𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

An economic expert has urged the UK’s triple lock mechanism to be replaced – with a system similar to what is used in Australia. 

The triple lock, which has long been staunchly defended by the Express, has come under regular fire with critics questioning whether it is sustainable.

In January, government employment tsar Alan Milburn, once a Labour cabinet member under Tony Blair, became the latest high-profile figure to call for it to be adapted.

He complained that successive governments have “backed the older generation with a triple lock, but there’s no such guarantee for young people”.

Milburn warned we face a “fiscal time bomb” unless the triple lock commitment is eased and money redirected to help the young find jobs.

But for pensioners, many of whom rely on the state pension as their main source of income, the triple lock isn’t just a policy, it’s a lifeline.

Since its introduction in April 2011, it has lifted millions out of poverty, protecting dignity and security in later life, by increasing the pension each year by inflation, average earnings growth or 2.5 per cent, whichever is highest.

Speaking to the Express, Laurence O’Brien, senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, urged the UK to consider an alternative to the triple lock which he believes protects pensioners for poverty while not putting the economy under such intense strain.

He said: “Ultimately, the triple lock is unsustainable because it leads to the state pension growing faster than the economy. This means ever higher taxes are needed to pay for it.

“A better approach for indexing the state pension is to keep the best features of the triple lock while making the system sustainable and predictable. A good option is a ‘smoothed earnings link’, similar to that used in Australia.

“This approach would give us the best of both worlds. It ensures that the state pension always rises at least as fast as inflation, protecting pensioners’ purchasing power.

“It also keeps the state pension anchored to living standards in the long run. But, crucially, it stops long-run costs spiralling in unpredictable ways. We can press the accelerator after shocks, but we then allow the state pension to come back gradually to an affordable level.”

Australia’s equivalent of the triple lock pegs payments to a fixed proportion of average earnings, ensuring pensioners share in rising living standards while providing protection against inflation.

Unlike the triple lock, this method allows for temporary price indexation when inflation exceeds wage growth, maintaining a stable, predictable, and sustainable long-term link to average earnings rather than creating a permanent ratchet effect.

O’Brien added that the triple lock “should not, and cannot, stay forever”.

He said: “The triple lock was introduced to protect pensioners when prices rise, and ensure the state pension keeps pace with general rises in living standards. These aims are commendable, because many retirees rely on the state pension for much of their income.

“However, the triple lock goes beyond this. As the value of the state pension rises by the maximum of earnings, inflation and 2.5%, it can grow faster than both inflation and average earnings growth when viewed over several years.

“Think of it like pressing the accelerator after every shock, but never touching the brake. Inflation pushes up the state pension one year, earnings push it up the next, and nothing ever brings it back into line.

“This makes the long-run cost of the state pension system hard to control and forecast. We can’t afford this at a time when the public finances also face other pressures, such as the need to spend more on defence.”