SO can the "third way" ever work? Tony Blair's political philosophy is to marry the demands of big business with the requirements of the people. Business wants profit; the people want decent, affordable services.

Can the twain ever meet?

Last summer there was outrage in rural communities as Barclays closed branches almost willy-nilly. No matter how much opposition there was, both among local people and national politicians, Barclays bulldozed through. Twenty-six communities in the North-East were left the poorer, but yesterday Barclays announced that it had become far richer as it recorded record profits.

Last autumn, there was outrage in rural and suburban communities alike as petrol prices rose. On a local level, there were barricades and rolling roadblocks; on a national level the Government called in the oil company bosses and gave them a stern talking to.

Very little changed - the communities are still the poorer as they pay Europe's highest prices but yesterday Shell announced that it was very much the richer as it, too, recorded record profits.

It is embarrassing for the Government and for politicians in general. However much they rail about poor services and high petrol prices, the reality is that none of them hold much sway when companies are so committed to rewarding shareholders.

It is embarrassing, too, for the companies themselves. The last thing either of them wanted after spending 2000 as the villains of the piece was to start 2001 with more mud being slung at them.

Indeed, it was hard not to feel sorry for the chairman of Shell UK Malcolm Brinved as he announced his mammoth takings, such were his pleadings of poverty - his 1,100 forecourts, he sobbed, had not made a penny for six years.

Barclays, though, didn't even have the decency to be even a little shamefaced as its chief executive, Matthew Barrett, said the bank was "ensuring operational excellence". He should also have added "except in the communities where we've ensured we have no operations whatsoever".

The Chancellor Gordon Brown has made much of his credentials as a business-friendly manager of the economy. He boasts how he has cut business taxes to the lowest levels.

This is to be commended when it helps businesses to find their feet and develop. However, it necessarily means that the tax burden on the individual will increase to make up for the concessions given to businesses.

When businesses grow so large that they rake in vast profits in defiance of their customers, the Chancellor should think about a third way. He did it at the last election when his windfall tax on the utilities funded the New Deal.

He should think about it again at this election. Barclays could be made to contribute to the communities it has deserted and Shell should be made to shoulder more of the tax burden that its customers now bear.