The law has long had little effect on the cannabis trade and its cultivation has become a major industry in some places. At this time of the year, the police spend plenty of time and money hunting out crops and growers, but with not quite the same will. In August, the police told the select committee they were open to the idea of decriminalising the drug, meaning a fine for those found in possession, but no taint of a criminal conviction. The Minister of Police holds similar views.

Now the committee has reported and it largely adopts the police stance. The committee suggests the Government should review existing policy on cannabis and reconsider its legal status. Further, it concludes from material placed before it that the mental damage of the drug has been overstated and that moderate use does not harm most people.

When the police administration, the minister and a conservative-led select committee venture down the path to more liberal cannabis laws, reform is definitely in the air. But let us tread very warily. Decriminalisation is one thing, but making the drug legal and allowing it to be grown for personal use is quite another. Our present social drugs cause enough damage; if we are going to move in the direction that one or two European states have roamed, we should do so only after careful evaluation of the dangers of the drug, not simply in surrender to its widespread use.

Even if cannabis is as pervasive as it now seems, that would not be a reason to condone a health hazard. But its prevalence may be exaggerated in any case. In a survey in the Herald-DigiPoll series, 60 per cent of those questioned said they had never tried cannabis and never would. Another 24 per cent said they had tried it only a few times. Less than 3 per cent described themselves as regular users. Any survey that invites people to incriminate themselves obviously has difficulties but this one also found that only 3.3 per cent would be interested in the drug if it were legal. That figure could be expected to be much higher if fear was a significant factor in the response, although it supports the contention of the pro-cannabis people that decriminalisation or legalisation would not result in an upsurge of use. The law appears to be having little influence on behaviour either way.

The select committee's suggested review is probably not going to be taken up by either of the main political parties before the next election but it could be a plank a minor party puts into a coalition agreement. The electorate should regard any such proposal with great care. The committee obviously feels more information is needed, and that is wise. We are surely some way from confirming cannabis' semi-legitimacy when the jury has plenty to consider.