Fuel for the fire

On any normal day, a missive from Tim Farron to George Osborne – urging him to axe the planned rise in fuel duty – would be striking enough. On a day when the Lib Dems finished sixth in a by-election, it has a whole lot more piquancy to it. I’m not saying that the Next Lib Dem Leader™ is trying to cause trouble, or even hastening to shore up support. He has, after all, been dutiful in defence of the coalition this morning, and he has been highlighting fuel costs for some time now. But Lib Dem backbenchers clearly have some demands for the government – and now’s the time for this one.

Farron’s point is that the Treasury can use some of it’s stronger-than-expected incomings to stave off the hike. And, in that regard, he is echoing Ed Balls, who again calls for action against swollen fuel prices in his Tribune column today. Naturally, the shadow chancellor goes further: demanding that Osborne also reverse the VAT hike on fuel, and rattling on about cuts, jobs, Plan Bs, etc. But Labour and Farron are at least united on the idea that, as Balls puts it, “George Osborne should look again at the annual fuel duty rise due in April.”

Thing is, the coalition – which has announced a 5p fuel duty cut for outlying Scottish regions today – is almost certainly of a similar mind. It would be quite surprising if Osborne didn’t act on fuel in this month’s Budget, and postponing the fuel duty hike is probably the simplest way to do that. That would surely satisfy Farron. But as for Ed Balls, I doubt anything will ever be enough.