In 1997, it all worked brilliantly. The sun shone on Blair as he made the political weather. The media lapped up the initiatives. The public welcomed the fresh start. The cabinet and Labour Party tolerated "strong leadership" from the man who had won them a landslide.

Ministers approved the Millennium Dome, even though a majority of them didn't want it. Blair didn't even bother to consult his cabinet about making the Bank of England independent, saying dismissively: "They will agree with it."

It is not working today. The media are unmoved by Blair's new bout of initiativitis. His announcements don't grab big headlines any more. The people aren't listening either. Both media and public know there will soon be another prime minister.

Cabinet ministers, who were promised an end to Blair's informal "sofa government" after the Iraq war, complain privately that the government has become a one-man band as Blair tries frantically to tick too many boxes before his time runs out this summer. He is a middle-aged prime minister in a hurry.

Several of his recent announcements have not been discussed by the cabinet, let alone approved by it.

They have been driven by Downing Street, not Whitehall departments.

This month, Blair announced an endowment scheme to safeguard the future of universities, including �200m of government funds to match money raised by the universities.

There's only one problem: there is no money in the education budget for it.

There are growing doubts about whether Gordon Brown, the increasingly frustrated prime-minister-stillin-waiting, will feel bound by the commitments Blair is rushing out.

Take the National Health Service.

On Monday, Blair raised the prospect of an average waiting time of eight weeks between seeing a GP and having an operation. This goes further than the 18-week maximum wait by the end of next year promised in Labour's 2005 manifesto.

If most operations were carried out within eight weeks, it would be a tremendous achievement. But people who waited 10 weeks might not think that. They might feel aggrieved at having to wait longer than the average.

Another source of friction is Blair's determination to push through a plan to split the Home Office into a security department and a ministry of justice. This is opposed by intelligence services, who do not want to come under the Home Office's wing.

Brown is not persuaded and does not think the proposal has been fully thought through. He is conducting his own assessment of Whitehall's structure as part of his government-wide spending review, which will inevitably supersede Blair's attempt to set the policy direction for the next 10 years.

If Brown is unhappy with the decision on the Home Office, he will review it this summer. Whatever happened to the "stable and orderly transition" Blair promised Labour MPs after the 2005 election? And to his pledge to restore cabinet government?

Yesterday it emerged that Blair has been lobbying the Bush administration for months to site key elements of the so-called 'Son of Star Wars' missile defence system in Britain.

That was news to cabinet ministers too, even though it is a hugely significant move. Brown has been sounded out about the costs but not the detail.

Some of Blair's closest allies are urging him to slow down and prioritise more in his remaining months. It is good advice. Instead of chasing yet more "headline-grabbing initiatives", as the prime minister once demanded in a leaked memo, or calling yet another Downing Street "summit", he should devote his remaining time to securing a few really big achievements.

The return of self-government in Northern Ireland would be a big prize and he would deserve the credit, given the amount of energy he has expended on the peace process in the past 10 years.

Perhaps Blair should spend more time trying to convince his pal George Bush to join a new global agreement on climate change and less on persuading him to base his hi-tech military toys in Britain. That really would be a legacy worth having.