Angela Rayner has backed Andy Burnham’s “brave” move to debate scrapping the state pension triple lock despite union warnings that it is “morally wrong”.
Andy Burnham urged to safeguard Triple Lock by Unite boss
Angela Rayner has thrown her support behind kickstarting a debate on scrapping the triple lock, despite warnings that doing so would be “morally wrong”.
One of Labour’s most powerful MPs, Ms Rayner, described rumours that Andy Burnham is planning to axe the lifeline to Britain’s pensioners as “brave”, saying it was “right” for him to start thinking about it.
Ms Rayner, branded the “Red Queen” in Labour circles, has long been wary of supporting the triple lock, which sees the state pension increase in line with earnings, inflation or 2.5%.
Before the last election, she refused to promise to support the lock after the General Election, despite repeatedly campaigning to protect people in their retirement.
A strong ally of Mr Burnham, she was appointed to the role of Housing Secretary when he became Prime Minister – months after stepping down from the same job over a tax scandal.
Angela Rayner said the call was ‘brave’ (Image: Getty)
She told Sky’s Electoral Dysfunction podcast: “I think he’s absolutely right to start the conversation. It’s brave.
“We’ve got a prime minister who said, ‘I am okay with burning through all my political capital to the point where it might finish me off, on the basis that my legacy will be something better and different.’”
But powerful Labour Party backers have slammed the suggestion that Mr Burnham could ditch the lock to fund other policies.
Sharon Graham, boss of Unite the Union, said: “Instead of going and trying to pick the pocket of pensioners, we need to move over to the other side of the equation and look at things like wealth taxes, way before we try to stop something like the triple lock.
“It’s wrong, and to be fair to Andy, he hasn’t said that.”
The Unite general secretary added: “When we met with Andy this week, it certainly wasn’t mentioned.
“But I do think that it’s important that Labour make sure that working-class people know that they’re on their side, and this would be a direction of travel that would say the opposite to that.”
She added: “Going to a group of people who are getting around £12,500 a year in order to pay for it to take away their security is wrong. I think it’s morally wrong.”