First David Cameron announces a “pause” in the government’s plans to reform the National Health Service in order to listen further to the views of health professionals and the public.
Then the doctor’s trade union, the British Medical Association, reveals that it thinks the Health and Social Care Bill should be scrapped, and any changes achieved without legislation.
Finally, deputy premier Nick Clegg announces that the Bill is to go back before a committee of MPs for further scrutiny, setting back its likely passage through Parliament by at least six months.
The question on the lips of many Westminster watchers this weekend is: Are the government’s NHS reforms dead in the water?
Predictably, backbench Tory MPs are up in arms over Mr Clegg's intervention, claiming yesterday that he had "bounced" the government into delaying the Bill.
They made clear that whatever changes are ultimately made to the Bill, there are certain "red lines they wish to draw against Lib Dem encroachment on the original blueprint.
In an email sent to all Conservative MPs yesterday, backbencher Nick de Bois called on his colleagues to "reclaim the debate" over the NHS.
He said the "red lines" should include the requirement for all GPs to take on responsibility for primary care across England – ignoring the fact that GPs themselves oppose this provision.
The backlash against the reforms was growing long before the Lib Dems' hopes of changing the voting system went up in smoke, but it was nevertheless this that proved the tipping point.
Once the Tories decided to throw the kitchen sink at AV, it was obvious that Nick Clegg would have to be thrown some sort of bone to keep the Lib Dems in the government, and it was equally obvious that this would be it.
Politically, sacrificing a set of unpopular health reforms in exchange for keeping a voting system that kept them in power for most of the 20th century might seem like a smart move for Mr Cameron.
But the downside is that so much had been invested politically in these reforms that the now seemingly-inevitable retreat will be seen as a major blow to the Prime Minister's authority.
Even if the reforms are not dead in the water, the political career of Health Secretary Andrew Lansley surely is.
If the government ultimately decides to press ahead with the changes, Mr Lansley is likely to be replaced by someone who can more successfully sell them to the relevant stakeholders.
If on the other hand they are watered down or abandoned, his job is almost certain to go to a more emollient politician who can re-build bridges with the health professionals.
The latter scenario is surely the most likely one. Tory MPs want the new GP fundholding consortia in place by April 2013, but in the light of Mr Clegg's latest intervention, this is looking like an increasingly forlorn hope.
The danger for the government is that, if the measures do not reach the statute book this summer, the institutional upheaval will still be ongoing in the run-up to the next election, due in 2015.
Mr Cameron is nothing if not a pragmatist, and he will surely view the prospect of organisational chaos in the NHS as a risk he can do without as he prepares to face the country again.
In those circumstances, it would make more sense for Mr Lansley's proposals to go into the next Conservative manifesto rather than into a revised Health and Social Care Bill.
And who knows - if Mr Cameron can win an outright majority next time, the Tories might even be able to claim a mandate for them.