For more than 15 years, the triple lock has guaranteed that the State Pension goes up every April by whichever is highest: inflation, earnings growth or 2.5%. Prime Minister Andy Burnham now wants to change that.
In his first conference speech as Labour leader, Burnham said that from April 2030, the State Pension would instead rise by the higher of inflation or 2.5%. The link to earnings growth would go, and the money saved would help pay for a new National Care Service.
Nothing changes for next April, or for the next few years. But for anyone who expects to rely on the State Pension in the 2030s, this is a big deal. Here’s what’s actually being proposed, what it could mean for your pension, and what happens next.
What Burnham announced
Speaking at Labour’s conference in Liverpool on September 29, Burnham set out the change like this:
| Now (the triple lock) | From April 2030 (proposed) | |
|---|---|---|
| Earnings growth | Counts | Dropped from the yearly formula |
| Inflation (CPI) | Counts | Counts |
| 2.5% minimum | Counts | Counts |
| Each April, pension rises by… | The highest of all three | The higher of inflation or 2.5% |
Burnham insisted pensioners wouldn’t fall behind. He said the State Pension “will hold its value relative to earnings over time,” and officials said it could still rise by more in some years to make sure that happens. Exactly how that would work hasn’t been explained yet. As Kate Smith of pension provider Aegon put it, it’s “unclear how this will work in practice.”
The timing is deliberate. Both the pension change and the National Care Service are set for after the next general election, due by 2029. That’s partly because Labour’s 2024 manifesto promised to keep the triple lock, and Burnham has said he’ll honour that promise for this parliament.
Why change it?
The short answer is cost. The State Pension is the government’s biggest single benefit. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimates spending on it will be about £154 billion in 2026–27.
The triple lock has pushed that figure up faster than wages. Because it always picks the highest of three numbers, the pension gets the benefit of whichever measure happens to jump in a given year, a “ratchet” that only ever turns one way. The IFS says the triple lock has added around £16 billion a year to spending compared with simply rising in line with earnings since 2010.
Burnham wants to use the savings to build a National Care Service, providing free, home-based care. He compared its importance to the creation of the NHS in 1948. Officials expect the pension change to save about £15 billion a year by 2040.
What it could mean for your pension
If you’re already retired, nothing changes for now. The triple lock stays in place until April 2030. That includes next April’s rise, which is expected to take the full new State Pension past £13,000 a year.
After 2030, the difference shows up in years when wages grow faster than prices. Here’s a simple example using made-up figures. Say earnings grow 4% one year and inflation is 3%:
| On a full pension of £250.70 a week | Weekly rise | Yearly rise |
|---|---|---|
| Triple lock (earnings, 4%) | +£10.03 | about +£522 |
| Proposed rule (inflation, 3%) | +£7.52 | about +£391 |
In a year like that, you’d get about £131 less. In years when inflation is highest, or everything is below 2.5%, there would be no difference.
Over the long run, the IFS expects pensions to keep up with wages. Jonathan Cribb of the IFS says the State Pension would still rise faster than prices over time, just more slowly than under the current system, and should in the long run keep pace with average earnings. He called the plan “a big improvement,” while noting that “better reforms were available.”
To show the scale, Cribb said that if the new rule had applied since 2011, State Pension spending this year would be about £9 billion lower. He also pointed out that savings would be “relatively small in the first few years,” and warned that the 2.5% minimum is “arbitrary and potentially costly.”
How people have reacted
The plan has drawn criticism from several sides:
- Unite, one of Labour’s biggest union backers, came out against it. General secretary Sharon Graham said “going to the well of pensioners before going for the super-rich is wrong,” and argued for wealth taxes instead.
- Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said that by potentially scrapping the triple lock, Burnham would “abdicate his responsibility to British pensioners.”
- Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Burnham’s announcements wouldn’t fix Britain’s long-term problems.
Others have been more welcoming. The IFS called it a big improvement on the current system, and pension providers have said they want to see the detail before judging it.
It’s not the first attempt to change the triple lock. Theresa May’s 2017 manifesto proposed dropping the 2.5% minimum, but the idea was abandoned after the Conservatives lost their majority.
What happens next
This is a proposal, not yet law. Because it’s timed to start after the next general election, it would only happen if Labour wins that election and then passes the legislation. Before then, expect more detail on how the “hold its value relative to earnings” promise would work, and plenty of debate.
The next moment to watch is the Budget on October 28, the first under Burnham and Chancellor John Healey.
Sources: Institute for Fiscal Studies (September 29, 2026), PA via Yahoo Finance UK and Express & Star.
Maria is a dedicated news writer covering the latest UK updates on DWP, PIP, State Pension Triple Lock, Child Benefit, Universal Credit, and driving licence regulations. She focuses on explaining government announcements, benefit eligibility, payment changes, pension increases, and new regulations in a clear and easy-to-understand way.