For years, MPs have periodically popped their heads above the parapet to take pot shots at it. Then things go quiet. But they always come back. Suddenly, a rash of MPs are calling for it to be scaled back, backed by a flurry of articles claiming the mechanism is “unsustainable”. I’ve seen plenty in recent weeks. There will be more. The enmity is odd, because the triple lock is one of the few government policies that has been a total success. It’s done exactly what it was designed to do: lift pensioners out of poverty. Too many still struggle in later life, but they’d be worse off without it. Yet a long and growing list of MPs want it gone.
The triple lock increases the state pension each year by inflation, earnings or 2.5%, whichever is highest. It has produced some hefty increases lately. In April 2023, pensions rose by 10.1%, driven by inflation. The following year, they jumped 8.5%, thanks to strong earnings growth. This year’s increase was a more modest 4.8%. For many MPs, that’s still too much. The attacks are coming thick and fast, from both sides of the Commons.
On the Labour side, MPs Graeme Downie and Calvin Bailey have been calling for the axe. As has Harriet Harman, now Baroness Harman, in the Lords. The Conservatives are also after its blood. Former Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt has said the government should “absolutely” reconsider the triple lock, arguing it burdens future generations with debt.
Oddly, Hunt showed little appetite to scrap it when in charge of the Treasury. He knew exactly how Tory voters would react. It’s easier to act tough once you’ve left office. Even more oddly, Hunt and Chancellor Rachel Reeves are said to be big buddies these days. He spends hours at No 11, presumably explaining how an economy works.
And that makes me wonder if he’s softening the ground on her behalf. Scaling back the triple lock to just one mechanism, say, earnings, would save the chancellor billions she urgently needs.
Publicly, Reeves insists the triple lock is safe for this Parliament. Although she’s said other things that didn’t turn out to be entirely true.
Polly Toynbee at leftie newspaper The Guardian also wants the triple lock gone, saying the savings should go to younger people. In other words, take support from those who’ve paid in for decades and hand it to those who haven’t. It’s not an argument likely to sway many pensioners.
Even former Labour Tony Blair has just published his own plan to replace the triple lock. Unfortunately for him, nobody understands it. But it’s not just Labour on the attack.
Conservative MPs Tom Tugendhat, Sir Edward Leigh and Damien Green are also taking pot shots. Leigh claims the triple lock is “bankrupting” Britain. Green says it has “served its purpose” and is unsustainable.
So what’s behind this latest push? Incredibly, the war in Iran is being used as cover. Critics now argue that defence spending must rise sharply, and the triple lock is the cost to cut. It’s a sneaky trick. Wrap it in national security, and hope patriotic pensioners will do their duty and take the hit.
Few dispute that we need to spend more on defence. But is attacking the triple lock the way to pay for it? Increasingly, MPs think so and are saying it out loud. Which should really set alarm bells ringing.