\n| \u00a0(Image: The Guardian)\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n I was 18 years old when I opened a bank account with the
\nRoyal Bank of Scotland. It was my first experience of aggressive salesmanship.\u00a0
\n\u00a0<\/p>\n I thought all I was doing was taking in some pieces of
\nidentification, confirming some information and opening a bank account. But no.
\nI had a half-hour appointment with an advisor who was keen to offer me pretty
\nmuch every other product the bank had available. Inevitably the conversation
\ncame round to the subject of pensions.<\/p>\n He asked me whether I had thought about pensions. I’d just
\nturned 18 years old a few days before and told him that I really hadn’t, they
\nwere not something I was particularly interested in and I would have plenty of
\ntime to think about it in the future. But he didn’t accept that as an answer.
\nHe kept pressing. He didn’t succeed in persuading me to do anything, but there
\nis a reason I bring this up now.<\/p>\n During the five minutes or so in which he basically tried to
\nbully me into opening a pension, he said something that has stayed with me:
\n“When you reach retirement age, there will no longer be a state
\npension.”<\/p>\n That was all the way back in 1995. I didn’t treat what he
\nsaid as a prediction because it wasn’t – it was a sales tactic. But it sticks
\nwith me not just because it was unnecessary fearmongering, but because it made
\nan impression for another reason. Immediately it became clear to me that
\npensions are only good if they are sustainable, and they are not fair if
\nyounger workers are paying more into a system that will be gone before they
\nretire.\u00a0<\/p>\n Liberal Democrats should approach pensions through our
\ncommitment to freedom, dignity and fairness. Nobody should spend their retirement
\nchoosing between heating and eating. Equally, promises made to today\u2019s
\npensioners must be affordable for the people whose contributions support
\nthem\u2014and credible for those who will retire tomorrow. Young people who are the
\nsame age now as I was back in 1995 shouldn’t have to worry about whether there
\nwill be provision for them at the end of a working life they may not yet have
\nstarted.<\/p>\n Andy Burnham\u2019s conference proposal deserves to be considered
\nin that spirit. From April 2030, he proposes retaining annual increases of at
\nleast inflation or 2.5%, while maintaining the state pension\u2019s relationship
\nwith earnings over time. That changes how the earnings protection operates; it
\ndoes not abandon it.<\/p>\n This is not as radical as some are suggesting. Neither is it
\nscrapping the triple lock. And it certainly isn’t stealing from pensioners.<\/p>\n To be precise, it replaces the existing annual formula with
\na different arrangement retaining three protections. This deserves honest
\ndebate, but describing it as theft obscures the question we should be asking:
\nwhat combination of pensions, income support and care best secures dignity in
\nlater life?<\/p>\n The intemperate reactions we have seen from various quarters
\nhaven’t helped the conversation. Yet this is a conversation that needs to be
\nhad. The conversation also needs to be rational, informed and focused on
\naddressing need rather than political expediency.<\/p>\n The triple lock\u2019s limitations<\/b><\/p>\n The triple lock was introduced in 2011, a Liberal Democrat
\nidea brought in by Steve Webb aimed at ensuring pensioners’ income did not fall
\nbehind the rest of society. It increases the basic and new state pensions each
\nyear by the highest of earnings growth, inflation or 2.5%. It helped repair the
\nerosion of the state pension\u2019s value and provides protection that pensioners
\nunderstandably value.<\/p>\n However, it isn’t without weaknesses. A key problem is that
\nit achieves these objectives through a permanent ratchet, rather than an agreed
\ndestination for pension adequacy. It is also a blunt instrument for tackling
\npoverty. A pensioner with substantial investment income and a comfortable
\noccupational pension receives the same percentage increase in their state
\npension as someone wholly dependent on it.\u00a0<\/p>\n That does not necessarily make a broadly available state
\npension undesirable. Such provision offers simplicity, security and public
\nlegitimacy. Nor should we overlook how much more a pension increase matters to
\nsomeone with little other income. But when the leader of the Liberal Democrats
\ncondemns the Prime Minister’s proposals around the triple lock as stealing from
\n“the pockets of our poorest pensioners” it raises questions about
\nwhether he genuinely understands how the triple lock works and whether there
\nmay be better means of actively supporting “our poorest pensioners”.
\nAn across-the-board uprating formula cannot and does not distinguish between
\ncomfortable retirement and severe hardship.<\/p>\n There is little evidence that the triple lock itself has had a significant
\nimpact on reducing pension poverty. There has been no sustained fall in
\npensioner poverty since its introduction in 2011, and the IFS suggests that,
\nwhile relative pensioner poverty fell from 25% to 13% between 2002-3 and
\n2011-12, it increased to 16% in 2022-3. What has helped, and was certainly the
\nkey factor behind the poverty reduction in the decade preceding the triple
\nlock’s introduction, is something else entirely – Pension Credit.<\/p>\n Pension Credit addresses a different task: topping up the incomes
\nof eligible pensioners. Because state pension income counts in its calculation,
\nan increase in the state pension can be offset by a reduction in Guarantee
\nCredit if the guaranteed minimum is unchanged. The poorest pensioners therefore
\nneed more than a promise about annual state pension increases. They need an
\nadequate total income, accessible benefits and help with the costs that drive
\nhardship.<\/p>\n Fairness between generations<\/b><\/p>\n The state pension is largely financed from current public
\nrevenues. Its affordability consequently depends on the economy and contribution
\nbase supporting it. It is not, contrary to popular belief, a personal
\ninvestment account accumulated by each recipient.<\/p>\n The triple lock creates an asymmetry. When inflation exceeds
\nearnings growth, pensioners receive protection against rising prices. When
\nwages subsequently recover, the existing formula awards the full earnings
\nincrease on top of that earlier protection. Repeated fluctuations can therefore
\npush pensions progressively higher relative to wages.<\/p>\n This is something recognised by the Resolution Foundation, a
\nthink-tank focused on improving living standards for those on low to moderate
\nincomes. The Foundation argues that “pensioners have seen three times as
\nmuch living standards growth as non-pensioners over the last two decades, a
\ntypical pensioner household now has the same level of income as the typical
\nworking-age household, and pensioners are less likely to be in poverty than the
\nrest of the population. There is not a strong case for continuing to increase
\nstate support for pensioners faster than the wages of typical workers.”<\/p>\n Protecting pensioners during an inflation shock is
\nreasonable. Permanently increasing their share of national earnings because of
\nthe sequence of economic shocks is harder to justify.<\/p>\n The additional spending has an opportunity cost. It must be
\nsupported by taxation, borrowing or choices elsewhere in public spending. Those
\nchoices matter to younger people trying to afford housing, raise children and
\nsave for their own retirement – all at a time when intergenerational inequality
\nis widening.<\/p>\n A Liberal Democrat approach should protect hardship at every
\nage and ask more of those with the greatest means. It should also recognise
\nthat today\u2019s younger workers are tomorrow\u2019s pensioners. They need a dependable
\nstate pension.<\/p>\n It is understandable that many Liberal Democrats feel proud
\nof the triple lock as one of the great achievements of the coalition years.
\nHowever, while it did achieve much of what it set out to do, in the words of
\nthe Resolution Foundation “it was always a poorly designed, unfair,
\narbitrary ratchet that we could never afford”. If we’re being realistic,
\nif this had been a Conservative rather than Lib Dem idea, would our leadership
\nstill be passionately defending it 15 years later despite evidence of its
\nweaknesses?<\/p>\n We need to be honest about the triple lock. Sadly, among the
\nlargely positive reactions to the Prime Minister’s speech there has been a fair
\namount of disingenuousness from those defending the triple lock. Ed Davey, on
\nBBC 4 Today, argued that the triple lock needs to be retained to “help
\nmillennials”, a claim that Tom Gordon MP said “is at best for the
\nbirds, and at worst downright insulting.” If we are determined to keep the
\ntriple lock, then we need to find compelling reasons to do so.\u00a0 Pretending
\nthe triple lock is safeguarding younger people is either unforgivably dishonest
\nor economically illiterate.\u00a0<\/p>\n Why the triple lock is unsustainable<\/b><\/p>\n Britain is not imminently about to become incapable of
\npaying pensions. The problem is that the present formula commits us to an
\nincreasingly expensive benefit that in the longer-term will become inviable.
\nThe State Pension simply cannot continue to rise forever by more than the
\nearnings of a typical worker.<\/p>\n Population ageing creates spending pressure independently of
\nthe triple lock.\u00a0 The number of people aged 16-64 for every person aged
\n65+ projected to fall from 3.3 to 1.9 between 2025 and 2075. The Office for
\nBudget Responsibility\u2019s July 2025 report described long-term projections in
\nwhich state pension spending will reach 7.7% of GDP by the early 2070s,
\napproximately half as much again as its current share. These are conditional
\nprojections, not inevitable outcomes, but they demonstrate the scale of the
\nchallenge.<\/p>\n There is nothing inherently wrong with choosing to spend
\nmore on retirement. But that choice should be deliberate and funded. An
\narbitrary annual minimum of 2.5%, combined with whichever economic indicator
\nhappens to rise fastest, is an inadequate substitute for a long-term
\nsettlement. The Prime Minister’s proposal is mere tinkering and doesn’t even
\nbegin to deal with the bigger questions.<\/p>\n Burnham\u2019s proposal addresses the permanent ratchet (to a
\ndegree) while retaining price protection and an earnings relationship. The
\nInstitute for Fiscal Studies welcomes that change, but also argues that the
\nsurviving 2.5% floor remains potentially costly and that reform alone is
\ninsufficient to fund universal social care. The sustainability problem remains.<\/p>\n Liberal Democrats should scrutinise these weaknesses. We
\nshould demand credible care funding and a clear pension formula. But rather
\nthan simply doubling down and defending the status quo, as if the triple lock
\nis sacrosanct, we should seek to promote an alternative vision for the future
\nof pensions in which everyone can count on dignity and financial security in
\nretirement. That means a stable, predictable system that protects purchasing
\npower, shares rising prosperity and remains sustainable over the long term.
\nAbove all, it must be equitable – providing stronger support for those with the
\nleast, recognising lives spent in low-paid work or unpaid care and sharing the
\ncosts fairly according to ability to pay, both within and between generations.<\/p>\n What Britain can learn from Europe<\/b><\/p>\n On social media, many accounts supporting retention of the
\ntriple lock have circulated misleading memes suggesting that the UK has the
\nlowest highest pension rate in Western Europe, yet is the only one to be
\n“unsustainable”. Such accounts also tend to characterise the Prime
\nMinister’s proposal as a “pensions grab”.<\/p>\n Such simplistic arguments contain a grain of truth, but the
\ncomparison is not a like-for-like one. I think it is helpful to look at Europe,
\nnot because all of their pension schemes are sustainable (they aren’t) but
\nbecause there are viable alternatives to doing things in the same way and
\nmerely tinkering a bit around the edges.<\/p>\n Iceland, the Netherlands and Denmark offer particularly
\nuseful lessons because they combine public retirement provision with extensive
\nfunded pensions. Their systems spread responsibility across the state,
\nemployers and individuals.<\/p>\n In Iceland, mandatory pension saving sits alongside targeted
\npublic provision. The OECD reports mandatory funded pension contributions of
\n15.5% of salary, comprising 4% from employees and 11.5% from employers. This
\nbuilds substantial retirement resources through working life, reducing reliance
\non the public pension alone.\u00a0<\/p>\n The Netherlands combines its basic state pension with
\nextensive occupational provision. Its pension system is undergoing a transition
\ntowards defined contribution arrangements, illustrating that even mature funded
\nsystems must adapt how they allocate investment and longevity risks.<\/p>\n Denmark combines a basic public pension, means-tested
\nsupplements, a funded supplementary pension scheme and occupational pensions
\nnegotiated through collective agreements. Its public basic and safety-net
\nbenefits are linked to wages, helping preserve their relative value.
\nRetirement-age links to longevity also form part of its approach to
\nsustainability.<\/p>\n These arrangements offer principles Britain can adopt,
\nrather than ready-made systems we can import. Wider pension coverage, stronger
\nemployer contributions, efficient collective provision and dependable minimum
\nincomes are all relevant.<\/p>\n But funded pensions take decades to mature. Increasing
\nsaving today does not pay today\u2019s state pension bill. Higher contributions also
\nhave immediate consequences for wages, household budgets and employers.<\/p>\n Investment returns are uncertain, while people with low pay
\nor interrupted careers cannot accumulate adequate pensions simply by being
\ninstructed to save more. Funded provision therefore needs public support and
\nstrong governance. It complements an adequate state pension; it cannot and
\nshould not replace the safety net.<\/p>\n What would best help the poorest pensioners?<\/b><\/p>\n This is the most important question, and one our leadership
\nshould be asking if it is serious about addressing need rather than using pour
\n“poorest pensioners” as a convenient stick with which to beat the
\nPrime Minister. The starting point should be a guaranteed minimum retirement
\nincome, assessed against actual living costs and reviewed regularly. That
\nguarantee must allow for the additional pressures facing renters, disabled
\npeople and those living alone.<\/p>\n Pension Credit provides an existing foundation, but its
\ndelivery is inadequate. DWP estimates for the financial year ending 2024
\nindicate that up to 910,000 eligible families did not claim it, leaving up to
\n\u00a32.5 billion unclaimed. An entitlement that people cannot navigate or do not
\nknow exists fails its purpose.<\/p>\n A solution to this could be government agencies using
\nadministrative data to identify likely eligibility and offer proactive
\nassistance. Alternatively, it may be time to move to a more fit-for-purpose
\nsystem.<\/p>\n If our objective is to tackle pensioner poverty, we should
\ndesign a system around that objective. The triple lock increases state pensions
\nwithout asking whether someone has enough to live on and without doing anything
\nto specifically help those Ed Davey describes as “the poorest
\npensioners”.\u00a0 A fairer alternative would direct greater support
\ntowards those with the smallest incomes and the greatest unavoidable costs.<\/p>\n Pension Credit has a purpose but is also problematic. It
\nshould be turned into a guaranteed retirement income, one delivered
\nautomatically wherever possible with straightforward assistance where further
\ninformation is needed. Its level should reflect an independently assessed
\nminimum living standard and be protected against both rising prices and falling
\nbehind the prosperity of the wider population. Unlike the triple lock, this
\nwould establish an explicit promise around minimum income.<\/p>\n A more radical option – and liberals should be radical –
\nwould be a higher, broadly available state pension, with the additional
\nexpenditure recovered progressively through taxation from pensioners with
\nsubstantial total incomes. This would reduce dependence on means-tested claims
\nwhile concentrating the net benefit on poorer pensioners. It would require
\ncareful costing and a fair transition, but its principle is clear: provide a
\ndependable pension entitlement, then ask those who can afford it to contribute more.
\nBroad entitlement need not mean equal financial benefit regardless of means.<\/p>\n We should also challenge the assumption that a secure
\nretirement must depend so heavily on an uninterrupted record of paid
\nemployment. A stronger residence-based pension entitlement, with appropriate
\nqualifying rules, could protect people whose working lives were disrupted by
\nillness, insecure employment or unpaid care. This would address gaps in
\nentitlement that the triple lock merely carries forward.<\/p>\n Fairness also requires recognising that the same income buys
\nvery different living standards. A pensioner paying private rent may face
\nhardship on an income that allows a mortgage-free homeowner to live
\ncomfortably. A retirement income guarantee should therefore be accompanied by adequate
\nhousing support and additional payments for disability and unavoidable care
\ncosts.\u00a0<\/p>\n These proposals would be better tools than the triple lock
\nfor helping the poorest because they address the reasons people lack an
\nadequate retirement income: insufficient entitlement, missing support or high
\nessential costs. Their success should be measured by how far they reduce
\npoverty and improve disposable incomes after housing and disability
\ncosts.\u00a0<\/p>\n The Liberal Democrat ambition should be a retirement
\nsettlement in which security is guaranteed, additional needs are recognised and
\ncontributions reflect ability to pay. Defending the triple lock is no
\nsubstitute for building a genuinely equitable arrangement.<\/p>\n A sustainable Liberal Democrat alternative<\/b><\/p>\n I would advocate a settlement with three connected elements.<\/p>\n Firstly, establish an adequate state pension and maintain
\nits relationship with earnings through a transparent, smoothed earnings link.
\nProtect purchasing power when inflation exceeds wage growth; once wages
\nrecover, allow the earnings benchmark to catch up before awarding further
\nincreases above inflation. This preserves security without permanently
\ncompounding every temporary shock. The IFS has proposed such an approach, which
\nalso removes the arbitrary 2.5% minimum.<\/p>\n Secondly, strengthen the guaranteed minimum retirement
\nincome and make it much easier to receive. Any reform should include explicit
\nprotection for the poorest. Housing and disability costs must be addressed
\nalongside ordinary living expenses.<\/p>\n Thirdly, improve funded pensions for future retirees. Extend
\neffective coverage to people poorly served by existing arrangements, including
\nself-employed people and those with several small jobs. Raise contributions
\ngradually where affordable, with greater employer participation and targeted
\nsupport for low earners and unpaid carers.\u00a0<\/p>\n These ideas are merely suggestions designed to offer a broad
\ndirection for reform rather than a detailed policy proposal. If anything, I am
\nsimply attempting to start a conversation. My hope is that those within the
\nparty with expertise in pensions, taxation and social security can develop a
\ncredible alternative to the status quo: one that offers greater scope than the
\ntriple lock to put Liberal Democrat principles of fairness into practice and
\nensure that no-one is enslaved by poverty in retirement. That means protecting
\nthe poorest, recognising different needs and circumstances, and sharing the
\ncosts equitably within and between generations, while providing lasting
\nsecurity in retirement. Efforts need to be focused and resources need to be
\ntargeted.<\/p>\n The Liberal Democrat test should be whether people gain real
\nsecurity and freedom. A sustainable pension protects future generations from
\nbroken promises. An adequate income floor protects today\u2019s poorest pensioners
\nfrom hardship. Properly funded care protects people from losing their
\nindependence when their needs increase.\u00a0<\/p>\n Those goals belong together. Our responsibility is to design
\na system that achieves them.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u00a0(Image: The Guardian)\u00a0 I was 18 years old when I opened a bank account with the Royal Bank of Scotland. It was my first experience of aggressive salesmanship.\u00a0 \u00a0 I thought all I was doing was taking in some pieces of identification, confirming some information and opening a bank account. But no. I had a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7079258,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[142796,231037,239994,239995,239996],"tags":[415,66129,14264,13460],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-7079257","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-ed-davey","category-pensions","category-steve-webb","category-tom-gordon","category-triple-lock","tag-case","tag-democrat","tag-liberal","tag-reform"],"yoast_head":"\n a Liberal Democrat case for reform - Som2ny Network<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"a Liberal Democrat case for reform - Som2ny Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"\u00a0(Image: The Guardian)\u00a0 I was 18 years old when I opened a bank account with the Royal Bank of Scotland. It was my first experience of aggressive salesmanship.\u00a0 \u00a0 I thought all I was doing was taking in some pieces of identification, confirming some information and opening a bank account. But no. I had a […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Som2ny Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-10-07T13:25:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/img\/a\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxNPEVNIqDhSNwWKEzznX4qTxKBoBY5CAQUc86R5mpcehOZdHvi7h-cBr1HeYYx1ISLLEvE0MnIWE4trBGvqkL89NrV7ZSKZBQ\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371\"},\"headline\":\"a Liberal Democrat case for reform\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-07T13:25:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\"},\"wordCount\":3065,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png\",\"keywords\":[\"Case\",\"Democrat\",\"Liberal\",\"Reform\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Ed Davey\",\"Pensions\",\"Steve Webb\",\"Tom Gordon\",\"triple lock\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\",\"name\":\"a Liberal Democrat case for reform - Som2ny Network\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-07T13:25:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png\",\"width\":465,\"height\":310},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?bp_activities=1\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"a Liberal Democrat case for reform\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/\",\"name\":\"Som2ny Network\",\"description\":\"Daily Deals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Som2ny Network\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png\",\"width\":300,\"height\":86,\"caption\":\"Som2ny Network\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"a Liberal Democrat case for reform - Som2ny Network","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"a Liberal Democrat case for reform - Som2ny Network","og_description":"\u00a0(Image: The Guardian)\u00a0 I was 18 years old when I opened a bank account with the Royal Bank of Scotland. It was my first experience of aggressive salesmanship.\u00a0 \u00a0 I thought all I was doing was taking in some pieces of identification, confirming some information and opening a bank account. But no. I had a […]","og_url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257","og_site_name":"Som2ny Network","article_published_time":"2026-10-07T13:25:00+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/img\/a\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxNPEVNIqDhSNwWKEzznX4qTxKBoBY5CAQUc86R5mpcehOZdHvi7h-cBr1HeYYx1ISLLEvE0MnIWE4trBGvqkL89NrV7ZSKZBQ","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371"},"headline":"a Liberal Democrat case for reform","datePublished":"2026-10-07T13:25:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257"},"wordCount":3065,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png","keywords":["Case","Democrat","Liberal","Reform"],"articleSection":["Ed Davey","Pensions","Steve Webb","Tom Gordon","triple lock"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257","name":"a Liberal Democrat case for reform - Som2ny Network","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png","datePublished":"2026-10-07T13:25:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxN.png","width":465,"height":310},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7079257#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?bp_activities=1"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"a Liberal Democrat case for reform"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/","name":"Som2ny Network","description":"Daily Deals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization","name":"Som2ny Network","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png","width":300,"height":86,"caption":"Som2ny Network"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/fivemor.com"],"url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7079257","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7079257"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7079257\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/7079258"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7079257"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7079257"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7079257"},{"taxonomy":"dealstore","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fdealstore&post=7079257"},{"taxonomy":"offerexpiration","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fofferexpiration&post=7079257"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} |
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/img\/a\/AVvXsEhMyvE3R7hEpDEcEeaLQSQPx46HnkRNOAwNXogHFTVFM8u8EcE2UV1wJMFaSkDzRsgQaBJXdyJGoQ8UzmQfzNyx_0-87DxNPEVNIqDhSNwWKEzznX4qTxKBoBY5CAQUc86R5mpcehOZdHvi7h-cBr1HeYYx1ISLLEvE0MnIWE4trBGvqkL89NrV7ZSKZBQ\")
<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n