They are, we are told, already dismissive of Britain Stronger in Europe (BSE) campaign launched earlier this month under the chairmanship of Lord (Stuart) Rose.

Rose is regarded as a "genuinely decent man with an acute business brain", but "politically gauche", being used like a decoy duck. He will be relegated to the sidelines when a re-invigorated campaign is unveiled.

That, of course, entirely accords with our thinking, where we have consistently pointed out that the formal "remain" campaign is an irrelevance – a " pantomime horse" which serves no other functions but to distract the "leavers" from the core issues, keeping them occupied and out of harm's way.

It has always been the case that the real enemy is represented by David Cameron, supported by the EU – represented by Jean-Claude Juncker. But we have also acknowledged that George Osborne is heavily involved.

This is a lesson which the "leavers" need to take on board, avoiding the obvious trap of frittering away time and energy when it should be tackling the issues that will have an effect on the conduct of the campaign.

Crucially, in his article, Oborne points up the issues familiar to readers of this blog, not least that Mandelson and Osborne want the referendum to be held at the last possible moment, most likely in the autumn of 2017.

By that time "colleagues" will have set in motion a series of treaty changes which will permit further integration among 19 eurozone members, opening the way for the UK to adopt what Osborne calls "associate status".

The "remainers" - with Osborne and Mandelson plotting behind the scenes - are convinced, says Osborne, that all this will convince the majority of the British people to vote to remain in the EU.

They also expect the "leavers" to be destabilised by these apparent concessions to the British people. In any case, they scent divisions in the "leave" camp, with some wanting to quit the EU at all costs, while others are prepared to remain if reforms are achieved.

This is not helped by the likes of Hannan whose ego-driven interventions have him acting the loose cannon, extolling the virtues of "associate status" when this is the very thing we need to avoid.

On the other hand, though, for all the political skills of the Osborne-Mandelson duo, their hand is very weak, forced on them by the "colleagues" and easily portrayed for what it is – a "second class" option, the worst of all possible worlds.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, the "remains" are picking up on tedious detail and making a meal of it, as if it really mattered.

But what actually matters is the big picture. We are being "played" and the only way to deal with it is to ignore the "remains" while we work to our own agenda. Will Straw and Dominic Cummings can waste their time arguing with each other, but we do not need to waste out time on it.

In fact, we need waste very little time on Will Straw and even less on Cummings and his business associate, Matthew Elliott. The Boiling Frog has their measure.

Lost Leonardo puts the campaign in better focus and Pete points us in the direction we should be going. It is not easy to ignore the distractions, but that makes it no less essential.

Predictably, the legacy media is of little help, running bizarre stories about impossible scenarios that should not detain us for more than a nanoscecond.

Nor should we be distracted by the red-herring raised by Cummings on a second referendum in the event of a "leave" vote. Originally, this was proposed by the man as a mechanism to de-risk the first referendum, offering a stages transition instead of a "big bang".

The preferable way to do this was and is to produce a coherent exit plan, but fragile alliance brokered by the Cummings-Elliott nexus is unable to agree on the nature of a plan. Any attempt to impose a single plan would fracture the alliance, so Cummings ducked the issue and went for his "second referendum" plan.

The idea has since become an option, where a "leave" vote could strengthen the UK’s hand and force the EU to give more ground in another renegotiation, followed by the second vote.

This possibility is now being strongly denied by No. 10 with David Cameron delivering "a stark warning" that a vote to leave the EU will be final and irreversible.

A senior aide to the prime minister put out a statement saying it was simply "not credible" to suggest that a majority of the electorate could vote to leave the EU, only for the government and EU to re-enter discussions to try to find a way to keep the UK in.

For all the "cleverness" of Mr Cummings, all he has managed to achieve, therefore, is to distract from the main issues, and to open up the Vote Leave campaign to the accusation that it is "lacking confidence in their own case" by proposing the plan. 

This is what happens when you get amateurs on the job. We don't need them. The actual targets are clear, and our best strategies are now emerging. We do not need the distractions, and would rather not waste the time.