons serve no purpose if the people administering them are just going through the motions.

Government needs to make sure that the people it puts in place are passionate about changing the system - not perpetuating it.