In July, David Gauke announced that increasing the state pension age to 68 was to be brought forward to commence in 2037.

Although a disappointment for those directly affected – those currently aged 47 and under – the news could hardly be described as a surprise: this was essentially what John Cridland had recommended in his report earlier in the year.

However, the timing was interesting. Theresa May’s government had just formed a Confidence and Supply pact with the DUP, and one of the conditions for the Ulster party’s support was the retention of the controversial triple lock. Perhaps this was the political straw that broke the pensions camel’s back.

Affordability has always been a problem for the state pension. Setting state pension age at a realistic level to allow costs to be controlled whilst avoiding the wrath of the electorate has always been a precarious political balancing act.

When state pension ages were set at 65 and 60 in 1940, a man at retirement age could expect to survive a further 11 years and a woman for16. By 2010, the comparable figures were 18 and 25 years respectively.

At the same time, the ratio of people in work whose National Insurance pays for benefits to pensioners in receipt of them – the Dependency Ratio – has shifted dramatically. With the benefit of hindsight, it seems remarkable that the increases to state pension age did not commence earlier than they did.

Share Story: