Tories and Labour mooting possible means testing of State Pension

[Turmerictolly]

www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/17/kemi-badenoch-pensions-triple-lock-means-test-alarm-tories

I would be so gutted if this happened but there's noise from both parties about this recently. I think it might be inevitable. What will happen to those of us nearing 60 who have made plans that include the full state pension we've paid contributions for?

• There may even be a penalty system if you have chosen to opt out and not saved enough into your private pension when you could have done.

Would that be similar to the penalty where people were told if they didn’t pay enough NI contributions they wouldn’t get a state pension and so wouldn’t be able to afford to live? But then the people who ignored that just get pension credits and free prescriptions etc instead?

That's the problem in a nutshell.

Unless we are prepared to live in a society in which people are allowed to starve there will always be those prepared to opt out of paying in because they know they'll be able to take out when the time comes. We need to find a way to rebalance things so that not working doesn't allow people to opt out of tax contributions yet benefit from the NHS, education, roads, defence etc that others pay for, and that includes pensions. Workers already contribute their time and energy to make goods or provide services and are taxed for doing so, when those who don't work qualify for means-tested benefits, pensions etc, and it's not fair by any metrics.

Anyone who is genuinely unable to work (eg ill, disabled, looking after someone who is ill or disabled, elderly after a lifetime of working) should of course be supported by those who are able to work, but we need to decide whether we want to continue to support those who are able to work and pay in but don't.

What you talk about is hypothecated contributions. That is what other countries do. It will probably be what the UK will have to do. Our system is not set up to have extended periods of dependency with widening categories of people qualifying. It only worked in the past because we had a bigger, healthier workforce and the criteria we had for qualification as to who received them was much stricter.

I can see the idealistic good in providing for all. But the problem is that with declining numbers of workers to support that then you either tax significantly, cut access or make it contribution based explicitly. But you need to do something.