Sympathy with the banks is in short supply lately, so few tears were shed on Thursday when the industry lost a landmark test case over charges on unauthorised overdrafts. But the High Court's decision, while welcome, should not trigger joyous celebrations for customers.

For a start, the banks are almost certain to appeal, which could drag out the process for another year or more. Secondly, while the ruling allows the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to cap fees, it is far from certain that it will choose to do so. Finally, the banks' collective reaction to the OFT's decision last year to cap credit-card charges at £12 was to raise interest rates, scale back benefits and change terms and conditions to squeeze more profit out of customers.

But the OFT should not be deterred by the banks' petulant reaction to the credit-card cap or the industry's thinly veiled threats to end so-called free banking. The simple fact is that overdraft charges at their current levels are excessive and unfair - and they often exacerbate the debt problems of those who are least able to pay. Furthermore, sneaky and excessive fees make it difficult for consumers to compare the true cost of current accounts, which is anti-competitive.

Unfortunately, the banks are unlikely to accept the loss of such a big slice of their profits with good grace, but the threat of large-scale customer defections should be enough to discourage the widespread introduction of monthly account fees.

If such fees do start to appear, the industry should be referred to the Competition Commission. If the banks try to introduce other backdoor charges to recoup their losses, the OFT should crack down on these as well. The Financial Services Authority should also do its bit by removing the waiver that allows the banks to stop paying recompense to aggrieved customers, particularly as there is evidence of some banks exploiting this condition.

After the self-inflicted credit problems that the banks have suffered and consumers are now paying for, it is time for the industry to accept that the overdraft gravy train has come to the last stop.

Brown's 10p climbdown fails to address the real problem

Although it is easy to be cynical about the petty politics of the rebel backbench MPs that almost brought the Government to its knees this week over the abolition of the 10p rate of income tax, they did have a point.

It might have taken them more than a year to get to grips with the implications of one of their Government's flagship policies, but at least they realised that it was deeply unfair, not to mention politically stupid, to make the poorest workers pay more income tax - particularly when it is to fund lower taxes for those on better salaries.

But these slow-burn campaigners should not be deflected by Gordon Brown's efforts to placate them. Indeed, the plans to help the five million people who are now worse off, such as meddling with the minimum wage, fiddling with the winter fuel allowance and tinkering with tax credits, are almost as flawed as the removal of the 10p rate in the first place. They certainly highlight the worst tendencies of this administration.

For a start, it is madness to make the already complex tax credit system even more complicated. It is also cruel to make low-earners even more reliant on an incompetent and intrusive State to boost their income. The Government simply does not seem to understand that taking with one hand to give back with another helps nobody but the bureaucrats who are handed well-paid jobs and pensions to administer such folly.

Surely a more dignified and practical way to help the working poor would be to increase the tax-free personal allowance. This may be expensive, because everyone benefits, but it is wonderfully simple and offers a real incentive for people to work their way out of the poverty trap.

The Government could fund such a move by abolishing tax credits altogether and raising income tax on the highest earners. These are the sort of measures for which Labour MPs should be campaigning. In the meantime, if they need any help deciphering their own Government's tax plans, then may I suggest that they read Times Money each week?

Fuel poverty summit generates a lot of hot air

Talk, it is widely acknowledged, is cheap. Perhaps this is why Ofgem, the energy regulator, the Government and the energy industry decided to organise a summit on fuel poverty rather than do anything more concrete. A genuine solution, after all, will cost money. A lot of money.

So was there anything more than hot air conjured from this meeting? Sadly, and predictably, the answer is no. The best they could come up with after putting their heads together for a whole day was that energy companies should allow consumers with expensive prepay meters to use comparison websites to switch supplier. This is about as likely to solve fuel poverty as Robert Mugabe's farms policy is to solve world food shortgages.

The energy companies are the villians here, but only the Government has the power to solve the problem. It must legislate to force suppliers to help their most vulnerable customers. With the news this week that energy bills are expected to increase by a further 25 per cent before the end of the year, the issue has become even more pressing.