THE 2000 fuel protests, a landmark event in recent political history, received significant support in Northern Ireland, including from the Ulster Farmers’ Union, the Road Haulage Association and all five main Stormont parties.

This contributed to the pressure that caused Tony Blair’s government to back down.

However, circumstances then were very different to today.

Prices had risen primarily due to the fuel duty escalator introduced by the Conservatives in 1993, which added inflation plus 3% a year.

Brian Feeney: Northern Ireland is neither a nation nor country and needs to stop comparing itself to the ‘rest of the UK’

Newton Emerson: Northern Ireland doesn’t have a housing boom – it’s a housing squeeze we can’t escape

Labour doubled this to 6% on entering office, but the impact was masked by a fall in underlying oil prices.

Only when OPEC cut production in 1999 to get prices up did the tax burden suddenly become apparent.

What the world now faces is a fundamental supply shortage, due to the war in the Persian Gulf.

Sinn Féin economy minister Caoimhe Archibald has called on the UK government to cut fuel taxes in response, as have the UUP, the SDLP and others.

Duty on petrol and diesel is 53 pence per litre plus 20% VAT, so there is plenty of scope for a cut, but it would not add one drop of fuel to the UK’s supply.

On the contrary, lower prices would increase demand, causing forecourt prices to go back up. The government would have thrown its revenue away for nothing.

It could try to get it back through a windfall tax on energy company profits, as it did after the invasion of Ukraine. That windfall tax is still in place so there is limited scope for another.

The government might still be desperate or cynical enough to cut fuel duty, as the Irish government has just done.

Dr Archibald wants London to match this reduction, no doubt partly on republican principle and also to save garages on the northern side of the border.

While this may be an understandable political position, again it makes no sense in terms of supply and demand.

The rational policy would be for Stormont to encourage people to buy their fuel over the border, using up the Republic’s supply while conserving our own.

I present this scenario purely for your entertainment.

Stormont cannot cut duty or increase supply itself, nor can it impose rationing or allocate fuel to priority users – all those powers are reserved to Westminster. So its options mainly involve helping people to drive less.

Examples would include encouraging car sharing and working from home, the modern equivalent of the 1970s three-day week.

Bus and train fares could be protected from rising fuel prices and public transport could be improved.

Targeted help could be offered to people who must drive and genuinely struggle to afford it, although it is hard to see how these people could be reliably identified.

The best approach might be to offer help via their employers.

People who are critically dependent on a car for non-work purposes will often be covered by disability benefits or carer’s allowance.

Topping up these payments would be expensive. Realistically, Stormont should wait to see if Westminster does it instead.

Everyone else is not as dependent on a car as they think they are, especially in an age of home delivery by electric van.

Stormont proved during the pandemic that it can respond to a crisis, albeit in a deeply flawed manner.

However, it is not clear the fuel crisis has reached the point where Stormont should respond, certainly with a long list of fiddly policies.

The simplest and most efficient way to help people drive less is to let rising fuel prices do the job, by setting the exact point at which each individual decides to reduce their mileage.

Some targeted support might still be required but for the moment it should not be much.

Petrol and diesel prices are still significantly below their peak 14 years ago.

A combination of taxes and global events pushed prices up to 140 pence per litre in 2012, equivalent to 204 pence today.

This was even higher in real terms than the spike after the invasion of Ukraine.

Because the price had crept up gradually after the 2008 financial crash, consumers and businesses accepted it. Prices stayed high until 2014 and took a further two years to gradually decline.

The suddenness of the rise since February is what has caused the political shock.

Its level remains manageable for now. If it is set to become unmanageable for many people shortly, that is all the more reason to hold off and preserve resources until serious intervention is required.

Stormont’s message in the meantime should be to keep calm and carry on, although it might want to find a less distinctly British slogan.

If you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article and would like to submit a Letter to the Editor to be considered for publication, please click here.

Letters to the Editor are invited on any subject. They should be authenticated with a full name, address and a daytime telephone number. Pen names are not allowed.

© The Irish News