Commenting on the report Barnett Waddingham senior consultant Malcolm McLean, says: “The case for and against a continuation of the triple lock continues to divide opinion, both inside and outside of government.
“Scrapping it is one of those “courageous” decisions that politicians may be extremely reluctant to make, for fear of losing the pensioner vote, but yet are aware of the cost for the economy of maintaining such an open ended commitment for an indefinite period of time. An early political consensus is certainly desirable but is far from certain that it can be achieved.
“I am personally not convinced that this is solely an intergenerational issue about millennials versus baby boomers, as implied by the Committee. There is no certainty that getting rid of the triple lock would put extra cash directly in the pockets of millennials, or indeed people of working age more widely. Also it is a fact that our state pension is not especially generous – even the shiny new state pension at £155.65 a week is only a mere 5p above the Government’s specified minimum income level of £155.60 a week as measured by the means-tested Pension Credit – and a failure to continue to provide adequate uplifts in its value runs the risk of putting more and more pensioners into poverty in the future.
“If it is decided that the triple lock has to go this may be the time to introduce a new dedicated pensioner index, one which concentrates on the cost of living increases that affect older people more significantly than others. These would probably relate to expenditure on food and heating costs with less emphasis on housing and travel.”
|
