Over a third of over-55s in Britain are less likely to vote Conservative if the triple lock is at risk, Old Mutual Wealth has found.

According to a recent survey of 1,000 voters over the age of 55, Old Mutual Wealth found that the threat to the state pension triple lock would change the voting habits of 34.2 per cent of the group, making them less likely to vote for the Tory party.

It was noted that the current Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May avoided questions on the triple lock today, while the party previously pledged to only keep the policy in place for this term in parliament.

In opposition to this, the party’s Labour counterparts have claimed that they will keep the pensions triple lock until 2025.

Nonetheless, the Cridland report on the state pension age did recommend putting an end to the policy by the next parliament to find a balance between access to the state pension and its value.

The over-55s are a key contingent in the General Election as they exercise their vote more frequently than their younger counterparts and so could have a considerable impact on the results of the snap election if this policy is not adequately addressed.

Old Mutual Wealth pensions expert, Jon Greer commented: “The issue of the triple lock has now become not just a key long-term decision but a crucial election battleground, with all parties under pressure to set out when they think we should be able to retire and how they plan to create an economy that supports longer working lives.

“The issue is that regardless of what happens to people’s earnings or the state economy the state pension has the potential to ratchet up by at least 2.5 per cent. Replacing the triple lock with an earnings link would make sure growth in pensions continues, but without the ratchet effect. In times when earnings fall behind price inflation, an above earnings increase could kick in until real earnings growth resumes.

“As society ages, with more people reaching retirement age leaning on a smaller proportion of the population that are of working age, costs will become a significant burden. While any party that refuses to address the political hot-potato of the state pension could be accused of kicking the can down the road. However, the power of the grey vote may mean politics rules over reason."

Commenting on a potential move back to the double lock, Hymans Robertson partner Chris Noon said: “The motivation to remove the triple lock and return to the former policy of double lock would be based on short-term cashflow considerations rather than sensible policy decision-making. It will come with big political risks, but more importantly the cost savings to any government will be insignificant in the context of the pressure building on the state pension due to huge savings shortfalls.”

Hymans Robertson also warned that although abandoning the triple lock would provide cost savings in the short term, it is likely to have the opposite effect in the long term. While the triple lock has cost the government £1.8-2bn over seven years, compared to the double lock approach, the nation needs to instead focus on long-term policy making and repairing the current savings crisis.

“As a nation people are not saving enough for retirement… we need to put long-term policy making ahead of short-term cashflow needs. And we need to truly incentivise savings rather than tinker with the system, kicking the can down the road for future generations to deal with,” Noon added.

Share Story: