I am told that talks between the Home Office and its drugs advisers are still continuing behind the scenes with the aim of producing a "joint statement".
Members of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) have said they expect an announcement "in a few days' time", but the Home Office has told me, very pointedly, that there is "no time-scale".
Alan Johnson is desperate to close down this unfortunate affair and officials are working with colleagues in Number Ten and Professor John Beddington, the government's Chief Scientific Adviser, to produce a communique that will satisfy the remaining ACMD members.
The home secretary had clearly gambled that he had enough to offer at yesterday's crunch meeting to head off any further resignations. I understand that "he did suggest a number of concrete ways" in which the relationship between his department and the council might be improved. ACMD members have told me that many present regarded his suggestions as "positive" and that he convinced the meeting of his genuine desire to find an accommodation.
"A week ago a clear majority (of members) were on the verge of resigning," one advisor disclosed to me. "Depending on what happens now, most will probably stay."
However, this morning's statements from Dr Simon Campbell (one of the three scientists who resigned after yesterday's meeting) reveal the anger that was also evident at the meeting.
He has described the sacking of Professor Nutt "by e-mail" as "an unnecessary humiliation for such a respected scientist". I understand that there were demands yesterday for Mr Johnson to apologise to the professor for the handling of his dismissal - something the home secretary refused to do.
There is also continuing frustration on the committee at the way that - in Dr Campbell's words today - "political expediency rules the roost". In other words, some members believe that government has not been giving due respect to the recommendations of the council because ministers are motivated by potential votes, not by hard facts.
This is what Dr Campbell said on the Today programme this morning:
"The council has to keep working with the government to make sure the government understands that we are presenting an evidence-based recommendation and, whatever the political expediency, at some stage a government has to accept a fact-driven recommendation."
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
Ministers argue, of course, that they do not have to accept advice - however fact-driven. But the view expressed by Dr Campbell echoes those of Dame Ruth Runciman, a former member of the ACMD, in a letter to The Times yesterday:
"Until now, the ACMD's advice has been accepted by governments of both parties despite the challenge to existing policies and practices that it sometimes posed. I think in particular of the Aids and Drug Misuse Reports, which I had the privilege of chairing and which attracted considerable public and press hostility. Nevertheless, Margaret Thatcher's Government, after some hesitation, took the bold step of accepting the ACMD's recommendations and implementing a wide range of harm reduction initiatives including needle exchanges. As a result, we now have one of the lowest rates in Europe of HIV among drug users."
Dame Ruth now chairs the independent UK Drug Policy Commission, which is currently looking at designing "a governance process for non-partisan, evidence-based drug policy that brings together in a systematic and transparent way, expert advice and public opinion".
One final thought - I think it is indicative of the fragile state of the relationship between the Home Office and its drug advisers that Dr Campbell assumed that details of his resignation were leaked to the BBC by the department. The Home Office denies doing any such thing and points to a statement issued last night which makes no mention of resignations or the names of those involved.
Journalists were separately advised that "any details of potential resignations" (plural) would come from the Advisory Council itself.
Nevertheless, Dr Campbell's consternation adds relevance to one of the demands made by the scientists at yesterday's meeting: that they should have their own press office to deal with journalists rather than come under the Home Office media operation. There is a growing feeling that only by separating the council from the department can its independence be assured.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~12~RS~)