Furious infighting at the top of the Government. Sounds familiar? No, not, the war of the Labour succession, but the turf war over the future of the Home Office and counter-terrorism strategy being fought among half a dozen departments, the intelligence agencies and the top permanent secretaries. It is a battle of political wills, vested interests and long experience.

Anyone who has talked to John Reid recently can be in little doubt about his determination. He believes that the dispersion of counter-terrorism activities around Whitehall has seriously damaged the drive against al-Qaeda. Vividly illustrating his point with his hands wide apart, he argues that there is a big gap between what is needed and current capabilities. On his view, Britain is years behind in providing the necessary drive, forward thinking about threats, planning and campaigning to win hearts and minds in the Muslim community.

Mr Reid’s passion about the need for an urgent decision has unsettled some Cabinet colleagues, who question whether he really has a grip over the running of his department. His strongest card has been appealing to a departing Prime Minister acutely sensitive to terrorist issues.

He has won the battle to be the chief ministerial co-ordinator of counter-terrorism, but that does not mean that he will be Mr Intelligence. Sir Richard Mottram in the Cabinet Office will remain chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee in charge of assessment as well as co-ordinator of the intelligence agencies. Moreover, the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and GCHQ, the signals and code breakers, will retain their current status, reporting through the Foreign Secretary.

The other big debate has been how far the Home Office should be split with prisons and probation (the National Offender Management Service) going into a ministry of justice formed out of a revamped Department for Constitutional Affairs. Originally, this plan was strongly opposed by the Whitehall Establishment and by most former home secretaries on the ground that the department should be broadly based.

Although final decisions are a few days away, the debate is shifting towards a split. Officials are looking at how to minimise the inevitable jagged lines between departments. The timing is also tricky. The Cabinet minister responsible for prisons cannot be in the Lords, as Lord Falconer of Thoroton is. Imagine the furore when a riot or escape occurs and only a junior minister answers to MPs. This argues for delaying a split, but not the shake-up in counter-terrorism, until the change of prime minister. So the next Lord Chancellor could be in the Commons, with only one Cabinet minister in the Lords.

The Gordon Brown camp seems relaxed. None of this will interfere with his plans for prime ministerial control of a national security strategy and a unified budget, as well as his plans for big changes in the machinery of government. So behind the headlines, watch for fudges in the details. Waiting for Gordon is still the watchword.

Times Recommends

• Strip away the figleaf and reveal naysayers
• Dave’n’George: there may be trouble ahead
• I do not accept that £64,000 a year for politicians is peanuts