A ROW erupted this week when the Lord Chancellor, the man in charge of our judicial system, advocated that burglars ought not be sent to prison for first or second time offences.

There were howls of outrage and those seeking to make political capital portrayed it as a sign of the Government "going soft" on criminals.

Prison serves two purposes: firstly to punish and secondly to protect the public. Our report this week on the views of the people who administer part of the criminal justice system (compiled before the Lord Chancellor's speech) echoes the widely held views of the people experienced in this field that prison is not always the best solution.

Leaving aside the huge cost of housing a prisoner, there is considerable evidence that Britain's jails are universities for crime, where the latest techniques for burglary are passed on to fresh students.

And when it comes to punishment perhaps spending every Saturday morning over a long period carrying out public works is more onerous than several weeks' rest playing pool and watching television in one of Her Majesty's hotels. Certainly, the thought of convicted liar and former Conservative Party chairman Jeffrey Archer spending his weekends sweeping up the dog dirt on local streets is somewhat more satisfying than him spending time dreaming up his next potboiler in a warm cell.

A non-custodial sentence might be hard to bear for the unfortunate householder who has had the sanctity of his home violated by some amoral toerag. A victim would be delighted to see the jail doors clang. But justice is not simply about revenge for the individual.

It is best to heed the advice of our probation services. They are skilled at determining what is the most effective punishment and advising our judges and magistrates accordingly.