The future of the State Pension Triple Lock has come under fresh scrutiny, with Members of the House of Lords questioning whether the current system can and should continue in its present form. Members of the House of Lords raised concerns about the long-term cost of the Triple Lock during a wide-ranging debate on the UK's fiscal outlook on Thursday. The Triple Lock guarantees that the State Pension increases annually by the highest of inflation, average earnings growth or 2.5%.

The policy has been protected for the rest of the current Parliament. Several peers, however, questioned whether a different approach could be needed in future.

As reported by the Daily Record, Conservative peer Lord Hill of Oareford, who served in David Cameron's Cabinet when the coalition government operated the Triple Lock, asked: "What are we going to do about the pension triple lock?"

He raised concerns about the financial implications of continuing to increase pension payments under the existing formula as the UK's population ages.

Former Labour pensions minister Lord Rooker said the Triple Lock was now "unsustainable" and proposed replacing it after the next election with what he described as a "triple average".

Lord Rooker said figures produced with help from the House of Lords Library suggested that pension increases over the previous three years would have been significantly different under such a system. He argued that the alternative could offer a simpler and more balanced way of increasing pensions after the next election.

However, calls to scrap the Triple Lock were also challenged by other members of the Lords, who warned that abolishing it without deciding what should replace it would leave a major question unanswered.

Labour peer Lord Davies of Brixton said he supported his party's commitment to maintain the Triple Lock until the next election, but added: "The inevitable question is: what follows?"

"A number of people simply say that we need to abolish it. I am sorry, but this is facile - that is only a part of the equation, because you also have to say what should replace it.

He added: "Crucially, we must also discuss the right level of the state pension, because the debate about the triple lock is as much about this as the technical details of the revaluation basis."

Lord Davies suggested these issues should be considered by the Pensions Commission, which he said is expected to report early next year. He also defended the role of the Triple Lock in protecting pensioners, particularly people who rely heavily on their State Pension. The policy has helped increase the value of the State Pension over time, although its rising cost remains a significant concern for the Government.

Conservative peer Lord Redwood defended the existing system and said both Labour and the Conservatives should honour their election promises.

He said: "I do not share the view of those who think we should pick on the pensioners or the disabled to make particular sacrifices at this juncture."

He added that both parties "were right to promise the triple lock in the election and should keep to their word."

Despite the concerns raised in the Lords, the Government has not announced any decision to abolish or change the Triple Lock. The policy remains protected for the rest of the current Parliament. The full rate of the new State Pension increased by 4.8% to £241.30 a week in April. The full basic State Pension is £184.90 per week.