Both Labour and Conservative politicians loathe the triple lock but fear the consequences of acting on that. Call it the hate that dare not speak its name.
MPs know voters won’t forgive whoever wields the axe and with good reason.
The mechanism has lifted millions of pensioners out of poverty by guaranteeing the state pension rises each year by inflation, earnings or 2.5%, whichever is highest.
The triple lock shielded pensioners during the cost of living crisis, delivering a 10.1% increase in April 2023, in line with inflation, and earnings-linked rise of 8.5% last year.
But the more it protects pensioners, the more MPs lay the ground for its destruction.
This morning, The i Paper declared: “In Westminster, MPs of all stripes don’t want to be the one to say the unsayable: for the state pension triple lock, the end is nigh.”
That follows official figures showing state pension claimants will rise by 1.7million over the next decade.
That’s an increase from 12million today to 13.7 million by 2032. The numbers will keep climbing as the population ages, pushing up the costs of the triple lock.
The i Paper concludes: “It’s time for MPs to say the quiet bit out loud: the triple lock is no longer affordable.”
Some MPs have stuck their heads above the parapet, but not for long. Eighteen months ago, I warned that MPs are secretly plotting to kill off the triple lock.
Former Tory leader William Hague damned the triple lock as “runaway train”. Today’s Tory Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride has called it “not sustainable”.
Former Tory Chancellor Philip Hammond reckons it’s “hard to justify”. Yet in public, the Tories have been the triple lock’s biggest cheerleaders. Just imagine what Labour MPs are saying!
The attacks keep coming.
The i Paper reports that the state pension has grown 60% in cash terms since 2010, against just 40% for average earnings.
It now swallows half the UK’s benefits bill, costing £110.5billion in the 2022/23 financial year, which climbed to £124billion last tax year.
One charge is eerily similar to the argument Chancellor Rachel Reeves used to axe the Winter Fuel Payment. That many wealthy pensioners simply don’t need it.
The problem, as we saw with the Winter Fuel Payment, is that the poorest will suffer most when it goes. It’ll be the same with the triple lock.
Having witnessed the huge backlash over the Winter Fuel Payment, MPs are even more terrified than ever of threatening the triple lock in public.
David Sinclair, chief executive of the International Longevity Centre think-tank, says MPs of all parties are in denial. “To keep the triple lock in place they would have three options open to them and they are all are lose, lose, lose.”
These options are: “Increase the retirement age, increase tax or take on more debt.”
The Pensions Policy Institute proposed switching to a double lock, removing the 2.5% backstop.
One MP, too scared to be named, suggested linking the state pension purely to earnings, and ditching both the inflation and 2.5% elements.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch recently opened her mouth on the topic by suggesting means testing. The furious backlash silenced her.
We know what MPs are thinking, even if they don’t say it. One day, one of them will be brave enough to act on it. We can’t let them take us by surprise.
