The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has been urged to scrap the £10 Christmas Bonus as part of efforts to preserve the state pension triple lock. The call comes after Sir Tony Blair's thinktank proposed scrapping the triple lock, prompting retirees to publicly defend it and appeal to the Labour government.
Retirees Speak Out
One retiree, writing to the Telegraph, stated: "As the debate over the triple lock continues, the Government should dispense with the £10 Christmas bonus, which is the same as it was when it was introduced. It should also get rid of the insulting weekly 25p added to the state pension when one turns 80. This just about pays for two small bananas in Tesco."
Another retiree commented: "I would be prepared to give up the triple lock in return for greater fairness in income tax. For each of the last three years, any increase in my state pension resulting from the triple lock has been totally outweighed by the rise in income tax on my private pensions. For the state to give with one hand while taking back with the other seems like an exercise in futility – though it does help to protect the jobs of civil servants in the Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC."
Understanding the Triple Lock
The triple lock guarantee ensures that the state pension increases every April in line with whichever is highest out of three options: total earnings growth from May to July of the previous year, Consumer Prices Index (CPI) inflation in September of the previous year, or a minimum of 2.5%.
Blair's Thinktank Proposal
Sir Tony Blair's thinktank has called for the triple lock to be scrapped to prevent the state pension from rising faster than earnings growth. It describes the current system as "outdated, increasingly unaffordable, and too rigid for the way people live and work" because it concentrates state-supported income support at retirement. Instead, the thinktank proposes establishing a "lifespan fund" that would provide a flexible model, building entitlement through activities including work, caring, and study.
Additional Retiree Perspectives
Another retiree added: "Having worked from the age of 16 until finally retiring at the age of 72, making significant contributions by way of income tax and National Insurance, I agree with Philip Hall (Letters, June 4), who asks why we shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy our retirement. Meanwhile, your report (June 4) regarding households containing adults who have never worked shows the problems with a system that allows payment without contribution."
