THAT WAS THEN. THIS IS NOW

David Cameron, like every other public figure, is entitled to a past.
When asked during the Conservative leadership campaign, he was
entitled to refuse to answer questions about whether he had used
illegal drugs as a young man. He is, in fact, only the second leading
British politician for whom this issue has arisen. Paddy Ashdown once
became cross and refused to answer the same question put to him by a
student magazine. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, on the other hand,
have both said "No" (as did David Miliband when the question was put
to him by a reader of The Independent last month).

That does not mean, however, that newspapers should refrain from
publishing information about the pasts of public figures. Mr Cameron
is entitled not to tell us, but when we find out about the early life
of a man who aspires to lead the country, the public has a right to know.

As a proudly liberal newspaper, The Independent on Sunday does not
believe that youthful experimentation with illegal drugs detracts
from an MP's ability to legislate, or a potential prime minister's
ability to lead.

Our revelation today that Mr Cameron was disciplined at Eton for
smoking cannabis is bound to make headlines. We can predict the fury
of parts of the Conservative Party and conservative press. It will be
argued that public figures have a responsibility as role models. And
it is true that there are dangers in presenting cannabis as harmless
or socially acceptable. Doctors are increasingly concerned about the
psychological impact of cannabis on a susceptible minority. But what
matters is whether Mr Cameron can use his experience and that of
those close to him to inform a credible policy. In this respect, he
cannot be faulted. He has been brave in facing down his party's
authoritarian instincts in advocating a harm-reduction strategy to
deal with the problems of drug addiction. He advocates intensive -
and expensive - rehabilitation for addicts as an alternative to prison.

There may be cynics who will say that our report today of Mr
Cameron's drug-taking at school, and possibly at university, is part
of a media management operation on behalf of the Conservative leader.
It may be speculated that it is convenient for him to get this story
out now rather than during the next election campaign, or to soften
up the public for further revelations to come. Such cynicism would be
misplaced. The fact that Mr Cameron got into trouble for smoking
cannabis was discovered and confirmed by the journalistic endeavour
of James Hanning and Francis Elliott, this newspaper's executive
editor and Whitehall editor respectively. Their forthcoming biography
of the Conservative leader promises a thorough and fair picture of a
man who could be prime minister.

We take the view that Mr Cameron's use of illegal drugs before he
became an MP has no bearing on his ability to discharge the
responsibilities of high office. To those tempted to be censorious,
we would urge calmness and a sense of proportion. We would remind
them that Mr Cameron was at the time of the incident a 15-year-old
child, and ask who has not done foolish things at that age?

Charles Kennedy's use of a legal intoxicant while a member of the
House of Commons was rather more material than Mr Cameron's use of an
illegal one many years ago. We believe that our view reflects the
trend in public attitudes, and that if our report provokes a media
frenzy it will be a relatively restrained one. The lesson of the
battering that Mr Cameron took over drugs in the leadership election
is that the public largely took his side.