Lib Dem MPs Challenge Davey Over Triple Lock Defence
Sir Ed Davey has been criticised by his own MPs after he defended the pensions triple lock against the prime minister's plan to change it. BBC
Sir Ed told the BBC's Today programme that removing the triple lock "would put more pensioners into poverty". He said millennials in work now would receive a very poor pension when they retire if it were removed.
The criticism came straight after the interview. One Liberal Democrat MP contacted the BBC to say most of the parliamentary party, the party's MPs in the Commons, would not support opposing Andy Burnham's changes. Senior figures on the party's frontbench, its team of senior spokespeople, also privately criticised Sir Ed's response to the prime minister's plans.
Tom Gordon, the MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, called Sir Ed's criticism of Mr Burnham's plan "nonsense". Vikki Slade, the MP for Mid-Dorset and North Poole, was also named among the internal critics. Politics.co.uk reported that one MP had told Sir Ed to 'think again' over his defence of the lock, while separate coverage said an MP accused the leader of "gaslighting" millennials. Politics.co.uk
Under Mr Burnham's plan, the automatic yearly link between the state pension and average earnings would end from 2030. The pension would instead rise by inflation, the general rise in prices, or by 2.5%, whichever was higher. The government said it hopes the change would raise £15bn a year by the end of the 2030s.
Mr Burnham said adjusting the triple lock on state pensions to fund social care reforms in England "is about helping pensioners". BBC
The triple lock is a three-way guarantee. It means the state pension rises each year in line with inflation, wage increases, or 2.5%, whichever is highest. It was brought in by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government in 2010.
This follows a series of public statements over the past fortnight. On 27 September, Mr Burnham told Laura Kuenssberg that scrapping the pensions triple lock was an "option that the government should consider alongside others". BBC On 22 September, Sir Ed said he backed keeping the triple lock in place, saying it has done much to reduce pensioner poverty. BBC On 1 October, Sir Ed said Mr Burnham's proposed way of paying for social care reforms would not pay for them. Mirror
The broader context here is one Westminster will recognise. The Liberal Democrats have supported the triple lock since coalition, and Sir Ed has previously said the party will continue to support it under any circumstances. That history makes any shift politically costly. At the same time, the parliamentary party now contains MPs elected in very different seats, and some see the earnings link as poor value for younger working age voters and as an obstacle to a funded plan for social care.
On the policy detail, what is proposed is not abolition. It is the removal of one element, the earnings link, from 2030, leaving a double guarantee of prices or 2.5%. The sum attached to that change is put at £15bn a year by the end of the 2030s. Social care is devolved, so the funding argument as presented applies to reforms in England.
In the short term, the test is party management. A leader takes a clear line on Today while frontbench colleagues brief against it, and a backbencher says most MPs would not follow him into opposition. That points to a position that has yet to be agreed inside the party. Whether Sir Ed holds his line, seeks a compromise form of words, or puts the question to conference will shape how seriously the party's pensions pledge is taken in any future negotiation.
