As a prime minister drained of authority struggles to hold her party together, ambitious ministers feel increasingly able to cock a snook with impunity. This week’s rows over Boris Johnson’s dangerous handling of a disagreement with Iran, and Priti Patel’s freelance policymaking in the Middle East may seem a coincidence. But the conduct of the foreign secretary is bound together with that of the international development secretary. Both Mr Johnson and Ms Patel are able to play fast and loose because normal collective cabinet disciplines no longer apply. The prime minister is afraid to reprimand or sack. In this government it is everyone for themselves.

As the more senior and high-profile minister, one might say that Mr Johnson’s conduct is the more serious. A week ago, he told the Commons foreign affairs select committee that the British woman Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was still detained in Iran but “she was simply teaching people journalism as I understand it”. This claim was untrue, but hardliners in Iran were quick to seize on the remarks. “His statement shows that Nazanin had visited the country for anything but a holiday,” an Iranian legal website concluded, accusing her of spreading propaganda instead. As a result, Ms Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who has already been in prison for 19 months accused of plotting to overthrow the regime, risks further charges and punishments.

If a minister makes a mistake of this kind, the first response ought to be to correct it. Yet it took six days, and pressure from the British woman’s husband, to get Mr Johnson to do this. When he did it, his words then fell short. On Tuesday, Mr Johnson phoned his Iranian counterpart to correct his remarks. Yet in the Commons later he found ways of saying everything except sorry. All he would allow was that he “could have been clearer”. Mr Johnson is not a man for details and not a man for apologies, either. Yet his actions have put a British citizen even further into harm’s way and have added to Mr Johnson’s already appalling reputation as Britain’s representative on the international stage. Mrs May was apparently considering during the summer whether she should sack Mr Johnson. She has not done it yet. But she has an even stronger reason for doing so now.

Nevertheless, Ms Patel’s actions are in many ways even more serious. In August, while on holiday, the international development secretary held 12 meetings with Israeli leaders and officials, including the prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, without telling the Foreign Office, the UK ambassador, or the prime minister in advance – or, in the PM’s case, afterwards. As acts of insubordination to the prime minister and her government, this is hard to beat, and even Ms Patel must have known it. Almost incredibly, she nevertheless went ahead. The Middle East is not New Zealand or Denmark, places where a mid-vacation courtesy call can perhaps be informal and unfreighted. The Middle East is the most intractable, adversarial and politically fractured place on the globe. Secret diplomacy by a minister in this manner is nothing less than mutinous.

Once again, though, Mrs May turned the other cheek. In the Commons on Tuesday the Middle East minister, Alistair Burt, who serves in both the FCO and DfID, was put up to speak on her behalf. Mr Burt did not try to excuse Ms Patel, but he said the matter was considered closed. It should not be. Ms Patel did not just make a lazy mistake. She did something seriously wrong, deliberately, a dozen times, for suspicious reasons, and then tried to change UK policy afterwards.

Quick guide Boris Johnson's errors of judgment Show Hide Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe Boris Johnson said that the British-Iranian citizen Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, convicted of spying in Iran, was “simply teaching people journalism” – a statement her family and her employer both said was untrue. His comments were subsequently cited as proof that she was engaged in “propaganda against the regime”. 'Dead bodies' After Johnson suggested that the Libyan city of Sirte might become a new Dubai once “the dead bodies” were removed, Downing Street said it was not “an appropriate choice of words”. Myanmar The foreign secretary was accused of “incredible insensitivity” after it emerged he recited part of a colonial-era Rudyard Kipling poem in front of local dignitaries while on an official visit to Myanmar. Whisky sour Johnson apologised after causing a “livid” reaction in a worshipper in a Sikh temple in Bristol by discussing his enthusiasm for ending tariffs on whisky traded between the UK and India. Alcohol is forbidden under some Sikh teachings. Continental drift Boris Johnson referred to Africa as “that country” in his Conservative party conference speech.

Tweet like Trump The foreign secretary suggested he wished he could tweet like Donald Trump, despite intense criticism of the US president’s use of Twitter, on which he has launched personal attacks against his foes.

Ms Patel and Mr Johnson have some differences. She is a sceptic about the two-state solution in the Middle East. He supports it. She is an ideological follower of Margaret Thatcher. He is interested only in himself.

But the two also have things in common. They are both Brexiters, each brought into the May cabinet in the doomed attempt to hold the Conservative party together after the referendum. Both are now also ministers with records of going freelance in defiance of government policy. And both are intensely ambitious to succeed Mrs May. Mr Johnson’s consuming egotism is well-known. But Ms Patel, whose speech to this year’s Tory conference contained the word “I” no fewer than 35 times, runs even Mr Johnson close.

Neither of these ministers would deserve a place in a Conservative cabinet based on competence, loyalty and Mrs May’s agenda of policies that claim to offer a fair deal for all. But Mrs May left those possibilities behind in the dust long ago. She may still be in office. But her supposed subordinates are now the ones with the power.