It must be irritating for a man who is blind in one eye and who has limited sight in the other to be told that he has a difficulty with “vision”. An absence of “vision”, the commenting classes intone, is what has handicapped Gordon Brown’s Government.

It is, allegedly, the explanation for the opinion polls, his patchy parliamentary performances and a perception that the Prime Minister has lost his sense of direction (a “moral compass”, it turns out, is no substitute for the actual item). It is, apparently, the explanation for a range of mishaps – from the number of days that a terrorist suspect can be held without charge to the content of the Foreign Secretary’s speech in Belgium. Mr Brown, it is claimed, must find a “vision” or he’ll be done for.

Well, if I were the Prime Minister I would not be popping out to Visions R Us. There are three sound reasons to doubt this fashionable thesis.

First, more than anything else it reflects the sour mood of the media. I do not believe that voters resent that we didn’t have an election last month. They might look back on all that happened around the party conference season with a little bemusement – but the notion that it has altered their long-term attitudes is nonsense. The press and television are another matter. Their reaction to the whole non-election affair is much like that of a lady who is whisked off for a romantic break by her boyfriend, taken for a tantalising glimpse of the contents of jewellery shop windows and given the impression that the question was about to be popped – and then informed that he would prefer another 18 months or more of courtship before a decision. The charge of lacking a “vision” is the media’s collective revenge on Mr Brown.

The second reason is that there is no evidence that the electorate is seeking a “vision”. Competent if unspectacular administration would be perfectly acceptable. Nor should this be thought irrational. If someone came up to you in the street and announced: “I have a vision I wish to share with you”, would your response be (a) to reply: “How fantastic, please do and take as long as you want about it” or (b) to work out how to escape from this nutter as soon as possible? The last significant historical figure to stake everything on a vision was Joan of Arc and the stake was her reward.

Finally, it is not as if Mr Brown is receiving an awful lot of competition on the vision front from David Cameron. Far from it. The Tory leader’s priority is to render his party inoffensive and if that means sacrificing intellectual rigour then so be it. So last week he made a speech in front of an audience of women during which he condemned rape (brave, Dave), another the next day in which he presented as bold and original a proposal first put forward 25 years ago by Michael Heseltine for referendums to be held before high council tax increases were allowed, and then a third which, since he was in the North West of England, was a testament to how much he adored manufacturing industry. If this is “vision”, then the test for inspirational leadership must be miserable.

So, vision is irrelevant. Mr Brown should not waste time worrying about it. This does not mean, though, that everything is fine in Downing Street and that there is nothing that he should learn from the present political situation. There is a legitimate critique but it is much more subtle than the “vision” chatter. It is instead about a failure of focus. Put simply, the Prime Minister has too small an inner circle trying to do far too much.

It is this that explains the perhaps paradoxical character of the Government. There has been, by every account, a real revival of the Cabinet and its committees under him and the content of legislation is debated rather than rubber-stamped at ministerial meetings. Formality has been restored and this has been appreciated by colleagues and officials. In contrast, on matters of political strategy rather than policy provision, a tiny set of Mr Brown’s close allies are manically attempting to shape it while moonlighting as men who are also in charge of various Whitehall departments. A blur is the inevitable outcome.

As a result, the Government appears to be promoting hundreds of initiatives without establishing a clear and consistent set of principles. The Prime Minister is unrivalled in a sudden crisis but otherwise has the tendency to immerse himself too deeply in micro-detail that should be delegated. It is as if having had to wait so long for his job he is determined to push through in minutes everything that he would have done if he had entered No 10 much earlier. Aneurin Bevan once insisted that “the language of priorities is the religion of socialism”. It is a maxim that Mr Brown should repeat endlessly to himself and all around him (it may be wise to leave the “socialism” bit out – no need to be quite that scary).

Focus was always destined to be the challenge for this hyperactive, restless, faintly tormented individual. It does not demand a version of costly laser surgery to fix it. The introduction of a few outside figures with the authority to make the agenda of the Prime Minister more disciplined and hone his message to voters would work wonders.

Vision is overstated. Focus, underrated. Will Mr Brown be able to see that?

Times Recommends

• We have kit and leadership. Let’s go
• Behind the scenes at the biggest deal
• Conferences — what a waste of money