When David Nutt warned that members of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs would quit over the government's neglect of their reports, he was not speaking from a place of inflated importance.

We have been reporting on Nutt's allegations the Misuse of Drugs Act was irresponsibly classifying drugs, listing cannabis as more dangerous than alcohol when the opposite appeared to be the case. Nutt, the chief advisory on the board, was fired for his report and ensuing comments. He warned other members would follow him out, and now two officially have. The home secretary has been warned more may follow.

A member of the board has said they are all considering their positions, feeling neglected and ignored. Nutt says there is allegedly no continued need for the council as its advice has been routinely distorted. Representatives from the government say Nutt was asked to resigned because he was serving in a conflicting role; he was both an adviser to the government as well as an outspoken critic against its policies.

If the members of the board do resign in one large group, it will lead to significant embarrassment for the government policy makers. The remarks Nutt and his colleagues have made have already partially discredited the national drug policy. In specific, the board said cannabis should not be classified as a Class B criminal drug. He also said ecstasy and LSD posed minimal risks to a person when compared with alcohol and cigarettes.

Alan Johnson, the home secretary, has made it clear it was solely his decision to release Nutt. He said the Prime Minister has had no impact on that decision, and the Prime Minister  has not supported or spoken out against the action. 

Johnson says the board, as a whole, has been doing a good job and he would like to continue to work with them. He felt his statement's against the report issued by Nutt were against Nutt alone. It is clear from the resignations, though, that the board was largely in support of Nutt's opinions and his right to express those opinions publicly.

The UK's policy on drug laws may not appear to directly impact drug and drunken driving law in the United States. However, it is important to note many of these policies gain international momentum. If one nation reports success with an initiative, like Sweden has with mandatory ignition interlock devices on a number of buses and private vehicles, then other nations often follow suit.