Anyone who has talked to Gordon Brown recently can sense his frustration. This is less to do with his and Labour's low ratings, despite complaints about 24-hour media pressures, than with his inability to make things better for most people.

He knows what is wrong and what needs to be done in the long term, but his short-term options are limited. His problem is how to bridge the two. The familiar levers of power do not work.

So as he prepares to start his seaside holiday this weekend, he is mainly worried about finding means of regaining the initiative in September rather than his own survival.

That dilemma is reflected in the curious dualism of his character: his impressive grasp when discussing global issues and his discomfort when talking about problems nearer to home.

On the former, he is fluent; on the latter, evasive but, apart from his generally assured foreign trips, the public mainly sees the less-secure domestic side.

The world scene has become an escape from political pressures at home. In conversation Mr Brown offers a convincing analysis: how the favourable impact of globalisation in holding down prices of goods through freer trade and in limiting the rate of pay increases through freer movement of labour has now been offset by the inevitable negative consequences.

Rapid growth in China and India has raised the demand for, and price of, oil and other fuels, while the hundreds of millions moving from subsistence into the global economy have pushed up the price of food.

The credit crunch has limited the availability, and pushed up the cost, of borrowing for businesses and homebuyers alike (although he omits his own errors in permitting an unsustainable rise in spending and debt).

Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, remains a close adviser. They talk about the role of speculators and the reform of international financial institutions, notably the International Monetary Fund.

Mr Brown has answers but most are medium-term at best. He explains his meetings with the leaders of Mexico and Nigeria, and the King of Saudi Arabia: how the prospect of an increase in supply, aided by Western technology, can affect market expectations and thus the price of oil.

In the longer term he wants the oil producers to invest in alternative energy sources such as civil nuclear power stations and renewables.

The Government's willingness to take controversial decisions on nuclear power and wind farms, as well as the planning Bill proposals to shorten inquiries into major infrastructure projects, are cited as evidence of his long termism. This is Brown the strategist.

Curiously, it is as a tactician, which seemed to be his strength, that Mr Brown falls down. He points to increased winter fuel payments for those over 60, the postponement of the 2p duty increase from this autumn and the deal with utility companies on helping with fuel bills, but since the problems are mainly global this does not add up to a convincing story. Voters do not feel he is on their side.

Mr Brown does not really like talking about politics as such. It is almost as if it sullies the purity of his strategy. He is irritated with the swings in media fashion, the focus on personalities, which makes it so hard to put across policies.

Yet Mr Brown is hardly blameless. Over the years he has earned a reputation for being indecisive, tribal, obsessed with media headlines and manipulative.

Nothing has damaged him more than an impression of slipperiness and avoidance of responsibility. He has taken the blame for the 10p tax mess, suggesting that the original estimates of the impact were wrong; but for all his energy in seeking global solutions, Mr Brown has appeared at the mercy of events beyond his control.

He is not alone in suffering a sharp fall in personal ratings; so have most of the other G8 leaders he met recently. This is not the time to be a leader facing re-election within two years.

Times Recommends

• It’s the beginning of the affair
• Afghanistan: still a price worth paying
• Heroes of the downtrodden