Whoever leaked Sir Kim Darroch’s email has dealt a terrible blow to Britain’s Diplomatic capability as well as to our vastly important alliance with the United States. What Ambassador will now want to give his full and frank and unvarnished opinion of any overseas regime, if it risks being leaked, and his or her career wrecked as a result?  The spooks must waste no time finding the culprit and making sure that he never has any role to play in public life ever again. It may even be that he will face criminal charges, about which few of us would shed many tears.

Yet it may be a symptom of a wider malaise - playing the man rather than the ball in footballing terms. (Ad hominem attacks to the classically educated). Sir Kim’s Diptel was about the Administration, it is true; but the language was pretty blatantly anti-Trump. The notion that Boris’s failure to endorse him during Wednesday’s heated TV debate led to Sir Kim’s resignation is absurd, and again tends to personalise it all. The fact is that, whether you like it or not, given the President’s clearly tweeted views, Sir Kim quite plainly could no longer continue as our Ambassador, Johnson endorsement or none.

I suppose it’s inevitable that the Leadership battle (which is thankfully close to its denouement) should get a bit personal, although I am glad that both candidates have avoided the worst personalised excesses and tried to focus on policy. Boris has been clear that detail is not his strong point, and that rather akin to his strategy when he was the (very successful) Mayor of London, masterful delegation to senior colleagues will be the hallmark of his Administration.

I very much welcome that. The PM should be Primus inter pares.  The Secretary of State should have total responsibility for his or her department, with the PM stepping in to solve disputes (for example with the Treasury), or on occasion to identify himself with some policy or another. But the detailed policy creation in which recent PMs seem to have engaged marks a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of No 10. We do not have a Presidency. We have Cabinet Government, and early signs are that Boris may well recognise that more than any recent PM.

Even normal political discussion has become excessively personal, especially with regard to Brexit. (The moron who wrote to me this week to indicate that I was a traitor, and should therefore suffer the penalty of hanging should know that Her Majesty’s finest may well be knocking on his idiotic door.) Surely we can discuss even the most fundamental and controversial of matters without resorting to personalised abuse and insult. I am delighted that my constituent and friend Sir Roger Scruton who was so falsely accused by the New Statesman and then absurdly sacked by James Brokenshire, has now been given a full apology by them both. We must be allowed our views – whether philosophical, diplomatic or political, and allowed to express them freely and without fear of personal abuse or retribution of any kind. Let us play the ball, not the man.