The end of the triple lock is coming… and it is just one of the myriad ways Burnham is planning to hit seniors and their pensions: JEFF PRESTRIDGE

Readers, the end is nigh. No, I’m not talking about Putin’s threat to launch military strikes on our country’s defence facilities. Nor am I referring to the impending emasculation of our economy by a free-spending Labour government intent on turning us into a socialist state and nationalising anything that moves.

No, I’m talking about the triple lock – the mechanism that ensures those of us (myself included) who have reached state pension age receive an annual increase to our hard-earned pension equivalent to the higher of inflation, earnings growth or 2.5 per cent.

Its days, dear readers, are numbered. Though I am not prepared to rule anything out when it comes to our new Prime Minister Andy Burnham, I hope the lock will not be abandoned until after the next General Election in 2029. But the welter of opinion against maintaining it is mounting by the day.

When Burnham made his underwhelming maiden speech as Prime Minister in the House of Commons a few days ago, it was no coincidence that one of his economic confidants took to the airwaves to state the triple lock was untenable.

The voice was that of Lord O’Neill, former economic adviser to Burnham, ex-chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (not everyone’s cup of tea) and inventor of the investment acronym BRIC (standing for the world’s new powerhouses of Brazil, Russia, India and China).

O’Neill was not backward in coming forward, referring to the lock as one of the ‘sacred cows’ that governments past and present refuse to touch (the Conservative government did actually suspend it for the tax year beginning April 6, 2022 in response to a sharp post-pandemic bounce back in average earnings of 8 per cent).

O’Neill said bond markets – unnerved by geopolitical unrest and nervousness over a Government that likes spending money it does not have – would respond favourably if Burnham were ‘to take credible action to deal with the excesses of the triple lock or the excesses of welfare spending’. 

Given Labour’s reluctance to tackle a mounting welfare bill – and for that matter its reticence in addressing the crippling cost of providing unfunded pensions in the public sector – the ending of the triple lock represents the only option available to Burnham.

In light of O’Neill’s remarks on the need to appease the bond markets – and those previously from the likes of the Resolution Foundation which described the lock as a ‘poorly designed, unfair arbitrary ratchet that we could never afford’ – I would be surprised if Chancellor John Healey remains silent on the issue in next month’s Budget.

Maybe he will spell out a timetable for its axeing, giving pensioners on tight budgets some financial breathing space to withstand the continued pressure on living costs triggered by the Iran war.

Maybe he’ll go further, but saying nothing will do little to arrest the rise in Government borrowing costs. For most pensioners, the axeing of the lock (if and when it comes) will represent a bigger betrayal than Rachel Reeves’s spiteful decision to target them in her first decision as Chancellor by taking away the winter fuel allowance.

It would also raise concerns that they are being targeted to address the country’s financial ills. Late last month, the Institute For Public Policy Research called for working pensioners to be hit with National Insurance bills as part of a move to make the tax system fairer to younger workers.

Then there is the freeze in income tax thresholds, which is due to remain in place until 2031 and drawing ever more pensioners into the tax net. Official figures confirm that the number of pensioners paying basic rate tax has risen by a third to nigh on 8.5 million over the past five years.

As if that wasn’t enough for seniors like me to feel victimised for just being old, Wednesday’s Money Mail made for tough reading.

My colleague Tanya Jefferies reported that millions of pensioners will be hit with a £100 ‘retirement stealth tax’ next spring when the full-rate state pension tops £13,000, surpassing the basic rate income tax threshold of £12,570.

As Tanya says, this will result in the situation where the Department for Work and Pensions pays state pension to those eligible, only for the Treasury to snatch back a slice of it in tax. Crazy.

I’ve accepted the triple lock will be a goner by 2029. But have you? If you think it should stay or you have any ideas about what should replace it, please let me know. I’m all ears.

jeff.prestridge@mailonsunday.co.uk