It’s too much to say that Tory MPs have lost confidence in Boris Johnson as Prime Minister. They never had much in the first place, which is why his chances of leading the party were seen as laughably low until the Brexit crisis. He was chosen as a wild card, the only man who could turn Theresa May’s mess into a majority. That hasn’t changed. So it doesn’t matter how frustrated they get with him: he is still, by some margin, the best election-winner they have. Until that changes, he stays.

But a glorious revolution now seems to be underway. The king remains but his powers are being curtailed by parliament – or, in this case, his Cabinet. Sajid Javid yesterday ruled out compulsory vaccination, abruptly ending the “national conversation” that the Prime Minister called for the night before. No 10 can, of course, still press ahead – but having described mandatory jabs as “unethical” Javid would have to resign (again). In his way, the Health Secretary has drawn a red line around No 10.

A few weeks ago, Rishi Sunak drew his own red line. Any extra revenue, he said, will be used to cut taxes rather than swell the state: that was his personal pledge delivered to a private meeting of backbench Tory MPs. No 10 might demand more spending but having made such a promise, Sunak would have to resign rather than break a personal pledge. So two holders of the four great offices of state have put the Prime Minister on notice. It’s quite an unusual situation.

Both Sunak and Javid have already bent quite a bit, swallowing decisions that they would once have choked on. In the Chancellor’s case it’s the hugely-expensive Dilnot proposals for care homes. With Javid, it’s vaccine passports. Not long ago, the Health Secretary was assuring Tory backbenchers that this was an example of Hancock-era illiberal madness and that he’d bury the idea. He took great pride in telling Andrew Marr (and the public) that he was scrapping them. Now he is enforcing them, without any evidence, under orders from a panicked No 10.

Politics is about compromise; every leader disappoints. But what’s changing now is that the Cabinet is limiting Johnson’s power because, if left alone, there’s no telling what damage he’d do. Sunak was promoted because he accepted what Javid (his predecessor) would not: that No 10 would spend what it wanted to and the Treasury simply raised the money. Javid hated being called “Chino” (Chancellor In Name Only) and thought for a while that Sunak would be seen as a “babychino”. But since then, Johnson’s authority has rapidly and visibly drained.

The rule-by-terror under Dominic Cummings has turned into a Boris Johnson court of chaos which is, if anything, worse. The Prime Minister’s bizarre decision to hold an inquiry into whether his own staff held a party under his own roof underlines the sense of no one being in charge. His ministers are told to rule out Plan B restrictions one day then, quite literally, implement them the next. It gives the impression of staggering decisions, affecting the lives of millions, being taken on a whim. As one minister puts it: “It’s a complete horror show.” 

It’s not just Twitter conspiracy theorists who suspect the new lockdown measures were intended to distract media attention from the growing scandal of rulebreaking Downing Street parties. There are members of the Cabinet who think that too. They can’t work out why else the vaccine passports arrived from nowhere, or why Johnson suddenly decided to emulate the European panic that he had been defining himself against. When he addressed the Cabinet this week, the Prime Minister admitted to this flaw in the logic – that, in effect, he had no evidence for his decision so no obvious exit strategy. But if this was a diversionary tactic, it has ended up a misjudgement of Owen Paterson-style proportions – turning backbench anger into cold fury. Small scandals that would once have been ignored are now seen to be far more relevant.

So it matters, now, if there were several parties in No 10 rather than just one. It matters if such parties were (as one attendee tells me) “widespread” not just in Downing Street but across Whitehall. Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, is now meant to be investigating – and in current political circumstances, this will not be a whitewash. This raises the question of what will happen to those who attended.

And it matters, now, if the Prime Minister misled his ethics adviser by saying he had no idea how his wife’s new wallpaper was being paid for when, in fact, he had personally asked the man who held the purse strings for more. It indicates a shambles which has gone beyond embarrassing and is plunging the country into unpredictable lockdown regimes that seem more closely linked to the news agenda than hospitalisation rates.

Once, those opposing Johnson on the back benches were the has-beens and the never-going-to-bes. That’s changing now, with young and ambitious Tory MPs ready to define themselves against Johnson’s lurch towards big-state conservatism. Dehenna Davison, perhaps the best-known of the 2019 intake, rebelled against tax rises and is rebelling against vaccine passports. Douglas Ross, leader of the Scottish Tories, is talking about Johnson’s resignation. A member of Johnson’s campaign team has told me he’d now vote to remove him if (he says “when”) the opportunity arises.

Johnson himself decided on strategic resignation. Thinking that Theresa May’s Brexit deal was heading for disaster, he thought he’d jump ship. As did Dominic Raab, Esther McVey and Suella Braverman – all of whom ended up in good positions in a new regime. Ministers who think the Johnson project is doomed might be tempted to leave now, positioning themselves for what follows. The sheer turnover of staff in No 10 might be an earlier indicator of resignations to come.

Ministers who do quit should be prepared to be on the back benches for quite some time. My hunch is that the Prime Minister will stay, but with more red lines drawn around him. Almost none of his Cabinet would tolerate compulsory vaccination, for example, but this time we should expect more to defy him by saying so in public. They are not (yet) ready to lose Johnson but will be actively asking who might do a better job.