Will the triple lock pension system be abolished by the new Labour leader?

Pensioners have benefited greatly from the triple lock, but there have been repeated concerns about its viability

Will Labour leader Andy Burnham protect it?

Keir Starmer pledged not to interfere with the triple lock, which guarantees an increase in the state pension every April based on the average earnings growth rate, inflation rate, or 2.5 percent, whichever is higher.

Over 12 million pensions received a state pension boost in April thanks to the triple lock guarantee, which increased by a very generous 4.8%. This year's state pensioner income increased by £575.

Compared to non-pensioners, who are essentially financing the state pension, the majority of pensioners saw an increase in their income.

The Office for Budget Responsibility projects that the triple lock will cost approximately £15.5 billion by 2030, up from the initial estimate of £5.2 billion.

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition implemented the triple lock in 2012. Both the Conservatives and Labour, led by Keir Starmer, pledged to do the same.

Politicians find it challenging to modify the policy because it is so well-liked by state pensioners. However, is an expensive policy established in 2012 still just and sustainable today?

Will the triple lock finally be abolished by Andy Burnham, who appears likely to become prime minister later this month?

Burnham's emphasis on devolution does not absolve him of the need to reduce government debt. There will undoubtedly be more pressure on him to take the helm in order to finally stop appeasing the elderly.

What is the triple lock's problem?

You might get a different response depending on who you ask. On the BFIA Talks podcast, Steve Webb, the pensions minister at the time the triple lock was implemented, explained to me that its purpose was to keep pensioners afloat.

"In 2010, I was appointed Minister of Pensions." However, over the past 30 years, the state pension's value has decreased in relation to people's earnings, so it has generally increased in tandem with inflation.

"However, the issue with that is that if you make money and then stop making money, the thing you fall back on must be related to a certain percentage of your earnings. Otherwise, your standard of living simply collapses and you fall off a cliff. Therefore, for 30 years, before the triple lock, the state pension must be linked to a percentage of people's earnings."

Therefore, the goal of more generous indexation after 2010 was to repair damage that had been done for thirty years. The over-indexing of the state pension makes me proud, not ashamed or embarrassed."

However, the working generation would contend that the system unfairly burdens taxpayers, particularly since young workers have doubts about the existence of the state pension for them.

Pensioners will claim that the increase only shields them from growing living expenses because they worked hard for it.

However, the Resolution Foundation, a think tank, claims that the triple lock has not significantly decreased pensioner poverty. Pensioner poverty increased by two and a third percentage points in the twelve years after the Triple Lock was implemented.

Challenging decisions for Burnham?

Both former Conservative chancellor Jeremy Hunt and former Labour leader Tony Blair have demanded that the antiquated and costly policy be abandoned.

Earlier this year, the Tony Blair Institute released a report advocating for the UK state pensions system to be redesigned and the triple lock to be removed by 2030.

The new Labour leader will eventually have to make some difficult decisions, even though it is unlikely that he will make any changes during this parliament. Will Burnham be the one to remove the triple lock at last?