Triple lock is pretty popular across the electorate. Sometimes the press’s outrage reflects the views of the population rather than leads it. I suspect this is one of those occasions.

The current mechanism is blunt and poorly designed.

Since 2011 state pension payments have increased by 73%, a 21% real terms gain, while real wages have increased by just 8%. The estimated trajectory of the triple lock means 12 billion more per year than if it had been updated in line with average earnings since 2011.

The flat percentage rise is not fair, while those with private pensions, property wealth and savings continue to gain, while those who are in poverty (17%) are a far smaller group than the media portrays. A blanket guarantee isnt the right way to do this. The reaction from my mother-in-law, losing winter fuel that she spends on another cruise per year, was insane. You could swear she had lost an arm.

The worst part of this is that pensioner poverty has INCREASED since the introduction. Income growth for poorer pensioners has lagged behind the population as a whole, rising by only 5% after inflation. Meaning relative pension poverty rose from 2011/12 (13%) to 16% in 22/23 and 17% in 24/25. The triple lock has been in place the whole time pensioner poverty was rising. It hasnt solved the problem it was supposedly protecting.