Late on Wednesday after PMQ’s and what appears to have been a poorly received meeting with Tory backbenchers the PM’s team went into crisis management overdrive.

First priority, don’t let things get worse by allowing the PM to speak to anyone. He needed to be unavailable for interview. That was quickly sorted when a member of the PM’s family tested positive for Covid. Why they thought to test the pet goldfish is unclear. In an uncharacteristically swift commitment to the rules the PM went straight into lock down.

Next they needed time. They needed a narrative to neuter the immediate calls for his resignation. Time is the only possible friend the PM has at the moment. Who knows what might happen tomorrow, Russia invade Ukraine, China invade Taiwan, Jacob Rees Mogg invade Scotland. Any of these would shift the spotlight and buy more time. But where could they get the time?

The investigation by Susan Grey was the solution. We all needed to wait for Susan’s fact finding work to be concluded before we came to any conclusions about the PM. Having all the facts is something that any fair judgement should be based on. It sounds so reasonable.

Obviously, this involves a jaw dropping piece of double think in that the PM confirmed the relevant facts at the dispatch box indeed apologised, with qualifications, for what he had done. Not clear what additional facts help in this decision. However, logic, truth, facts are all so many weapons to be picked up, bent and dropped as occasion requires.

Next, the detailed comms. This starts with presentational guidance and here we have the tried and tested 4 rule approach that has been used for years now. Rule one, consistency. Everyone recites exactly the same answer, whatever the question, across the media. Rule two, gravitas. Speak seriously, gravely and with absolute confidence. Do not, for a moment allow your brain to engage with what you are saying. This is the kind of schoolboy error which leads to doubt and that can be heard in the voice. Rule three. If the questioner suggests the answer does not address the question, then repeat the same answer speaking as before except more slowly and precisely, as if your questioner is either deaf or dim. Finally, rule four. Whatever questions are asked from then on revert to rule three.

Next, content. First, accept mistakes have been made. Next, point out the PM made a “fulsome” apology. Next the switch. Refer to the investigation into all the facts that is being carried out by Sue Grey. Emphasise how thorough and independent minded Sue is. Don’t mention who she will submit the report to. Then, the close. Claim it is obviously only fair to wait for all the facts before judgements should be made about who should and should not resign. Finally, refer, as if in passing, to what a good job the PM has done on the “big calls”, Brexit, and Vaccination. Don’t be drawn into detail on this.

So on Thursday morning it started on the Today programme and was repeated by different ministers through the course of the day. We need to wait for the facts to be determined by the estimable Susan Grey whose character is unimpeachable. Once she has completed her work we will all be in a better position to decide.

Next stage wheel out cabinet ministers to provide statements of support. Stick to the big calls line. Avoid detail. Don’t take questions.

Next, prepare to shape the appearance of the Sue Grey report. Provide selective leaks so its shock value is undermined. Get someone to read through forensically and look for any ways in which it can be undermined or weaponised. Don’t forget strict logic is not a constraint in the process.

Finally, make sure all those involved in the “alleged” parties know what they think and ensure they have not left any inadvertent clues lying about on their phones, laptops or other electronic devices.

The first part of all this is, I think, not far from the truth. You only have to listen to the news through the course of the day to know a clear narrative has been set and applied. The latter part may be true and actually is by far the riskiest part of the whole strategy. Usually it is the cover up that delivers the killer punch.

Having said all this I suspect all this effort is likely to be of no avail. It looks very much like the judgement train has left the station. The public are not going to carefully parse a dry report on facts about the parties. And it certainly will not change their opinion.

People have watched relatives die on IPads and adhered to the most stringent curtailment of their freedoms since the second world war at the behest of the PM. The vast bulk of the population have seen the logic of what was needed and behaved with incredible restraint and probity.

When the author of the rules flagrantly breaches them, it cuts through. When he apologises but goes on to say he did not realise it was a party. It adds insult to injury.

Boris has lost the public. What is more, if he battles on it is virtually certain he will make his position worse. Cabinet colleagues and leadership contenders will need to think carefully about how much of their political capital they are willing to expend on defending the indefensible.

This is not a situation where Labour supporters are making a routine call for resignation. Many thousands of Tory voters are doing the same. The PM’s one strength was his ability to connect with the public and win elections. He has now lost that. The past year has seen a succession of spectacular own goals which have eaten away at the credibility of the PM and the Conservative Party.

Boris is famous for being able to get out of tight corners, but his slippery skills are now set against the ruthless power focus of the Conservative Party. He now looks like a loser and worse a liability. There can be few believe he will be able to change.

On Sunday there will be some awful headlines and possibly some further revelations and new poll numbers showing Labour pulling ahead of the Tory’s. In their constituencies and constituency party Conservative MP’s will be getting a grilling from their Chairs particularly those in red wall seats. Positioning for a challenge has already started with soundings amongst grandees and funders.

The men in grey suits will be calculating when is the optimum time to tap the PM on the shoulder. Next week as MP’s come back from their constituencies one suspect the calculation will only be when not if.

Allowing a culture to arise where breaches of the rules within government are allowed is a serious failure of judgement. Participating in the breaches is a disgrace. Pretending you did not know is duplicitous. But the worst thing of all is not understanding what you have done is just wrong. That is what has hurt the public and that is the tragedy of Mr Johnson – not having a clear understanding of the difference between right and wrong.