OpenTube

Burnham's Triple Lock Change ‘Won’t Pay For Social Care’ | Paul Johnson

Times Radio

18,248 views

“I think we will have to pay a significant additional amount of tax in order to pay for what is effectively a significant additional leg to the welfare state.”

The former director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies Paul Johnson says that Andy Burnham “change of the triple lock is very welcome” but it won’t pay for his new social care plan “at least not in the first decade.”

Adam Boulton and Paul Johnson speaking to Kait Borsay on The Evening Edition on Times Radio. Listen live every Monday to Thursday, 7–10pm.

Read the best of our journalism: https://www.thetimes.com/
Listen live to Times Radio: https://www.thetimes.com/radio/live
Subscribe to The Times and The Sunday Times YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/subscription_...
Find us on Facebook: Facebook: timesandsundaytimes
Find us on X: https://x.com/thetimes
Find us on Instagram: Instagram: thetimes

20 Comments

@davidlumb5836 1 day ago

The biggest failure of the last 30 years has been the con of student loans for useless ‘degrees’ and that never get paid back.

@allisonnancholas9620 1 day ago

The triple lock will go, social care reform will be kicked into the long grass and the money from pensioners will be given to benefits claimants and migrants.

@ScottChegg-1942 1 day ago

Tax in every postcode. Grievance in every heart.

@mobob75 1 day ago

Sadly the only contributors will be tax payers. Who will support all these immigrants who will also grow old ? especially as many will never work living on benefits and are housed in social housing. This isn't sustainable out benefits bill is more than the taxes they take in ? Crazy

@GrahamPatterson-i3c 1 day ago (edited)

Andy Burnham just lost the next General Election for Labour by scrapping the pensions triple lock.

@traleyton8057 1 day ago

Fake Promises & Lies. Same old BS.

@hughmclaughlin2320 1 day ago

pensioners have paid enough into this so called system and penalised to the core with it

@jimgrace3492 1 day ago

For-profit care homes typically make 18-40% profit for their shareholders. Executives earn between £300K and £2M a year.

Removing the profiteering and reducing executive pay to civil servant levels, would drastically reduce overall costs. Perhaps as much as 50% per client.

@JamesMullarneyIsAFraud 1 day ago

No more tax!

@Peter165 1 day ago

The underlying problem with the proposed triple lock change is that over the last 16 years pensions have risen significantly more than they did under the Blair / Brown period but they are still well below the pensioner poverty level so this will keep some 2m pensioners in relative poverty.

@Nev403 1 day ago

4 years ago I was in out of hospital and most of the wards I was put in wards full of men that were bed blocking because the homes couldn't cope with them, I had to wait 24 hrs to get a bed every time I went in that year (4 times)

Whatever Burnham says he can't touch anything until he wins the next GE as he doesn't have a Mandate, all hot air IMO and no meat on the bones. We just need rid of this Labour party.

@minutd1993 1 day ago

Burnham is gaslighting us. He's trying to tell us that getting rid of the triple lock it will pay for social care; it won't save a fraction of what the social care budget needs. It's all about scrapping the triple lock. He not only wants to change the triple lock, but he also wants to change it to the lowest metric of inflation, which, compared to the last 10 years, would mean the state pension now, would be £1450/yr lower than it is now.

@nigel-v7z6t 1 day ago (edited)

When he finds the money for all this give me a Ring..! 😅😅

@CaptainFog 1 day ago (edited)

A key way to reduce NHS and adult social care costs is to encourage more people to live healthily - too many people make very poor choices about what they eat, how often they eat, how much alcohol they drink etc - and then expect the state to cure them when - surprise surprise - they develop chronic metabolic disorders that could have been prevented or kept away for much longer if they had been more responsible. Too many people focus too much on their rights / entitlements and not enough on their personal responsibility not to burden the state and other taxpayers with their poor lifestyle choices.

@calvinaitkin-sf9up 1 day ago

It just means pensioners will in effect be paying more for their social care than they are already,,Burnham said a few days ago he wanted everyone to contribute,,as per usual its just pensioners who will have to cough up.

@davidlumb5836 1 day ago

The Government of whatever colour has never recognised that easing the pressure on one part of the cloth of finance and increasing it elsewhere just means it eventually tears somewhere else.

@lizmonk1115 12 hours ago

The demand for social care will balloon 🤔

@prasadthaker6058 1 day ago

This conference was all about election policies 2030 ! What about running the country now ? Andy has got all media talking about 2030 and hope after this. He has come in unelected- and was meant to say what he will do NOW - next 3 years ! If he wanted to out line his thinking - post 2030 - he should have stood for election against Stammer and outline his thinking. What about illegal immigration, oil security , housing , food costs , welfare reform , defence , crime and spending - nothing for now but talking about the future - he is just out of his depth - but cleaver - all these long list is a diversion from his ability now .

@eonitawhitfield5734 23 hours ago

The savings will probably be another rise for MPs.

@lestrem11 49 minutes ago

He is now in hiding as pensioners demand to know why Burnham ignored the millions of benefit scroungers who have never done a days work in their lives and attacked people who have paid taxes for 50 years.