Unite general secretary Sharon Graham has warned Andy Burnham against scrapping or weakening the state pension triple lock to help finance Labour’s proposed national care service, arguing that pensioners should not be made to pay for reforms to social care.
Graham told the Daily Express at Labour’s conference in Liverpool that a national care service was needed but said using the pension guarantee as a source of funding would be an “absolute error”.
“We need a national care service. My mum was in hospital recently, and you could see that the bed blocking was causing additional problems. That is really clear that we need something of that nature,” she said.
“I think where the difficulty comes is some of the rumour and speculation that some of this is going to be funded from the triple lock, and I think that would be an absolute error.
“We cannot have a situation where we’re going to older people to say to them to pay for all of this.”
The triple lock guarantees that the state pension rises annually by whichever is highest of average earnings growth, inflation or 2.5 per cent.
Graham argued that Britain already spends relatively little on pensions compared with other G7 economies.
“We have got the lowest amount that we spend on pensioners in terms of GDP in the G7, we’re the joint-lowest. I find it abhorrent that we’re the joint lowest,” she said.
“And for me, you don’t have to keep robbing Peter to pay Paul.
“Why aren’t we looking at the wealthiest in our society? Why do we constantly keep going back to the triple lock because actually we’re only just in a situation where maybe people can survive?”
She added: “And I don’t think I want to be in a country where they are taking money away from pensioners like that.
“I don’t think that is a good way for us to fund the national care service. Andy hasn’t said that, but of course, people around Government have intimated it, and I think that needs to stop.”
Her comments come amid renewed debate within Labour over the future cost of the pension guarantee and how the government could fund reforms to social care.
Former Treasury minister Darren Jones raised questions over the policy after suggesting during an appearance on the BBC’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg that the triple lock could be ditched to help fund social care.
Defence Secretary Wes Streeting said Labour remained committed to its manifesto pledge to retain the policy during the current parliament, but declined to say whether the guarantee would feature in the party’s next manifesto.
Graham also criticised what she described as an “obsession” with targeting pensioners, pointing to the government’s decision to restrict winter fuel payments before subsequently reversing course following political pressure.
“We are in a situation where older people in Britain aren’t massively well off,” she said.
“If there are very, very rich older people in Britain, they’re taxed like everybody else – that’s the system that we have.
“Why we keep being obsessed by going back to things like stopping winter fuel or indeed stopping the triple lock is beyond me because that isn’t the well that we should be going to.”
Graham instead called for greater focus on wealth taxes and borrowing for investment.
“What we should be looking at is wealth taxes and borrowing to invest as a country, so we can invest in our industries. We should not be penalising pensioners in any way, shape or form.”
The debate reflects a wider tension between the rising cost of supporting an ageing population and the political commitment to protect pension incomes.
Graham warned that the financial position of future pensioners could become more difficult as traditional occupational pensions and home ownership become less widespread.
“And in my experience, they’re not massively well off,” she said. “As pensioners come through in generations to come, they’re probably going to be less well off, as we don’t have the occupational pension schemes we used to have, we don’t have many people now buying their own homes. This problem is going to get worse, not better.”
Critics of the triple lock argue that its cost is difficult to sustain over the long term, while supporters regard it as an important protection for pensioners with limited incomes. The government has yet to set out how any future national care service would be funded.
Leave a Comment