It's what the British do best - an establishment cover-up breathtaking in its brazenness

In the early years of the 21st century, even in creaky old Britain, it is unprecedented for an official inquiry to be carried out by a key player in the institution under investigation. Sir Michael Peat, the Prince of Wales's Private Secretary, is not exactly well placed to deliver an objective report. Not surprisingly, therefore, his judgements are equally unprecedented in their absurdity.

Where individuals are blamed, it is not at all clear what they have done wrong. When serious allegations are made, no one is blamed. Instead, there are unspecified "failings in systems and procedures". What a surprise. The report lets the Royals off the hook and is an embarrassing setback for systems and procedures. It is not possible to sack Prince System and Princess Procedure.

The main semi-victim of the report is Prince Charles' valet, Michael Fawcett, but the Prince's household has hit upon a "third way" in almost punishing him, but not quite doing so. Mr Fawcett has resigned, but his firm will work for the Prince on a freelance basis. The valet was found to have infringed rules on accepting gifts, but there was no financial impropriety. He was guilty. He was not guilty. He has resigned. He will still be working for the Prince. Perhaps Sir Michael could compose a second UN resolution on Iraq that would unite Britain and France and keep Cameroon on board.

On other, more explosive issues, the "investigation" proceeds with the same seamless illogicality. The report concludes there was no cover-up in a claim of male rape from another valet. Yet Sir Michael adds that the Palace did not conduct a proper investigation. Apparently this was to do with the "mindset" of the Royal Household. The rest of us would not get away with this excuse.

Predictably, the bizarre collapse of the Paul Burrell trial raises no questions for these investigators. The Queen's disclosure of her pre-trial conversation with Paul Burrell was "properly made". The fact that Prince William was told of Mr Burrell's claim that he was safeguarding Diana's possessions 18 months before the collapse of the trial is noted without comment. Surely this information cries out for a question, even if Sir Michael dares not seek answers.

What comes across vividly in this superficial whitewash of a report is that the Royal Family continues to live in an insular world of its own, where the criteria that govern the rest of us simply do not apply. It is an outdated world of valets, butlers and gifts.

This report, though, will be a mere hiccup for the Royals. Let us not forget how some newspapers forced the BBC and meek liberal commentators to accept that the death of the Queen Mother was worthy of a week's televised mourning. Although increasingly anachronistic, the Royals will not go away with such powerful allies.