The Chancellor decided she would show how tough she was by scrapping the popular benefit for 10million pensioners.

It was her first big decision - and it backfired spectacularly.

PM Keir Starmer felt the backlash during local elections, where voters repeatedly brought it up on the doorstep. He ordered Reeves to do a reverse ferret.

From this winter, around nine million pensioners , worth up to £300 per household.

But up to three million still won't benefit because they earn too much. The cut-off point is £35,000 a year. They'll receive the Winter Fuel Payment, but .

It's going to be horrendously complicated, with massive scope for errors.

Reeves originally hoped to save £1.4 billion, but at most she'll save £450million. It could be less. And that has massive implications for the state pension triple lock.

Jon Greer, head of retirement policy at Quilter, said Reeves's U-turn "underlines how politically and practically difficult it is to unpick long-standing universal benefits".

He said Reeves wanted to appear fiscally responsible, but underestimated the administrative burden and strength of feeling among pensioners.

Greer is right. She enraged Labour voters and drove many into the arms of Nigel Farage's Reform UK.

Starmer and Reeves have learned a hard lesson. "Removing support, even for retirees with more wealth, directly impacts people's lives," Greer said.

Ultimately, the Winter Fuel Payment is a trifle compared to the triple lock.

Introduced in 2011, the triple lock increases the state pension each year by the highest of earnings, inflation or 2.5%.

It was designed to drag millions of pensioners out of poverty, and has been tremendously successful.

In April, it gave pensioners a 4.1% pay rise, adding as much as £470 a year to the state pension. In April 2024, they got 8.5%. The year before, a thumping 10.1%.

Labour says pensioners will get £1,900 extra over the five years of this Parliament, purely thanks to the triple lock.

No wonder pensioners love it. The Treasury, however, hates it - because it costs a fortune.

As the population ages and the number of pensioners grows, pressure on the triple lock will only intensify.

There are rumblings across Westminster about its affordability, but no one dares say so out loud.

Greer says thanks to Reeves, politicians will be even more terrified of touching it. "This episode has shown just how radioactive any attempt at reform has become."

The fallout has been dramatic. Scaling back the triple lock would be anything but modest - and now MPs have seen the political cost of trying.

Perhaps pensioners should thank Rachel Reeves for making the triple lock too radioactive to touch. She may have secured it both through this Parliament and the next one too. The trouble is, that wasn't her plan.