EUROPE has been a big disappointment of Tony Blair’s premiership: probably for him as well. Today, he makes one of his occasional big speeches on Europe.

Occurring every six months, they have invariably been about the need to end decades of Britain being the awkward partner in the EU. The speeches have been applauded, but the follow-up has not matched earlier expectations. Today’s speech is different. Mr Blair can no longer set out amibitous hopes. That time is over. All he can do now is reflect on his record, and what might have been.

Mr Blair can claim some achievements: backing enlargement to the east; getting economic reform firmly established on the EU agenda; helping to shift the balance of the EU budget slowly (too slowly) away from farming; developing joint security and defence. So he will claim today that Europe is now a “more comfortable place for Britain”, with agreement on the new priorities of jobs, security, energy supply and migration and a “reform consensus”. But there is plenty of resistance to change, such as foreign takeovers and more competition.

The whole is still much less than these parts. Mr Blair has failed to resolve Britain’s relations with the EU. It is not just the indefinite postponement of entry to the euro and the limbo after the rejection of the constitution. Britain may be more influential in Brussels than before 1997, but voters here have not become more pro-EU than a decade ago. Hence, Mr Blair still faces charges of being a “traitor” and betraying British interests when he reaches pragmatic deals, as over the EU budget in December.

Moreover, Europe remains the big exception to the ditching of previous policies by David Cameron. The Tories remain strongly Eurosceptic and have not moved on to new Labour ground.

The question now is less about what Mr Blair can do than what difference Gordon Brown will make. The Blairite view, or perhaps hope, is that Mr Brown will continue with a similar pro-EU and pro-reform approach. Doubters point to Mr Brown’s repeated emphasis on the broader challenges of globalisation, as opposed to trade-bloc Europe. Yet that leads to similar conclusions about resisting protectionist, anti-foreigner views and being outward looking. The real contrast, as with so many Blair-Brown comparisons, is less in policy than in rhetoric, often tilted to a domestic and Eurosceptic media audience.

There is a tendency now to say that the EU is off the agenda with no euro or constitution, and before the French presidential elections in 15 months. Big decisions may be deferred until late 2007, possibly after Mr Blair has gone. But, as Denis MacShane, the former Europe Minister, will argue in a Foreign Policy Centre pamphlet next week, this is not an argument for standing back because Britain needs to be involved in the debate about how to run an EU of 25 (or 27 next year) and about reform. There is a strong case for improving economic performance before addressing institutional issues.

The challenge to Mr Brown will be partly personal, winning over EU leaders as he has Americans. Above all, as Blairites note, Mr Brown will find that being Prime Minister is different from being Chancellor.

Times Recommends

• Oh no, Mr Darling: you have failed
• BBC survives dogfight over Kennel Club expose
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone