State pension scandal as Labour MPs back Tony Blair's call to scrap triple lock

Thanks to the triple lock mechanism, retirees enjoy an annual payment rate hike to their state pensions with payments rising by either the rate of inflation, average wage growth, or 2.5 per cent; whichever is highest.

However, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has warned that the policy is costing the taxpayer up to £10billion more a year than initially forecast.

Despite this expense, many MPs are aware that it is politically unpopular to get rid of the state pension triple lock, especially during a cost of living crisis.

Speaking to The i Paper, Labour members of Parliament admitted they believe the payment uprate mechanism is unfair to young working-age people who are paying for generous pensioner benefit support.

Earlier this week, Mr Blair published an open letter criticising Sir Keir and Chancellor Rachel Reeves's record since returning the party to power in July 2024.

Notably, the ex-PM asserted the triple lock was "not affordable" in the years to come and urged politicians to "be honest" about the reality of Government spending.

An unnamed Labour MP said: "Everyone knows [the triple lock] is not sustainable. Labour MPs know, opposition MPs know. No one wants to touch it, but it's ludicrous to avoid it when we have generational problems."

Currently, every major political party, including Reform, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Greens have issued their support for keeping the triple lock.

Dr Kristian Niemietz, an editorial director of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), said: "The triple lock is one of the most expensive commitments in British public policy, it is an electoral bribe with a compound interest rate.

"It ratchets up spending year after year, including under economic conditions that really do not warrant it. It is a poorly targeted benefit, much of which goes to already well-off pensioners, paid for by working-age people who get a raw deal from our stagnant economy.

“While pledges to make cuts elsewhere are welcome, a party that claims to stand for radical reform and fiscal responsibility should be leading the argument for a sustainable pension settlement, not bidding for grey votes with the same unaffordable promises as everyone else.

“We need to talk about containing the cost of the current system in the short term, but also, in the longer term, about how to move to a system with a more stable funding base less amenable to political meddling.

We need to give people the opportunity to build up their own savings throughout their working lives, so that they are not reliant on political bribes in old age."