Abolishing The Triple Lock Is On The Secret Wish List Of Many Labour MPs
5 min read
Many Labour MPs in private say the triple lock has to go. Members of rival parties agree that the policy is unaffordable and unfair. But abolition still seems far away.
“Anyone with half a brain knows it is not sustainable,” said one Labour backbencher.
A veteran Labour MP added: "Do I think it is an important policy? No. Does it reach the right people? No. Would there be better ways to reach them? Yes."
Meanwhile, a minister told PoliticsHome: “If I am sacked as a minister tomorrow, I will go out and advocate for its removal."
These MPs were all describing the same policy: the triple lock
The lock guarantees that the state pension will rise in line with whatever is highest out of wage growth, inflation, or 2.5 per cent.
It was a policy introduced by the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition government in 2012 to tackle pensioner poverty, and initial forecasts by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) at the time suggested that it would cost the taxpayer an extra £5.2bn a year by 2029-30.
However, spikes in inflation and stagnant wage growth in the years since then mean that the triple lock is now expected to cost the state £15.5bn annually by 2029-30.
Combined with the fact that people in the UK are living longer, it is a commitment that is increasingly seen as unaffordable and in need of reform.
Despite this, Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to confirm in her Budget on Wednesday that the triple lock will be maintained, meaning those on the full rate of the state pension will receive an extra £550 per year.
But the question of how much longer the government, whether it be Labour, Conservative or something else, can continue with this policy is coming under growing scrutiny.
Chris Curtis, Labour MP for Milton Keynes North and chair of the Labour Growth Group, told the Politics Inside Out podcast last week that it was “mathematically impossible” to keep the triple lock forever.
“This is a conversation that we’re going to have to have at some point. The question is, at what point?"
He added: “A far more healthy way for us to have this conversation is actually what percentage of average incomes in this country do we think the state pension should be at… what’s the trajectory we want in order to get there?"
There is widespread agreement across the political divide that intergenerational unfairness, a belief that too often young people are asked the bear the brunt of the country's economic difficulties, is a key driver of public discontent in the UK. Keeping the triple lock in place while cuts and taxes fall elsewhere is seen by some as totemic of imbalance.
It was the main subject of discussion at a meeting last week of the Blue Labour caucus of Labour MPs, PoliticsHome understands — a group seen as having a significant influence on political thinking in Keir Starmer's Downing Street operation.
Similar discussions are starting to take place in Tory and Reform UK circles, too.
Leader of the Opposition Kemi Badenoch has said that she does not want to abolish the triple lock "now" but refrained from saying the policy would never need reform.
Reform leader Nigel Farage has also been reluctant to talk about preserving the triple lock in the long term.
But, as Scarlett Maguire, CEO of polling company Merlin Strategy, explained, there is a "good reason" why politicians on all sides are so fearful of actually abolishing it.
"Voters overwhelmingly back the triple lock," she told PoliticsHome, "and even though this is particularly the case for Reform and Conservative voters, 65 per cent of Labour voters think it should be maintained compared to 25 per cent who think it should be scrapped."
Support for maintaining the policy in its current form, unsurprisingly, is highest among elderly voters, who are also the most likely to go out and vote on election day.
Good luck getting that through the PLP
Even Labour MPs who would like to see the triple lock go admit that the Starmer government probably doesn't possess the necessary political capital to take such a risky step. The Prime Minister has already had to ditch plans to get rid of winter fuel payments for pensioners after a major public backlash.
"Labour has already substantially alienated this group with the winter fuel payment cut and may be nervous about further upsetting the part of the electorate which is still the most likely to turn out and vote," added Maguire.
Indeed, while there are many Labour MPs who are enthusiastic about major pensions reform, others would be nervous about picking another fight with a key part of the electorate at a time when government popularity is already so low.
“Good luck getting that through the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party],” remarked one Labour MP.
Speaking on the Politics Inside Out podcast, Curtis stressed that his party couldn't change the triple lock before the next general election, even if it wanted to, having promised to keep it in its 2024 election manifesto.
The Tories and Reform will both be wary of angering elderly voters, knowing that this group is particularly important to their electoral prospects.
“It’s fiendishly difficult,” said one Conservative MP who was in Parliament when the triple lock was first introduced over a decade ago.
“We mustn’t forget when it was brought in, there was a real issue for pensioners' living standards, having declined over a period of time.”
Earlier this year, the government tasked a new Pensions Commission with exploring the future of pensions policy. It is expected to produce its recommendations within the next 12 months, which could be the catalyst for more serious discussion about the triple lock in Westminster.
“Everybody knows it has to be scrapped," said a former government official who worked on the policy.
For now and almost certainly the foreseeable future, however, it will remain in place, fraught with political risk.
