Chancellor responds to pressure over fuel duty


UPDATE: The Treasury is making clear that the planned 3p fuel duty rise due in August has now been postponed until January 2013. Postponing planned rises is the way that the duty has been frozen under this government and the last one.

Ministers have taken the decision even though oil prices are currently falling worldwide. The price of crude oil has been falling steadily since March/April. The most recent peak was at above $125 a barrel for Brent crude, the leading benchmark. Falling demand, with a weakening global economy, has now seen that drop to today's $92 a barrel.

At the pump, unleaded had been above 142p a litre. Yesterday the average price of unleaded petrol was 132p a litre. This week Asda and Tesco have both been cutting prices, with Asda promising not to charge more than 127.7p a litre.

The Treasury points out, however, that pump prices are still mainly above the level at the time of the Budget of 2011, when the chancellor took the decision to scrap the so-called fuel duty escalator which produced automatic above inflation duty rises.

The cost of the latest decision is £500m and the Treasury claims that it will be paid for by higher-than-expected departmental savings.

The government was facing a vote in the Commons on fuel duty in which it would have been opposed by Labour and some Tory backbenchers. Half a dozen Conservative MPs had signed an Early Day Motion calling for a duty freeze. This morning the shadow chancellor called for the duty to be frozen in an article in The Sun and on Radio 4's Today programme.

In the last few moments Ed Balls welcomed what he described as another U-turn to join those on pasties, churches, caravans and skips.

Only a few days ago the Transport Secretary Justine Greening said that she would not be calling for a freeze in duty.

15:21: The Chancellor of the Exchequer has just announced in the Commons that he will not proceed with the planned 3p increase in fuel duty this August.

In his Autumn Statement George Osborne postponed a scheduled 3p rise in fuel duty for January but said that the planned rise this Summer would proceed - even though it would be cut from 5p to 3p.

He has now responded to pressure from some Tory backbenchers and The Sun newspaper who were joined by Labour today when Ed Balls called for the duty to be frozen.

This comes on a day when official figures showed people's standard of living dropping. Petrol is for many families the largest contributor to a squeeze on their incomes.

Nick Robinson Article written by Nick Robinson Nick Robinson Political editor

What a difference a day makes

In just 24 hours, Sir Malcolm Rifkind went from angry defiance to a grim-faced acceptance that he would have to quit his job as an MP and chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee.

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Nick


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 135.


    " took a quick look at 50, for 'context', and can't see the reference to Labour anywhere."
    Your "quick look" analysis up to it's usual standard.

    Post 50 queries the validity of the govt voted for by a "small minority", which wrongly implies that there is a more valid alternative with more than "small minority". Which party do you think this could be ????

  • rate this

    Comment number 134.

    Sorry Strictly, took a quick look at 50, for 'context', and can't see the reference to Labour anywhere.

    Are you combining selective quotation (based on what interests you) along with imagining words in other posters posts?

    Each to their own I suppose.

  • rate this

    Comment number 133.

    "what about the other bit of my 125, showing my balanced view on the topic. Did you miss that ... ?"
    No. I just didn't think it was relevant or interesting.

    "anyone who thinks it would have been a good idea for Labour to have clung onto power in 2010 based on 29% of the vote ... is at the very least, slightly pickled."
    That would be James in post 50.

  • rate this

    Comment number 132.

    And Strictly @ 129, what about the other bit of my 125, showing my balanced view on the topic. Did you miss that as you trawled through the 'context' of this thread?

    If you're bothered, my view is that anyone who thinks it would have been a good idea for Labour to have clung onto power in 2010 based on 29% of the vote and 256 seats, is at the very least, slightly pickled.

  • rate this

    Comment number 131.

    "James describes as a "small minority" in post 50. Presumably he thinks Labour should be in power with an even smaller minority"

    Yes, there are a lot of contributors complaining about the Govt, 'not being elected' etc, but I'm fairly certain that had Brown managed to cling on & formed the highly dubious 'rainbow coalition' we would not have heard a peep from them.


Comments 5 of 135



  • Mukesh SinghNo remorse

    Delhi bus rapist says victim shouldn't have fought back

  • Aimen DeanI spied

    The founder member of al-Qaeda who worked for MI6

  • Before and after shotsPerfect body

    Just how reliable are 'before and after' photos?

  • Woman with closed eyeStrange light show

    What do you see when you close your eyes?

  • Sony WalkmanLost ideas

    What has happened to Japan's inventors?

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.