Conservatives to retain UK pension triple lock in manifesto

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

UK chancellor Jeremy Hunt has paved the way for the state pension triple lock to last until the end of the decade, after confirming that the Conservatives would include a pledge to keep it in their election manifesto.

Labour insiders said it was “inconceivable” that Sir Keir Starmer would not match a Tory commitment to keep the triple lock, to ensure that the party remains competitive in the fight for the “grey vote”.

Hunt last week told a parliamentary committee that the triple lock would have to come under review in the coming years to reflect the growing pressure on public finances of an ageing population.

But on Sunday he told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg that a pledge to retain the triple lock — introduced in the 2011-12 financial year — for the whole of the next parliament would be a Conservative manifesto pledge.

“When we came into office in 2010 pensioners were more likely to be in poverty than other groups,” he said. “Now because of the triple lock, they are less likely to be in poverty. That’s a very important social change.”

Hunt confirmed that continuing with the policy — which ensures the state pension rises with whichever is the highest number out of average earnings increases, inflation or 2.5 per cent — would be “expensive”.

But he said: “You can only make that commitment if you’re confident that you’re going to deliver economic growth.” He said pensioners needed protection because they were retired and unable to increase work.

Anneliese Dodds, chair of the Labour party, said Starmer had not made any final decisions on his party’s manifesto. But Labour insiders confirmed that the triple lock was almost certain to feature.

One said: “The reality is that if the Tories do this, we’ll do it too. We aren’t going to let a gap open up on an issue like this.”

Hunt and Dodds, however, refused to make any commitments on what compensation might be paid to millions of women born in the 1950s after an Ombudsman ruled the government mishandled state pension age rises.

The Parliamentary Service and Health Ombudsman last week asked parliament to intervene to provide the “quickest route” to compensation for women who had “suffered injustice” because of maladministration by the Department for Work and Pensions.

Meanwhile, Hunt doubled down on his claim last week that people in his South West Surrey seat were feeling the pinch if they were earning £100,000 and that it was “not a huge salary in our area”.

Labour had claimed that Hunt’s comment on the social media site X showed he was “desperately out of touch”, when the average salary across the UK was £35,000.

The chancellor conceded that £100,000 was considered by many to be “a very high salary” but said that with people facing average property costs in his area of £670,000 and childcare on top “it doesn’t go as far as you think”.