My Lords, I was happy to support previous Conservative Governments in implementing the triple lock, and I support the current Government in honouring their promise. This has been a useful policy in reducing pensioner poverty.
As one of the Members of this House probably keenest to control public spending, I am very conscious of cost, and I have regularly recommended that we should raise the state retirement age, which gives you a substantial reduction and is a fair way of achieving the savings. It is also very much in the spirit of this report, which I welcome; namely, that people in their 60s, unless there is disability or a serious health problem, should be encouraged to work, and they will probably have richer lives as a result. This is now possible because life expectancy is greater than when the lower state retirement pension ages were first set.
More importantly, there are now very few people who do hard manual work. Clearly, they needed a much lower retirement age because they could not continue. Now people have hydraulics, automation and robotics, so it is much more feasible to carry on working for longer. Really, the most power or muscle pressure you now need is the ability for your fingers to press a touchscreen; you are then able to do most of the interesting jobs in our community.
Those who wish to abolish the triple lock or make other changes to pension arrangements would be well advised to remind themselves that the pension is not a welfare benefit but an entitlement based on contributions to the national insurance scheme. Of course, that can all be changed, but it would require complex legislation and a lot of political argument. No Government to this day have been willing to attempt that, I suspect because it would be very unpopular with the public.
The contributory principle is, to me, fundamental. It shows that people have to work and have to pay national insurance. There is an annual sign-off of the fund, with a review. It is a pay-as-you-go fund, not an endowment fund. It embodies a very important contract between generations: the working generation say that they will pay for their parents’ generation on the basis that their children, when they are working, will then pay for them. I do not want to disturb that social contract between generations; I want to keep the contributory principle—you get something for something—and I do not want to take away the triple lock. That would be a great pity.
September 5, 2026
It’s interesting that something that actually does some good i e. Lifting many pensioners out of poverty is alway targeted as unaffordable.
I worked for most of my life in the power industry building, commissioning and maintaining industrial gas turbines. There is no way this job will ever be taken over by AI or any other gimmick.
At 80 I have mobility problems directly as a result of my job. I don’t claim disability benefit and I buy my own cars.
A great deal of money could be saved by restricting the above especially stress related claims etc.
On another note close to my heart, Norway has just applied to the Supreme Court to overturn the EU ban on drilling and exploration as current wells are reducing output.
They have also instructed the power company not to approve any more electricity export cables for the next 4 years. This has cancelled the proposed new connection to Scotland.
Norway agreed to join the European Grid because it was deemed to be a two way street but as the UK blew up perfectly good coal fired Stations, Germany shut down its nuclear and France failed to update its ageing nuclear fleet there has been little or no imports into Norway.
Having had a series of dry spells and shortage of ice melt, Norway lakes are very low. They are now preparing to restrict exports to conserve water for domestic Hydro.
Just another example of the futility of relying on foreigners to provide the UK with electricity.
September 5, 2026
Well AI may not take over this industry but it will surely be a useful and cost saving tool for those running it.
To a large degree we do currently have to rely on imports of electricity, gas, oil, fertiliser (also energy) even some coal. Mainly due to insane energy policies driven by the devil gas religion that has infected the brains of Ed Miliband, Theresa May (now made a Baroness by Sunak for her serial vandalism) & most of our deluded art grad MPs for 35 years or so. Or as rational and informed people see it plant, tree, crop and seaweed food and the gas of life.
The Earth currently has rather a dearth of CO2 it in the atmosphere in historical terms which has many negative effects on crop yields, prosperity, winter deaths for examples.
September 5, 2026
@Ian Wragg
This is rubbish. There are NO economically extractable fossil fuel reserves left in the N Sea. Zilch, Zero
Fortunately we had the common sense to build the interconnectors. In the 2024/25 winter heating season, power generated by wind, hydro and solar reached 55TWh, 10TWh more than the 45TWh’s generated by gas power stations across the UK. 55TWh is an absolutely phenomenal amount of juice. This saved us from having to import at least 25 tanker loads of extremely expensive LNG
We are exporting as much electricity to the EU as we import. Check it out in the middle of the night, when UK renewable electricity and battery storage is charging up French and German EV’s and earning income for the Treasury. In 2025 we exported over £1billion worth of renewable electricity to the EU
Reply We are heavy net importers of expensive electricity. We have plenty of oil and gas available to get out to replace imports.
September 5, 2026
SG we export at a loss or negative prices. It’s easy to Google Norway energy dilemma but of course it doesn’t fit your narrative. Everything I’ve written is 100% true.
September 5, 2026
” There are NO economically extractable fossil fuel reserves left in the N Sea. Zilch, Zero ”
I find this a very strange statement SG. The Operators in the North Sea aren’t there to make losses and I assume would not being doing so if the current crippling taxes were removed. They have large (sunk-cost) infrastructure already in place and that could be used to exploit smaller fields as I undertand it.
September 6, 2026
Exactly.
September 5, 2026
All sensible stuff JR.
If we just encourage growth (by reversing all Labour’s and earlier governments mad & doom loop policies – net zero esp.) then the triple lock is certainly affordable.
“life expectancy is greater than when the lower state retirement pension ages were first set” it is indeed. Though we have seen a significant decline since 2020 of above 2% circa 2 years for men and 3 for women mainly due to the gross incompetence of the vastly expensive Covid response. This also made people poorer and perhaps more depressed which also reduces health. STRANGE then that the government has not reversed the pension ages in response to this decline?
The UK government is going to great length to preventing us from getting anonymised data on health and deaths by Covid Vaccine status – now why might they want to do that? A waste of time as the cat is already well out of the bag. Many countries including the USA are well ahead on this.
September 5, 2026
Once again the economists, wealthy fund managers and rich commentators are demanding the end of the pension “triple lock”, claiming that it’s unsustainable and we can’t afford it
Pensioners have paid NI contributions into the system all their working lives. The state pension and it’s earnings related element known as SERPS with the regular triple lock uplift have been used by many of those approaching pensionable age to calculate how much savings they need to put away whilst they are still working.
Why should the pensioners have their income reduced in an inflationary environment, because successive governments need to pay for excessive inward migration and particularly, the boat people? Already, the government has tried to tinker with the pensioner’s winter fuel allowance.
The pensioners are not responsible for the profligacy of previous governments. If money has to be saved, the way to do it is to reduce the benefits bill for those who claim they are sick and cannot work, asylum seekers and particularly the boat people.
September 5, 2026
I wouldn’t mind the triple lock being removed – if instead my State Pension was increased annually at the same rate as that of senior Civil Servants. Then I’d be reassured that they would take very good care of me.
September 6, 2026
Indeed, I paid many thousands of pounds extra to enhance my older style state pension, only to now find the new pension pays more.
The triple lock is supposed to keep up with wages or inflation, but it is taxed at 20% so on an inflation basis I lose out every year !
Pension credits are freely given out to those who did not contribute, so where is the encouragement.
Take out your own private pension and the unspent sums will now be calculated as part of your estate for IHT, then the final recipient will be taxed again on withdrawal.
A socaal contract and trust that is now going to be broken and hit by retrospective taxation destroying 4-5 decades of saving.
September 5, 2026
Norwegian researchers showed a 20% increased cancer risk for women on folic acid supplements.
For those taking a high dose along with epliepsy medication it reached 2.7 fold higher.
2025 study.
The excellent Dr. Claire Craig today.
So why are the government ramming this medication into everyone’s food? Some may need it perhaps but for vast majority it on balance does net harm. Have the government learned nothing from the COVID “vaccines” also rammed into people for whom they could only ever do net harm as they were never at any real risk. Follow the money I assume.
Sign the petition to try to stop this new lunacy perhaps?
September 5, 2026
The one aspect of the triple lock that seems questionable to me is the minimum 2.5% increase. I think a double lock is all that we need.
September 5, 2026
Indeed and inflation will beat 2.5% that for a fair while anyway. Certainly the bond markets think so.
September 5, 2026
Oh come on!
A number of points to debate here:
1. Starting work at 16 in vacations, I was handed my NI number on the basis of a return at 65 years old, not 70 or 75. That was the deal. There was no triple lock and no guarantee on amount, but there was on age.
2. Just because “not many people are in manual work” doesn’t mean they should be denied a state pension at 65. They could always delay it voluntarily if they wanted to.
3. If you do work at 65+, or earn on investments, then you hand back half that state pension anyway in income tax.
4. The triple lock is expensive. I don’t want my children to pay tax for me to be shielded against the real world of Tory/Labour inspired inflation/wage deflation etc.
The deal here should be –
1. HMG honours promises made when you’re handed your NI number-you pay in for x years at y amount, you get back some factor of x and y in return as a kind of annuity from 60 or 65, in your option, obviously increasing with age of start date. This gets logged onto the future state debt and income at Day 1. You don’t contribute, you don’t get. Obviously maternity/child care etc gets logged as joint contributions with your partner and possibly some credit for bringing up kids properly.
2. A triple lock is a very Cameronian type scheme-a sort of short cut to popularity on the back of taxpayers and should be put in the dustbin of history. There is no link between the state pension being an entitlement and the triple lock. What’s that got to do with it?
September 5, 2026
Not quite half (directly anyway) as you do not yet pay NI on pension income so 45% tops. But then if you spend it another 20% vat and if you do not then 40% IHT on death!
September 5, 2026
SG. If you check Gridwatch Templar artist moment you can see we are exporting at £5.45 per mwh after importing yesterday at £136 per mwh. Not a very good business model. When you have to virtually give away a product at a loss rather than pay constraint payments.
September 5, 2026
Insanity from deluded or worse Theresa May and Ed Milibrain.
September 5, 2026
Generosity with other peoples money is not a virtue it is theft. The sooner the socialist learn that fundamental truth the sooner we can enjoy sustainable economic conditions and the sooner we can grow the wealth production side of society, i.e. the Private Sector.
The tax payers have been robbed without mercy all in the name of Woke socialist policies. Until we break away from those flawed ideologies there will be no real growth in the economy.
I note one of Mr Burnham’s first priorities is to increase our Foreign Aid budget back up to 0.7% of GNP. He has chosen to do this at a time when our borrowing costs are at a century high. He clearly knows all of the additional £21 billion that foreign aid uplift demands will have to be borrowed.
That is how disconnected from sustainable economic reality the socialist mind now is.
September 5, 2026
I’m sure Mssrs Burnham & Healy are going to hit the hard rocks of reality very shortly. In fact I’m certain they are already wondering how to avoid them. Unfortunately for them (and us) it’s already too late. Take cover boys – incoming.
September 5, 2026
One might point out gently to all those who deem the state pension as ‘benefit’ to be manipulated at the (economic) whim of government, and to those who deem the state pension as an unnecessary burden on the working population that all those now at work were themselves children once … and thus housed, clothed, fed, educated and nowadays even more by their parents who now don’t work because of being old. Thus it is only fair that those children now return the care their parents gave them, via the state pension.
But wait: the destruction of the intergenerational contract is another item on the list of those who are busily destroying our society’s fabric …
September 6, 2026
+1
September 5, 2026
It’s actually very simple. The old tend to be Conservatives.To the socialist that means they should be stripped of their wealth, property and all entitlements.
September 5, 2026
Those seeking to abandon the triple lock conflate it with general welfare benefits, which it is not. National Insurance contributions made during one’s working life were based on the understanding of a reasonable state pension on retirement. Today’s state pension is probably just about reasonable but certainly not generous. A pensioner living only on a state pension would struggle to exist in today’s cost of living. Energy, water and Council tax are exceptionally expensive, then there’s food and essentials. Those who have been prudent to save during their working lives should not be penalised because government ministers have failed in their duty to manage the country’s finances. Labour especially should remember this as their track record is woeful indeed.
September 5, 2026
Taking away the triple lock would be an act of injustice. For too long pensioners have had to survive on a paltry state pension, certainly you couldn’t call it living.
If pensioners seem to have a surplus of money, certainly a false idea, it is because they are unlikely to be able to do the many things they would like to be doing because of a health system that fails them and the aging effect.
The National Insurance system has had it’s day. It was never a perfect system but is proving itself to be unsustainable. A major rethink is required on how we fund pensions and health care.
People are realising that a one size fits all is not only illogical, it doesn’t do the job intended.
The answer is simple – PRIVATISE PERSONAL PENSION AND HEALTH CARE.
My last company provided a host of benefits as part of the salary package, including health and pension benefits – It wouldn’t be a huge leap to use this method to replace the NI for all of those working and earning.
Those that have never worked or are dependent on the state would have to rely on the magnanimity of the state and what could be taken from general taxation.
September 5, 2026
I’m a pensioner and I retired at age 68. Until recentIy, I opposed the triple lock and favoured a simple inflation-linked increase like in the US. However, I now realise that governments play games with official inflation measures and can’t be trusted to report real inflation, so I’m coming round to Lord Redwood’s view.
September 5, 2026
Public sector pensions and employer contributions of 29% is a more relevant conversation.
September 5, 2026
I think the 2.5% is unnecessary in the triple lock.
I would also take inflation out of the mix. I see no reason why pensioners or indeed benefit claimants should have greater protection from inflation than workers. The measure should be average wage rises.
I will soon be a recipient of the state pension (unless they change the rules again).
September 6, 2026
All your points are well made. However would it be possible not only to adjust the pension age but also to make it a “single lock” which would be CPI adjustment. This will preserve the value of the pension notwithstanding the ‘working population’ are getting worse off !