Sharon Graham says scrapping pensions triple lock to fund social care would be ‘morally wrong’

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham has warned that scrapping the state pension triple lock to help pay for a new social care system would be ‘morally wrong’. Her intervention on Tuesday puts a direct challenge to Prime Minister Andy Burnham as he prepares to set out his care plans at Labour’s conference: how to fund a service intended to be free at the point of use without reducing pensioners’ income protections. No decision to remove the triple lock has been announced.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Graham said ministers should consider wealth taxes before changing pension protections. She argued that asking people receiving around £12,500 a year to give up that security to pay for social care was wrong. Graham also said British state pensions were the lowest in the G7. Those figures and comparisons were her arguments as reported by the BBC, rather than independently established measures in this account.

What Labour has committed to

Labour deputy leader Lucy Powell told BBC Breakfast on Tuesday that the party remained committed to the triple lock, describing it as a pledge in its 2024 election manifesto. She said the policy was expected to raise the value of the state pension by around £2,000 a year over the current parliament. Labour’s manifesto pledged to retain the lock, and the government’s 2024 Autumn Budget said it would maintain it for the duration of that parliament.

The triple lock determines annual increases to the basic and new State Pension using the highest of earnings growth, inflation or 2.5%, according to the House of Commons Library. It has operated since 2011/12, though it was temporarily suspended for 2022/23, when pensions rose by 3.1% in line with inflation. The policy therefore concerns how pensions rise from year to year; the present dispute is about whether that guarantee should continue in a future parliament.

The care proposal and its unresolved cost

Burnham has described a future social care system in England modelled on the NHS, with care free at the point of use. In an interview reported by the Guardian, he said everybody would contribute to its funding but gave no method for collecting that money. He described the existing English system as unfair and acknowledged that a nationwide replacement would be complicated and likely costly. He said a review was continuing and promised more detail in his conference speech.

For people who need care now, the funding question has practical weight. The BBC reports that social care, unlike NHS treatment, is not generally free at the point of use. In England, the upper capital limit for means-tested local-authority support is £23,250, according to government care guidance. A financial assessment determines what an eligible person must contribute. The BBC notes that eligibility rules differ in Wales and Scotland, so the English threshold does not describe a uniform UK system.

The Guardian reported that Burnham ruled out implementing his proposed reforms before the next general election, then due in 2029, and intended to put the plan in Labour’s next manifesto for voters to consider. He said the annual cost would be below a suggested £18bn figure but did not supply a settled price or funding formula in that interview. The scale of the public-finance challenge, he said, meant the proposal had to be worked through carefully.

A pledge for this parliament, a question for the next

The distinction between Labour’s current promise and its next manifesto is central to the dispute. The Independent reported on Monday that ministers had not confirmed whether the triple-lock pledge would appear in the next election programme. Chancellor John Healey said that manifesto would be decided at the time. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said Labour had kept its existing commitment and that pensioners should have reassurance about the pledge, while awaiting Burnham’s plans.

Former Labour minister Alan Milburn called social care reform a major decision Burnham appeared prepared to make, according to the BBC’s account of his Political Thinking podcast interview. Milburn’s assessment did not amount to an announcement about pension policy. Neither the prime minister’s description of an NHS-style service nor ministers’ comments establish that the triple lock will be changed, or that pension savings have been chosen as a funding source.

Burnham has encountered opposition over social care funding before. As health secretary in 2009, he proposed a national care service financed through a levy on estates. Opponents labelled it a ‘death tax’, and the plan was abandoned after Labour lost the 2010 election, the Guardian reported. Burnham has said nothing is off the table this time, while making clear that he is not simply returning to that earlier proposal.

Graham’s intervention therefore comes before the decisive choices have been made. Labour says the triple lock remains its policy for this parliament; Burnham says he wants a universal care service after the next election. His conference speech may add detail, but the eventual price, means of payment and place of the pension pledge in Labour’s next manifesto remain open questions in the published accounts.