The “fuel crisis” in Britain five years ago was a case in point. Mr Blair tore to the front of the stage to take the lead and almost lost control when the oil companies refused to order their drivers out of the gates and Britain’s petrol stations ran dry, leading to panic buying in supermarkets and the closure of schools. The country came to within 24 hours of disintegration. The Chancellor’s first contribution came only when meltdown seemed to have been averted — and then he publicly denied two of Mr Blair’s suggestions, first that there had even been a crisis and secondly that the Government might respond by cutting fuel duty.

Today Mr Brown has taken charge of the “fuel crisis”, and No 10 has been delighted to let him. In part this recognises the Chancellor’s far higher levels of trust with the British public, and in part it reflects the near-disaster last time when the Prime Minister “took control”, and everything continued to collapse. It may have been chance that Mr Brown was giving a big television interview on Sunday that put him in the firing line as newspapers were predicting turmoil, and that he was due to make a major speech to the TUC yesterday. But look at what the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said on Monday, when asked if the Government was making preparations for possible fuel protests today. He said that “the Treasury had made it clear that the appropriate contingency plans were in place”. Asked if the Prime Minister had sympathy for the protesters, the spokesman added that No 10 “fully understood why people were concerned. The Chancellor had set out the position in terms of the global economy and the effects on oil prices.”

The Treasury had made it clear . . . The Chancellor had set out the position . . . Over to you, Gordon. Mr Blair was here all weekend and could easily have intervened by now had he wanted to. The spokesman’s words are a stark message: the Chancellor is in charge.

Then compare Mr Brown’s speech to the TUC yesterday with the one he gave in similar circumstances five years ago. On that occasion he had to be persuaded by Mr Blair to say anything at all about the fuel protests. Yesterday the Chancellor arrived in Brighton with a six-point plan to tackle what he insists is a global and not a British crisis.

We have here, in the way in which he is responding to the challenge, Prime Minister Brown encapsulated. First, he sets the problem in a worldwide context, in which global economic development has seen Asia’s consumption leap to 30 per cent of world oil. Then he has a comprehensive and ambitious plan, with him at the forefront of it: higher production, greater transparency from Opec and additional investment in new capacity from Opec states. In his interview on Sunday AM, he added: “I believe by the time we get to the end of this month, with the IMF and World Bank meetings — and I will be chairing some of these meetings — we will see progress in each of these areas.” I’m in charge.

Next he turns to the need to protect the world’s poor — not Britain’s hauliers, farmers and motorists, for whom he has little real sympathy — calling for a new fund from the World Bank to support developing countries investing in alternative sources of energy and greater energy efficiency, a new IMF facility to protect poor countries against price shocks and a special trust fund to help poor countries to write down unpayable debts.

The poor will always, instinctively, be at the forefront of Prime Minister Brown’s mind. On Sunday AM he emphasised that, while conscious of the problems hauliers face from the high prices, “I am aware, particularly, of the problems low-income families face with petrol prices rising”. No concessions to whinging middle-class motorists there.

But there will be concessions, of course. For while Mr Brown is publicly cool towards suggestions that he might respond to the protests by cutting prices, he discreetly lets it be known that he is in fact likely to extend the 1.2p a litre freeze in fuel duty that is due to end in November.

Game, set and match? We shall see. It does look as though the Chancellor has handled the situation rather well, and in stark contrast to Mr Blair’s “I feel your pain” method. Predictions of panic seem to have become selffulfilling prophecies only at a few petrol stations.

Granted, today is not like it was five years ago. Overall petrol prices are higher but fuel duty and VAT account for about 10 per cent less of the cost than they did then. But in practice that amounts to only a few pence difference in the tax take from a litre. Suggestions that motorists have suddenly got to grips with global economic pressures and are understanding about their £1 a litre petrol seem unlikely. What has changed is that in 2000 the country relished punishing a Prime Minister who appeared complacent and arrogant. The more Mr Blair tried to take charge, the more triumphantly the public backed the protesters. That vitriolic mood is absent today.

I always enjoy fuel protests — keen drivers locking themselves into slow-moving traffic to block their own supply of petrol — and I’m sorry we appear likely to avoid them this time. What is missing in Mr Brown’s prime minsterial debut is any real challenge to the British public to face up to the reality of higher global oil prices and cut their own energy consumption. Now that would take a really great prime minister. We shall see.

JOIN THE DEBATE

Send your e-mails from here

Times Recommends

• Treasury needs a new golden rule fast
• Testing doctors is no magic cure
• We must cry out for the poor