Five years on, Prescott remains the man to watch

If anything, he could become even more essential to the PM as the jockeying for succession starts

Internal links

Blair 'like rabbit in headlights' on euro, says Patten

Labour's anniversary: How was it for you?

News analysis: Wasted chances and strategic blunders haunt Prime Minister

Leading article: After five years in office, New Labour has still not found its sense of purpose

As Tony Blair finishes the washing up after this week's thrash for the Queen with past prime ministers, will he contemplate a similar knees-up for his cabinet ministers who tomorrow celebrate, with him, five years in office? Of the original 22 members of Mr Blair's cabinet, formed in May 1997, only 10 of them are still there. And of these, only five are in their original positions.

When was the last time a government, after five years in office, still had the three top ministers – Prime Minister, Deputy PM and the Chancellor – all in the same positions? After such a period in power, on most occasions in previous administrations in modern times, usually one or other of these "Big Three" had either resigned, retired or been sacked.

True, John Prescott has swapped his Transport brief for the Cabinet Office but, along with Gordon Brown, he remains the most enduring and important public face of the current administration – apart from the Prime Minister himself. He has now been sitting alongside Tony Blair for a total of eight years. And the likelihood is that this remarkable state of affairs seems set to deepen and to last as long as Mr Blair remains in office.

Wild speculation about Mr Prescott's imminent retirement, which circulated earlier this year, is totally wide of the mark. If anything, he could become even more essential and indispensable to the Prime Minister in the remaining years ahead as the jockeying for the succession gets under way.

Having achieved his own personal political ambitions and now at the apex of his parliamentary career, he appears more relaxed, although as busy and energetic as ever. Crucially, he is trusted by Mr Blair, who regards him not as a potential rival, dreaming of the succession, but as a loyal and dependable colleague.

Now that Mr Blair has probably passed the halfway point of his premiership, however, the danger of isolation and bunker mentality must be resisted. Never more than now will he be in need of the loyal deputy and candid friend.

More column inches have been devoted to the sometimes fraught relationship between the Prime Minister and his Chancellor – due to Mr Brown's desire, one day, to succeed to the top job. But an equally intriguing relationship is the one between Messrs Blair and Prescott – partly because of the age difference and partly because of their totally different characters and backgrounds. When Mr Prescott was first elected to Parliament Mr Blair was still at school. Arguably, this "odd couple" is the rock on which the Government's ultimate success of policy delivery – the economy apart – depends.

Willie Whitelaw was indispensable to Margaret Thatcher as her personal "fixer". But she used the post to punish Geoffrey Howe in 1989 after he and Nigel Lawson had threatened to resign if she did not commit Britain to joining the ERM earlier that year. Michael Heseltine tried to perform a similar role for John Major as Mr Prescott, but Heseltine's authority was weaker, not least because he still had ambitions to succeed Mr Major.

Mr Prescott's importance is derived from the fact that he is, by extension, part of "Tony Blair – Prime Minister". But the relationship also depends on Mr Prescott's renowned frankness, in private, of which Mr Blair will no doubt be on the receiving end should the two discuss Mr Blair's threat to withdraw benefits from persistent truants. Mr Prescott, as head of the Social Exclusion Unit, was noticeably lukewarm when interviewed by the BBC for On the Record. Ministers have long recognised that in their dealings with Mr Prescott they are, in effect, dealing with Mr Blair and there will be as much lobbying of Mr Prescott by the likes of Alistair Darling at Work and Pensions as there will be of Downing Street.

It has taken a long time to refine Mr Prescott's role, in institutional terms. Part of this has been due to the learning process required because barely a single member of this Government had ever been in office prior to winning the 1997 General Election. The early control freakery was a hangover from the discipline acquired in Opposition.

This has now developed further with the No. 10 policy units and the introduction of the Performance and Innovation Unit, Forward Strategy Unit and the Delivery Unit.

But there must surely be a growing recognition that the functions here and those of the Cabinet Office, over which Mr Prescott presides, now need to be better co-ordinated – with a senior politician properly able to account for their activities to Parliament. Mr Prescott has been arguing for better parliamentary accountability for some time and should be pleased at Mr Blair's welcome decision to appear, twice a year, before the Liaison Committee of Chairmen of Select Committees. This may now pave the way for an extension of Mr Prescott's own role to include more regular accountability to the departmental committees.

The opportunity provided by the retirement of Sir Richard Wilson, the outgoing Cabinet Secretary, ought now to be taken, explicitly, to clarify the lines of accountability between civil servants and politicians regarding the execution of policy. This should surely result in the likelihood of better accountability by Ministers, through Mr Prescott, to Parliament that may also restore the outward sense of collective cabinet government.

Already Mr Prescott resolves differences between cabinet ministers and chairs the bulk of cabinet committees. He has always been more committed to cabinet government than many ministers. What he and Mr Blair want to avoid are the damaging Cabinet rows that characterised the Major years. It was this immediate lesson that led Mr Blair's new Government to do everything possible to run a tight ship, even though this has often given the impression that there is no collective decision-making. Now that the Government is "growing up", it finally seems able to cope with backbench dissent without feeling that the disease of "split" need overwhelm the Cabinet.

But Mr Prescott understands that Parliament, media and the public now have to be satisfied that the Government is actually delivering on its policies and that this can no longer be done by the traditional Labour spin machine, which has become discredited. A recognition that the fuzziness and overlaps at the edges of the No. 10 units, along the responsibilities he already has at the Cabinet Office (areas which have hitherto been within the ambit of the Cabinet Secretary) need to be properly codified.

The prospects for this look good, following Sir Richard's valedictory speech last month, setting out his proposals for a Civil Service Act. There is even talk of a White Paper, published in the near future, to clarify these areas of ministerial and civil service responsibility. All of this should be welcomed in the name of good government.

None of this is to suggest that Mr Blair necessarily wants to vacate domestic policy while he deals with international affairs. Far from it. He is by nature a hands-on Prime Minister. Nevertheless an "Office of the Deputy Prime Minister", accountable to departmental select committees for the delivery units and the Cabinet Office, would be a way for Mr Prescott to be a lightning conductor for Mr Blair, satisfying Parliament as to accountability while not bogging down the Prime Minister, personally, in unnecessary controversies.

mrbrown@pimlico.freeserve.co.uk