Financial literacy should mean life skills, not compulsory maths to 18

Former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has reignited the debate on financial education, arguing that British pupils lack essential "financial literacy" compared to their European counterparts. However, his proposed solution — extending compulsory mathematics education to age 18 — has drawn criticism from commentators who suggest this conflates numeracy with practical life skills. Simon Jenkins contends that while Sunak is correct about the need for better financial preparedness, this should not translate into simply more classroom maths, but rather a broader curriculum that addresses real-world competencies. The discussion highlights a fundamental question about the purpose of education: whether it should prioritise academic subjects or the practical competencies needed for adult life. Jenkins argues that young people require knowledge of insurance, pensions, taxation, digital technology, and mental health management — areas often neglected in traditional curricula. This perspective challenges policymakers to consider how schools and colleges might better equip students for the realities they will face beyond the school gates, ensuring that education serves both personal development and economic participation. The article contextualises these educational debates against troubling employment statistics, citing recent findings that approximately one million young people aged 16 to 24 are currently not in education, employment or training (NEET). For local authorities responsible for children's services and skills provision, this underscores the urgency of ensuring that educational pathways genuinely prepare young people for economic participation. The piece invites consideration of whether current curriculum reforms are sufficiently responsive to the practical skills gaps facing today's youth, particularly those at risk of disengaging from education and the labour market.