ATTEMPTS to cut the prison population and find more effective ways of preventing recidivism are not new.

Back in 2008 Henry McLeish, former first minister, declared in a report that prison should only be reserved for those “whose offences are so serious that no other punishment will do”.

Justice Secretary Michael Matheson reminded MSPs of this in announcing his plans to cut the use of short sentences. He also pointed out that all the evidence then and in intervening years suggests that short prison terms are little use, if not actively counterproductive, in preventing further crime.

The challenge has always been to find alternatives that are robust and effective in the community.

Mr Matheson suggested that it may be a change in mindset that is needed: “We must challenge the idea that the only real punishment is prison,” he said.

At present, there is still a public perception that jail is in some way the “serious” option, but it doesn’t have to be that way. It should be seen as one item in the justice armoury, but not at all the best, particularly for those who are no danger to the public.

Even for those who do need to have their liberty restricted in some way, other approaches are possible than the large institutions, their regime little changed from Victorian times, that we have inherited.

Other approaches such as the community-based women’s custody units now planned for Dundee and Glasgow. Or more imaginative use of more technologically advanced options for electronic monitoring which are becoming available.

There is evidence already of a shift to community sentences, and Mr Matheson claims a new presumption against sentences of less than 12 months will accelerate this. But he doesn’t really know what impact this will have.

Due to the independence of the judiciary, the presumption can be ignored if sheriffs are not satisfied by the alternatives on offer.

Mr Matheson’s approach is bold in a context where there are those in the opposition and parts of the media who will pounce on the promotion of any alternative to prison as soft touch or weak.

But the degree of confidence people have in the community alternatives on offer is crucial

Mr Matheson knows that if he is to cut the numbers going to prison he has to increase the resources on offer to fund robust community punishments.

Crucially, he doesn’t just need to improve what is already on offer. If the presumption is effective, he will also need to fund a rapid expansion of a range of schemes to take those who might otherwise be behind bars.

Short sentences do not work for anyone. Prisons are unable to do effective work with inmates, offenders have their housing, relationships and income disrupted and victims are not protected from reoffending.

A change could benefit everyone involved. But the courts have to be persuaded by the alternatives on offer , and that includes the court of public opinion.