A Triumph of Political Expediency Over the Environment?

Transport generates almost a quarter of the UK's 'greenhouse gas' emissions. Raising taxes on petrol and diesel fuel has been one of that country's methods of limiting climate change (as well as being a 'nice, little earner'). The cost of living crisis has, however, produced a strange cross-party enthusiasm for the Chancellor announcing a 'temporary' 5 pence per litre reduction in fuel duty (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/21/the-guardian-view-on-fuel-duty-cuts-expediency-over-the-environment ). Fuel duty cuts would be popular with the powerful driving lobby. Such cuts would, however, be incredibly short-sighted. Reducing fuel duty effectively encourages people to keep on 'trucking' as well as operating fuel-inefficient vehicles. It has been estimated, however, that only 7% of any savings of a fuel duty cut would go to the poorest (i.e. most vulnerable) 20% of UK households. Slashing fuel duty would also a) make the UK even more susceptible to 'weaponised' of oil and gas production (now evident) and b) further increase the already massive profits of the petrochemical companies. A 'windfall tax' on petrochemical company profits is apparently out (why?). There are better and fairer ways of dealing with the cost of living crisis, that are also more environmentally sound. Using the money to insulate homes, would save the benefitting households much more cash and would slash emissions. Providing free public transport could be beneficial and might take more people off the roads. Money could be spent on rolling out renewable sources of power more quickly. One could even (perish the thought?) increase the allowances paid to assist people in poorer households with food and heating bills. Cutting fuel duty seems hardly to be the 'go-to' action of an avowed 'green leader on climate change'!