Pensions Triple Lock

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Tuesday 13th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Pat McFadden)]

With permission, I will make a statement on the Government’s plan for the future uprating of the state pension. Security and dignity in later life is a mission that has run through every Labour Government. Harold Wilson was the first to introduce the statutory link with earnings. The creation of pension credit in the early 2000s increased the incomes of the poorest pensioners and saw pensioner poverty halve under the last Labour Government.

In our 2024 manifesto, we said we would keep the triple lock for the duration of this Parliament—that is a promise that we will keep to pensioners. Keeping that promise means that this year the full new state pension is rising by £575. It is set to be over £2,000 a year more by the end of this Parliament compared with when we took office in 2024. That will take the new state pension to over 30% of average earnings by the end of the Parliament and it is forecast to be a record high. In the future, we will adjust the triple lock to make those gains permanent but also to put the state pension on a sustainable basis.

Let me set out how that will work and deliver a state pension that rises each and every year. The uprating mechanism will retain its current three elements. There will be a universal state pension that protects against inflation, ensures a material rise every year, and enables pensioners to share in the wealth of the nation as wages go up. From April 2030, the state pension will continue to go up by the highest of inflation, 2.5% or what is required to maintain its record high level against average earnings. That will lock in for the future all the gains from the triple lock up until April 2030.

The adjusted mechanism will mean that the state pension grows in line with earnings over time, instead of outpacing them as is the case with the current triple lock. It will end what is known as the ratchet effect, which makes the triple lock consume a greater share of national wealth over time, making reform at some stage inevitable. In simple terms, it will mean the state pension will continue to rise but not to permanently grow as a share of average earnings.

We know that people want security in retirement and we are committed to protecting the poorest pensioners. Under our plans, pensioner poverty is set to fall. In addition, we have asked the Pensions Commission to include suggestions on further supporting lower-income pensioners in its final report, to be delivered next year.

A good retirement, however, is about more than income. It is about security and peace of mind too, which is why it is so important that the savings from the change will make a significant contribution to a new settlement for older people: a rising, more sustainable state pension alongside free personal care through a new national care service. This is a policy that is better for pensioners, better for families and better for the NHS. It is better for pensioners because so many worry about what will happen to them in their final years; better for families because those worries are shared by children and grandchildren who want to know that their elderly relatives will be looked after when they need it; and better for the NHS because it will ease the pressure we see today, where failings in our social care system mean many pensioners are kept in hospital longer than they need to be because social care beds are unavailable. The cost of inaction—the cost of turning away from this—is more pressure on the NHS, more ambulance call-outs, more A&E admissions, more corridor care and more people stuck in hospital when they do not have to be. That is why change is needed.

The triple lock has of course been the subject of much debate. Economists and commentators have proposed a range of options—as has the Conservative party, over the years—from removing the earnings link to scrapping the triple lock altogether. Some have called for the state pension to be means-tested. We have rejected those proposals. We believe that our plan is the right answer to a difficult question that has been ignored for far too long.

I am enormously grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for Pensions for his work in this area, which has helped to ensure that we can have a system going forward that is sustainable and retains, in an adjusted way, the three current elements of the triple lock system. It will mean that the state pension will not continue to outpace average earnings as it would have done under the current triple lock. The savings from the changes will reduce spending by an estimated £15 billion a year by the end of the next decade, rising substantially to around £50 billion a year by 2050.

The pension and social care changes are a new settlement that puts the universal state pension on a more sustainable footing, so that it is there for decades to come, while giving pensioners and older people a better deal on social care. Pensioners can be confident that they will have a rising state pension every year. They can also be confident that we are sorting out one of the most difficult problems the country has faced for a long time—the issue of social care. A new settlement for pensioners, a rising pension, a sustainable system, and a plan to fix our social care system: that is what we will deliver. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Well, the Secretary of State definitely had his porridge this morning! I remind Members that we reference colleagues not by their names but by their constituencies—although I appreciate that the Secretary of State was quoting.

[Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)]

I particularly welcome the element of the Secretary of State’s statement about improvements to social care, which some of us have been campaigning for in this House for more years than we care to remember. Could he confirm that this is intended to make sure that individuals do not have to pay for their own care directly and that the burden will be lifted from council tax payers, many of whom now have to pay for social care for those who cannot afford to pay directly themselves? That is really important. We should make sure that council tax goes to other services and not massively towards social care.

[Pat McFadden]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that this is designed to cover the kind of personal care that people are having to pay for out of the current system. It is also, as he suggested, a national system and less reliant on the various local differences that we see throughout the current care system.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for sharing his statement in advance. The Liberal Democrats have a proud history around the old age pension. In fact, it was Asquith and Lloyd George who introduced it in 1908. Then in came Margaret Thatcher in 1980 and broke the link with earnings, and that sadly remained for 30 years. Sadly, the Brown and Blair Governments did not ride to the rescue during that period of time with regard to the link with earnings. It took the Liberal Democrats introducing the triple lock when they returned to government in 2010 to start tackling pensioner poverty and drawing it to a conclusion.

The triple lock has been a powerful tool for tackling pensioner poverty. It has almost drawn together the gap between males and females in respect of the state pension. It has helped some of the most vulnerable people receiving pensions. Looking to the future, it ensures that there is a solid foundation that people can build on when considering their future pension savings. That does not detract from the fact that there continues to be a cost of living crisis and that there are many people who are not saving enough towards their pensions. There is an assumption within the system for lots of our society that people should be saving towards their pensions.

We have some serious questions to put to the Secretary of State. We would welcome the Secretary of State sharing any impact assessment on pensioner poverty that the Government have undertaken. In respect of social care, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has identified that the savings from within these proposals do not cover the finances that the Government have suggested. Is the IFS lying?

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. For future reference, Mr Darling, you were over time by 30 seconds.

[Pat McFadden]

Let me begin with a cross-party point of agreement: when the hon. Member draws attention to the Liberal legacy in establishing a state pension system, he is right. He is also right that the break with earnings for many years hurt pensioner incomes. That damage has been put right through many years of state pension rises. When we get to April 2030—when the new system kicks in—those gains will be locked in under this adjusted triple lock for future years.

I began my response by reaching out to the hon. Member. I am afraid that I must also point out that the Liberal Democrats did support faster than expected rises in the state pension age during their time in power. He asked about pensioner poverty, which is set to fall under our plans, the details of which were published on 29 September. He also asked about the pace and scale of rolling out the national care service. That is a matter for Baroness Louise Casey to report on, and she will issue her final report next summer.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. Just before the Secretary of State responds, I know that Mr Speaker reminded colleagues this morning that when they are speaking, they must do so through the Chair—they must not turn their back on the Chair.

[Pat McFadden]

Let me say to the pensioners in Feltham and Heston, and in every other constituency, that the state pension will continue to rise every year. It will rise by prices or by 2.5%, and the gains that it will show in relation to average earnings will be locked in from April 2030 onwards.

--- Later in debate ---

[Pat McFadden]

Since we came into office, we have changed the system of non-doms and the taxation regime for the wealthiest in society. More broadly, tax is a matter for the Chancellor and he has to weigh all these things up. The way that we are doing this is fair. It is a new settlement for pensioners that ensures a rising basic state pension, but also tackles the long-running issue of social care. It is a new settlement not just for pensioners but for their families, who often are worried about what will happen to their elderly relatives as they approach their final years.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Llinos Medi.

[Llinos Medi (Ynys Môn) (PC)]

Diolch, Madam Dirprwy Lefarydd. This Government have said more than once that pensioners who rely on the state pension as their only source of income will not have to pay tax on it during this Parliament. However, the proposed reforms to the triple lock would take effect in the next Parliament. Will the Secretary of State confirm that pensioners reliant on the state pension alone will not have to pay tax when the reforms come into place?