The campaign to end the triple lock for state pensions is bizarre. The Bank of England loses billions more on bad and needless bond sales yet the establishment that wants to mug the pensioners pretends the losses are not happening. Well off pensioners drawing index linked public sector pensions propose making those relying more on the state pension worse off whilst ignoring the collapse of public sector productivity this decade costing taxpayers more billions. Many of the enthusiastic triple lock abolitionists urge we spend and waste more and more money on net zero subsidies and paying renewable generators to switch off for lack of grid. The triple lock to update pensions to cope with the rising cost of living has been a good policy to cut pensioner poverty. Better off pensioners pay tax on the pension. This would be a small cut for the next few years with a big political price.
The UK’s run away public expenditure owes little to the triple lock and much to the burgeoning welfare bill as hundreds of thousands are given sicknotes for life at a very young age and as the state writes off many people with mild mental ill health conditions that work might alleviate. I have set out tens of billions of relatively easy cuts across government, and the Conservative party have published a plan for £47 bn of reductions without touching the state retirement pension. There are better, bigger and easier ways of cutting state spending.
Mr Lawson embarked on an unwarranted attack on me for supporting the triple lock without giving me any warning or right to reply. His own article began with a vivid and accurate account of how Baroness May’s Manifesto for the 2017 election wiped out a strong Conservative lead in the polls with its attack on pensions and pensioners as if he understood the public mood. He then switched to attacking me for being illogical for consistently understanding the public mood on this issue. I distanced myself from the 2017 Conservative Manifesto in the election and promised my electors to speak out against the worst features of it.
Mr Lawson and the establishment choir against the triple lock never mention that the pension is a Contributory benefit. It is an entitlement based on a person’s contributions. 76% of all National Insurance contributions are paid into the National Insurance Fund. The balance part pays for the NHS. The Fund has a duty to pay the pensions with their annual uprating out of the NI money paid in. If the fund falls short the government has to top it up from general taxes or increase the contribution rate. If the fund is in surplus the surplus stays with the fund. The government would need to amend the law to raid the fund for other purposes.
When they say the triple lock pension is unaffordable they ignore the fact the fund is in healthy surplus. The Government Actuary forecasts a large and growing surplus for the next five years. It means of course the deeply damaging increase in National Insurance contributions destroying jobs introduced by Rachel Reeves was not needed. The surplus in the Fund is heading to £160 bn. To divert this money a government would need to legislate to remove the contributory principle and abolish the fund, making the pension a welfare benefit paid for out of general taxation. The reason retired people do not pay National Insurance contributions is to avoid taking part of their pensions away in an absurd money go round. The critics of the triple lock usually call National Insurance contributions Nics as if they were an ordinary general tax.
Mr Lawson is right to say the triple lock can be changed by changing the law. This however represents bad faith for all those paying contributions over the last two decades with a promise that this would entitle them to a triple lock pension. He objects that the National Insurance fund is not an endowment fund like a company or personal pension. He ignores the fact that it is a pay as you go fund, based on the principle that the working generation pays for the retired on the basis their children will pay for them, with the state requiring all to pay during their working years to qualify and to be fair to all.
The best argument to keep the triple lock is to build some integrity in politics, to get the out of touch often wrong establishment to understand the public mood. The main parties supported the triple lock to get MPs elected in 2024. They need to keep their word for this Parliament. I think it unlikely parties serious about wanting to win next time would think it a good idea to raid the National Insurance fund for other purposes or to legislate to destroy the most important contributory principle. Integrity and understanding the public mood matter more than Mr Lawson’s logic.
September 15, 2026
I am normally fully supportive of John’s views but on this ( and I am a beneficiary) I think that he is wrong .
Reply Why am I wrong? If a party or government wants to remove the triple lock and get rid of the National Insurance fund they can do so, but need to explain their broken promise and propose the necessary legislation. Surely politicians should keep their promises? There are plenty of easier ways of saving much more government spending as I regularly set out. Why did the parties adopt and support the triple lock?
September 15, 2026
The fund is owned by those who contributed or are contributing to it.
The Government would need to legislate to make legal robbing them of their fund. Why not therefore, rob the owners of much richer funds?
If some robbery, murder, covering of faces is legal, then there is no argument for maintaining any rule of law.
When the Government IS the GANG, we live in a criminal state.
September 15, 2026
It is rather irritating when people just say “you are wrong” without saying why they think this so you can reply to explain to them.
So Kemi Badenoch will ‘abolish inheritance tax’ if she wins next election. A good policy to have it is a hugely damaging doom loop law.
But “if” prob. seems to be at circa a 5% chance of a Tory overall majority. Also will she do it day one on or after 5 years for it to be revered by the following government a month or two later?
Osborne promised £1 million threshold about 18 years back it remains at £325k today (now worth just circa £200k) so how is Kemi going to convince us the Tories would deliver or even try to deliver this time?
Reply This policy has not yet been adopted or announced. Getting rid of taxes is a good idea as long as spending cuts are identified to pay for such changes. The firm tax pledge so far is on Stamp Duty with more to come
September 15, 2026
Stamp Duty drives property inflation because to recover the original cost you need to realise up to 15% more than the headline purchase price, and then the ratchet ratchets on an on.
Eventually the Government has taken the equal of the value of the property and still owns it’s ‘golden share’.
This is effective nationalisation of the property market.
September 15, 2026
Also hit by the CGT without any indexation for not PPR props and Osborne’s moronic attack on interest deductions for rented properties so tax is due on profits you have not even made. Tax at over 100% even worse than Denis Healey’s 98% thanks Osborne!
So if you want to let out your property and rent a similar property elsewhere to take up a new job you lose out hugely in taxes and agents fees and risks in recovery of the property. But if you sell and buy a new one loads of other costs and stamp duty. Now little point in buying unless you are sure you will be staying for perhaps 10 years and no one can be “sure” of this.
September 15, 2026
To reply:- IHT is a huge reason for wealth people to leave the country, or to invest less efficiently or not to move to, invest in or bring wealth the UK or indeed bother to build up wealth at all. LABOUR have mad matters far worse with the new 20% IHT of trading companies and farms.
Over say 20years UK taxes (all of them) them + Inflation and 40% IHT on death can easily take 95% of your wealth off you in the UK. Unless you like spending loads of time and money with tax planners best avoid the UK. Your say 10% return reduce to perhaps 6% after tax for 20 years then inflation at say 4% the. 40% loss on death – it is hard even to keep pace with inflation post tax even if you investment go well.
September 15, 2026
Milton Friedman famously said, “I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it’s possible“ – me too as people and businesses, on average, invariable spend it so much more wisely and much more efficiently too. Hard not to with these deluded, doom loop, tax to death, net zero loons in charge.
September 15, 2026
I see the BoE is about to sell £100 billion of Bonds at a loss indemnified by the taxpayer. Neither the US or Brussels does this. This shortfall would cover the triple lock and extra defence spending.
It’s almost as though the BoE has It’s own agenda.
September 15, 2026
Because by 2030 it will add another £15biilion to the already ‘out-of-control’ Welfare bill .The whole welfare bill needs culling ,including the Triple Lock
September 15, 2026
Look. If politicians kept their promises Cameron would have taken us out of the EU with no deal, we would only have a few thousand immigrants p.a., and frankly pensions would be paid at 65 years. It’s a non-starter.
Why are you so ravaged about a very recent triple lock, but not about the broken promise made to me 50 odd years ago that my state pension would be paid at 65?
September 15, 2026
Like my self I was in a job that didn’t give me a pension so went without and put it to buying my home to live in, unlike the politicians and city workers nowadays who get gold plated pensions and the state pension is peanuts to them, so keeping the triple lock makes one hell of difference to
the spare money I have and many other like myself and would be political suicidal to
scrap it , just saying
September 15, 2026
DOMINIQUE Lawson talks of INCREASED longevity. This actually has decline by about 3% since the Covid “vaccines”, the Covid NHS shutdown fiasco and general incompetence. Anyway inflation is likely to exceed 2.5% for some time so this element of the triple lock is rather irrelevant currently anyway.
Still Lawson is as his father was a climate realist so he gets that right.
September 15, 2026
ALSO this government is grabbing back much of the state pension in energy market rigging taxes, council tax, residents parking charges and visitors parking permits, loss of heating allowances for many (even after the U turn), and now the holiday hotel taxes on top of VAT to come too…
September 15, 2026
It now cost me about £25 a day for a residents day pass at my relative flat in Camden. THIS even if the car is unused for the week plus ULEZ each day if used and the other motorist mugging traps to avoid too. Or you pay for rip off train and tubes so you can watch all the youngsters and migrants vaulting the tube barriers all ignored by staff.
September 15, 2026
I was never an admirer of Dominic Lawson; I find his writing turgid, opinionated and tedious, boring and repetitive. He is jumping on the anti-triple lock campaign currently being waged by those who will not have to live on the state pension in retirement.
John Redwood has frequently written in support of the triple lock, here and elsewhere. His arguments in favour are strong and he has my support, for what it’s worth.
Lawson is part of the failed fossil fuel lobby. He is a prominent climate change sceptic who frequently uses his columns to attack the UK’s climate targets, green energy transitions, and environmental policies. Lawson’s stance ignores dangerous tipping points – such as the melting of permafrost or ice sheets- which will trigger irreversible, runaway climate changes.
He has written about nimby “public pushback” against green infrastructure, arguing that while people support the concept of net zero, they oppose the giant wind turbines or pylons that “ruin” local landscapes.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and global economic bodies warn that failing to transition will lead to catastrophic costs from extreme weather, property damage, food insecurity, wildfires and supply chain collapses. Patently, this is already happening
Onshore wind and solar are now the cheapest forms of new electricity generation in UK history, consistently undercutting new fossil fuel plants by substantial margins. And don’t go on about “subsidies” there are none.
September 15, 2026
Can you clear up for me which Lawson you are referring to. AI cannot decide. Copilot tells me it is the late former chancellor. Gemini tells me it is the Mail journalist.
Reply The journalist
September 15, 2026
Dominic Lawson the son of the late Conservative politician and Chancellor of the Exchequer Nigel Lawson, and the brother of foodie celeb. Nigella. Eton then history at Oxford but fairly sound in Climate Realism.
September 15, 2026
The triple lock is a political tool not a legal one. It was given and so can be taken away.
The state pension should be a reasonable amount and for some, based on their contributions it is but for most it isn’t because their contributions were so high. This is one of the reasons why those earning over £50K only pay 2% national insurance as there is no further return.
However there is no reason that pensioners should be any better protected against inflation than those working. So I think that the state pension should rise by average earnings not be triple locked.
September 15, 2026
It would be an act of blatant thuggery to change the triple lock. Politicians must understand changing NI fund legislation would destroy any semblance of trust remaining. This is another compelling reason why Parliament and politicians are held in such contempt. They cannot be trusted to be honourable and make good decisions. Our National debt and debt interest is clear evidence of mismanagement by Government and the Bank of England. This calls into question the competency of Prime Ministers when they select their Chancellor and Treasury team, because we, the people, are being badly served.
September 15, 2026
Maybe if the Government was economically, financially and fiscally competent …..then it would not have to worry so much about the cost of the pensions it pays to old people. It might also be able to justify its general profligacy.
September 15, 2026
Savings I would target:
Public sector employer contributions of up to 29% – if we consider how large the public sector wage bill is knocking 20 – 25% off the pension contribution represents a huge saving by moving to defined contribution pensions.
Benefits can be average wage increases less 1%. There is no reason why those on benefits should be protected against inflation and paying benefits increases demand (particularly in housing).
Green subsidies.
Carbon capture
HS2
Any payments to a foreigner who has not paid tax for 5 years, including health and education.
The Lords
The number of MPs
Tax political donations. Tax union fees
September 15, 2026
Not only should the government keep it’s hands of the triple lock. It should increase the income tax starting threshold to ensure people relying solely on the state pension are not taxed on it.
How mad is it to give a pension set by government and then take some back in tax ……
September 15, 2026
The world is rapidly approaching an oil price crunch due to Trump’s failed “three week” war on the Ayatollahs. Trump is aware of the likely effect on US inflation should the oil price rapidly rise to a projected $250 a barrel. He is already trying to blame Zelenskiy for the high costs of refined oil products, because of Ukraine bombing Russian oil refineries. And it’s definitely not due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by the IRGC
( personal allegation against Trump removed ed)
All summer, the oil price has been artificially held down by releases from global oil stockpiles. These are now close to exhaustion. Big Oil and Big Gas are rubbing their hands with glee at the vast profits they are about to accrue this winter. The rest of us can freeze.
September 15, 2026
@Sakara Gold – and the UK sits atop of oil and gas reserves that would keeps prices under control, but its Political Class prefers sending UK money that it doesn’t have abroad to prop up dodgy regimes.
Its good to see that you are favour of your Ayatollahs and their aspirations of being a Nuclear weapon power in a such a volatile area of the World
September 15, 2026
Not to be out done David Willetts the President of the Socialist think tank ‘the Resolution Foundation(that alone says it all) Chips in with
“The triple lock is a symbol of a society that has stolen the young’s future”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/09/12/the-triple-lock-is-a-symbol-of-society-stolen-young-future/
According to him the weekly amount: £184.90 per week or £9,614.80 per year based on a full record of contributions, is more than what the UK’s poorest households that are permitted to work and earn get. He is conflating that older people should surrender their dignity and go cap in hand to the State for handout as justification of a Politician not being honest.
September 15, 2026
Yes John you are correct the triple lock should stay
I do hope the conservatives are serious about delivering policies that will make large reductions in spending this country desperately needs
The increase in NI must be reversed
September 15, 2026
I’d like to see an end to the triple lock and elimination of employer’s national insurance, which makes British industry uncompetitive. Let workers contribute to their own occupational pension scheme, which is now mandatory following the Pension Act and wean people off the public teat.
No wonder the National Insurance fund is in surplus given the steady increase in tax rates over time.
September 15, 2026
Has anyone explained what they propose to replace the triple lock and how much pensioners would consequently lose?
September 15, 2026
Not to loose site of who is stocking up the controversy, The Daily Telegraph has been running campaigns against pensioners for seemingly for the last couple of years. It appears they have let a very junior staffer who is having a heyday stoking up ‘click-bait’ at the expense of other peoples lives
September 15, 2026
What we have been seeing in recent years is intergenerational covetousness and envy fuelled by commentators like Lawson (ignoring the tenth commandment).
We need more young people is the demographic reality but picking them up off the rubber boats is not the answer; they could cost us more than the pensioners. Tax breaks for working families to encourage more births would make more sense in the medium term.