Triple lock

Jalima, if you had a flying carpet, it would have so many passengers trying to cram on it that it would never get airborne!

I asked the question because I wanted to ask about my financial future.I think I'm ok for now, well I certainly won't starve but Ive had my last payslip. So now I will get just under £140 a week and a small NHS pension(I'm not sure how much but I took the higher lump sum so it won't be much. The house is falling apart I want to update it.) my husband still works but if I had to live on my own I'm not sure I would manage. I'd hate to be in the position of not having enough to live on. Our council tax would be 3/4 of a weeks pension alone but then I suppose I'd get some sort of discount. Well I just better look after my husband a bit better and hope he outlives me.

I thought that the basic state pension had gone up, in April 2016, morethan ? Must admit that I've not looked at gov't website for a while ever since I found out they'd bumped my retirement age back again.

morethan - there's lots of financial advice out there for people facing income reduction in retirement - try the AgeUK website - but I'm sure there'll be others - perhaps even Gransnet.
On the triple lock debate - I do think that politicians underestimate the electorate - they think everyone votes selfishly for the party that will put more money in their pocket - hence the pensioner bribes - but I'd be content for the triple lock to be removed even though it would affect me - as I said before, I think it's unfair.

"It’s true that the basic state pension rose by 75p per week in one year of the last Labour government (between 1999 and 2000). But the natural comparison isn’t with the total annual rise under seven years of Conservative-led government. In fact, pensions rose by more under Labour, on average, once you take inflation into account.

In simple cash terms, the full basic state pension rose by £141 a year on average under Labour compared to £183 a year under the Coalition and Conservative governments.

But as we’ve noted when assessing Ms May’s headline figure in isolation, this takes no account of price inflation. When taking the natural rise in prices (as measured by the Consumer Prices Index) into account, we see a different story.

In real terms, the full basic state pension went from roughly £4,800 a year in April 1997 to £5,800 a year in April 2010. So, on average, every year of the Labour government saw an increase of £82 in real terms. The real value of that pension under the Conservatives went from £5,800 to £6,400—an average annual rise of £75 a year."

I think we still need the triple lock.

whitewave Wed 26-Apr-17 19:11:33

'Gordon Brown introduced it for the reasons I have outlined - pensioner poverty - in 2006.'

He did not!

You get a few things wrong and I don't bother telling you but we have been here before on another a while ago if I remember correctly.

The Coalition Government introduced the Triple Lock in 2010.

How can anyone think the triple lock is fair? In 2007 a single persons basic pension was £87.30 a week now it's £122.30. That's an increase of 40% over the 10 years and an increase of £1820 per annum over the period.Meanwhile, many many public sector workers have had minimal pay increases. Why should pensioners be exempt from the impact of austerity? I'd get rid of WFA, bus pass, TV license etc and target extra help to pensioners through the pension credit system. That already exists and would surely be the cheapest most efficient way to give help where it is needed. It's messy doing it through the income tax system.

It seems to be very important on all the news broadcasts and in tomorrow's papers.

I missed out on that Chewbacca by just 6 days. My birthday 31 march the change over to pensions happened on 6 April. Well that's what they told me on the gov call centre.

There has been a lot of pensioner bashing lately. To attack pensioners as the reason for austerity and cut backs to the working population is ludicrous. And remember they too will be pensioners soon so it's like turkeys voting for Christmas. Pensioners who are only on State Pensions after paying in NI contributions for 40 years are still on borderline poverty rates. Getting a rise of pence per year even on triple lock. Percentages on very low incomes mean diddley squat. So don't be fooled. Pensioners who receive income over £10,000 pay tax. Getting old ain't for sissies they need all the help and dignity society can afford.

It's just been said that May is taking a good long look at it, looking at the costings and the polling data.
So it's not really anything to do with policy.

Rigby, you've got it wrong again.
An increase of £1820 per year for ten years means that every pensioner would be getting over £18200 per year now. I can assure you we are not.

Pensioners do NOT get pennies increase at all, that's ridiculous. Arguing against the triple lock is not pensioner bashing. It's arguing to be fair so that extra help goes to poorer pensioners through pension credit - which I would actually make more generous. I see no reason at all why a pensioner like me with generous occupational and private pensions as well as income from working still should be benefitting from the triple lock, WFA etc whilst all around benefits are being frozen and many workers are getting hardly any increases in pay. No one has said that pensioners are the cause of austerity but they sure are being shielded from it. No pensioner is just on the basic state pension - they would be entitled to pension credit

You're reading it wrong DJ as you did with MOnica - it's an increase over 10 years not each year - the figures compare the pension in 2007 with that in 2017.

"an increase of £1820 per annum over the period"

Over the period, or per annum? I don't think I read it wrong.
An increase of £182 a year is not so impressive, is it?
£3.50 a week doesn't pay for your utility and council tax rises.

I'll try again - if we compare the basic pension in 2007 with that in 2017, it is 40% higher. If we look at the actual annual amount in 2007 and compare it with the annual amount in 2017, the annual amount in 2017 is £1820 a year more. I'm not arguing that the basic pension is generous, far from it, but the way to help poorer pensioners is through pension credit and that the government should not be using the triple lock for pensioners when it won't use it for example with disability or sickness benefits. If you are on the basic state pension alone, your council tax will be paid and you will get pension credit. No one has just the basic state pension to live on unless they have a very good amount in savings

I read it like djen did as well, but it is now clearer from your last post Rigby

Apparently May has been advised that she just as well keep the 2.5% it as she will actually save money as inflation is expect to be much higher in the years ahead. So all she has to do is fiddle with the CPI part and job done.

We'll wait and see what the manifesto brings- oh I sound like rose

Thank you Rigby. I assume that's per household and that if a partner is receiving a private pension, a couple wouldn't be eligible for council tax payment?

Would it be better if all basic state pensions were paid at the same rate so that there was no such thing as pensions credits, free bus passes and the winter fuel allowance.

I think we could certainly begin to role these extra 'benefits' into the State Pension (SP) Morethan2. It is complex though. Because the state pension is seen to have been paid for (a bit debatable but a strongly held view) we have a set age at which we receive it whereas the added extras are given to some who have not yet reached state pension age (SPA). The same happens to Pension Credit; it is a benefit in the widest definition of benefits. To tidy up SP, without pensioners feeling they have had something taken from them, you would have to stop the little (£10 at Christmas!)additions and directly increase the pension by the same amount. The losers would be those who get them prior to SPA.

Roses says we can't expect to keep it forever - the triple lock that is. I am not so sure. I have to admit that my first thought was that we should go to double lock but keep increasing the Pension Credit. On second thoughts I think, in the long run we should keep the triple lock until we have a 'living pension', i.e., one that requires no additional benefits in order to live. (Sadly I have to exclude housing benefit as that is a problem in its own right which can only be sorted from the housing end not the benefits one.) A living pension would be somewhere around £12,000. This would mean we could get rid of the idea that we 'paid' for the pension and make it a universal benefit. Obviously we would tax this off the high earners. I would also continue NI all the way through and - as it would no longer relate to SP - it could become a National Health and Care Insurance.

I just don't know if any of our current parties would feel politically able to do this though.

It depends how much the private pension is. If you look on your local council's website, there might be a calculation tool.

I know the threshold is low, but I can't remember the figure and I think it's different for pensioners. I know I'm not eligible for it, but I'm still of working age. It's assumed I can live on £73pw for everything (ha ha) after housing costs, but it's higher for pensioners and, obviously, more for couples but not double.

I think NI should continue to be paid as a Gracesgran suggests. National Health and Care Insurance. Compulsory.

Perhaps too minimum wage should be subject to the Triple Lock.

As a matter of interest, which benefits are given to some people who haven't yet reached SPA?

I'm 62 and my SPA is 66, so I'd love to know if there's anything I'm missing out on.

AFAIK the only benefits I can claim are free prescriptions and eye tests (which I get anyway, because I'm diabetic) and I have a Senor Railcard, which I had to pay for.

I could be wrong, but I think minimum wage has gone up more than the triple lock, but working age benefits have been frozen and, in some cases, reduced.

It really irritates me that JSA is less than half the new basic state pension. If I were just a couple of years older, I would be receiving state pension. It seems ridiculous that people just a little older than I am are considered to need double what I need.