But what is the triple lock, and why was the announcement so controversial?<\/p>\n
The triple lock is a mechanism that provides a guaranteed increase in the basic and new state pension<\/a>. It raises it by whichever is highest among average earnings growth, price inflation, or 2.5% and ensures that state pension payments increase in value every April. <\/p>\n Politicians have long considered any challenge to the triple lock to be highly risky to their chances at the ballot box. But how long has the mechanism been in place and what were the reasons for its introduction?<\/p>\n \n Increasing the value of pensions has been hotly debated since the early 1970s. Back then, the Labour government<\/a> introduced legislation to increase long-term benefits and state pensions in line with earnings or prices, whichever was higher \u2013 a \u201cdouble lock\u201d on pensions growth. <\/p>\n But by the late 1970s, the governing Conservative party deemed this mechanism \u201cunsustainable\u201d because of the same \u201cratchet effect\u201d that the triple lock is now criticised for. In other words, for the rest of the population, their wages grew in response to inflation \u2013 but pensioners enjoyed the rise every year. Pensions were then linked to prices only, rather than slower-growing earnings.<\/p>\n During the 1980s and 1990s, concerns grew about a growing number of people falling into poverty in later life. Consecutive governments debated whether the link to earnings should be restored. At the same time, pensioners were experiencing a steady decrease<\/a> in the value of the state pension relative to average earnings. This went from a peak of 26% of average earnings in 1979 to around 16% of average earnings between 2000 and 2010. <\/p>\n In 1999, there was a reckoning when pensioners received an increase of just 75p per week<\/a> after a period of low inflation. The tiny uptick sparked anger<\/a> and then-chancellor Gordon Brown was under pressure to act. Finally, in 2002, the Labour government legislated to increase pensions by the higher of 2.5% or price inflation. The double lock was back in place.<\/p>\n A key point came when the (first) Pensions Commission in 2005 published its recommendation that the government restore the link of pensions with earnings. This was a bid to<\/a> reduce the risk of pensioners falling into poverty and placing pressure on the system of means-tested benefits.<\/p>\n This recommendation was followed by the announcement of a triple lock by the Conservative\/Liberal Democrat coalition government in its first budget in 2010. It had been a key promise in the Lib Dem manifesto<\/a>, and it was implemented in 2011 by then-chancellor George Osborne.<\/p>\n Since 2011, the triple lock has increased the value of the state pension considerably. Analysis<\/a> by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) showed that between 2010-2023, the median disposable household income for pensioners rose by 15%. Cross-party support for maintaining the triple lock during the 2019 general election demonstrated a broad commitment to the steady increase<\/a> of the state pension.<\/p>\n However, while average incomes in later life have risen, the gap between poorer pensioners and those on average incomes has widened. Relative poverty among pensioners rose<\/a> from 13% in 2011, to 16% in 2022. Thus, the triple lock has not necessarily meant<\/a> that fewer? pensioners are living in poverty.<\/p>\n At the same time, the key safety net for low-income pensioners is not the state pension alone. Historically, this was provided by something called the minimum income guarantee. This is a means-tested benefit which ensures that pensioners\u2019 weekly income does not fall below a legally set minimum<\/a> (\u00a3238 per week for a single person in 2026\/7, and \u00a3363.25 for a couple), which was also linked to earnings.<\/p>\n The minimum income guarantee was replaced by the guarantee element of pension credit (a means-tested benefit that tops up the income of poorer pensioners). This move towards some kind of guarantee of a minimum income didn\u2019t come with the fanfare of the triple lock \u2013 but it did make a big difference to pensioners\u2019 incomes before the triple lock was introduced.<\/p>\n The Resolution Foundation, an independent thinktank focused on raising UK living standards, estimated<\/a> that there was a 15.8 percentage point fall in pensioner relative poverty between 1997-98 and 2011-12, as growing incomes for poor pensioners closed the gap with the non-pensioner median income. <\/p>\n But there are still an estimated 760,000 vulnerable pensioners who are eligible for means-tested pension credit, but who failed to claim<\/a> it in 2025\/6. <\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n Read more:
\n Plans to tamper with the pension triple lock might not be as dangerous for Labour as some believe<\/a>
\n <\/strong>
\n <\/em>\n<\/p>\n
\nA growing gap<\/h2>\n
![\"An](\"https:\/\/images.theconversation.com\/files\/764918\/original\/file-20261008-50-i1b8tu.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.1&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip\")
\n Maren Winter\/Shutterstock<\/a><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/counter.theconversation.com\/content\/293467\/count.gif\")
<\/p>\n