Parties that do not commit to the pensions triple lock face “annihilation” at the next general election, campaigners have warned. Chancellor Rachel Reeves unveiled a 4.8% increase in the basic and new state pension next year at her Budget as part of the policy.

But the rise has sparked fresh questions over the measure, which guarantees that the state pension rises in line with average earnings, inflation or 2.5% each year. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has warned that he cannot guarantee the future of the triple lock, while prominent Tory MPs Sir Edward Leigh and Tom Tugendhat have also criticised the policy.

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy

But Dennis Reed, director of the Silver Voices campaign group, said there was already anger over the extension of the income tax threshold freeze, which will drag more pensioners into the taxman’s net.

Mr Reed said: “With pensioners still reeling from the shock extension of the frozen tax personal allowances by three years yesterday, opponents of the triple lock need to shut up, because older people are very angry after the Budget.

“The Chancellor didn’t even have the political nous to recognise that pensioners as well as working people would suffer as a result of the freeze extension.

“Any political party which wishes to face the electorate without a firm commitment to the lock would face annihilation at the polls, and any firm proposals would face the mother and father of all political battles. We are already incensed that for most pensioners the triple lock will be taxed in future as a result of the Budget decision.”

It comes after Mr Farage said voters must be “realistic” about the dire state of the public finances and spiralling debt levels.

Asked about the triple lock after the Budget on Wednesday, he said: “We’re not going to guarantee anything on the triple lock. We have to see what the economic situation is like nearer the next election.”

Meanwhile, Conservative MP Sir Edward branded the policy as “unsustainable”.

The country’s longest continuously serving MP told the Commons: “You cannot have a situation where people of my generation are consuming an ever-greater proportion of national wealth through the state pension.

“Frankly, our government never dared tackle it having brought it in because they knew that the Labour Party would crucify them at the ballot box. Now the Labour Party is caught in the same bind. The fact is, it is completely unfair on younger people if the burden of older people, through the triple lock, increases year by year.”

Conservative former minister Tom Tugendhat said there are not “enough young people for an ageing population”.

Mr Tugendhat added: “That means, I’m afraid we do need to look at the triple lock. I have already been clear. Now, I know my front bench doesn’t agree with me, but I have been clear on this, that we simply cannot afford the level of welfare payments that we are making.

“We need to be clear that health and pensions are now costing too much.”

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) found earlier this year that, due to inflation and earnings volatility, the triple lock has cost around three times more than initial expectations.

Labour has committed to the measure for the duration of this Parliament. The Daily Express has a long-running crusade to protect the state pension triple lock.