As the FT notes this morning:
Only one in four young adults say they received any financial education at school, according to new research, highlighting the scale of the UK's challenge to ensure children are taught how money works.
They added:
Santander UK, which conducted the survey, said the findings, if applied to the whole young population, would mean 4mn people finished their education without a “fundamental understanding of money management”.
Santander could, of course, step up to fund this education, but that would be unnecessary. As I noted a couple of years ago, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales had at that time collected more than £140 million in fines from big audit firms who had failed in their public duty to undertake their work to a sufficient standard to protect the public from harm.
I proposed in May 2023 that:
Around £100 million [of that sum should] be spent over ten years to provide education for young people in the financial skills that they will need when they either leave home or enter the world of work, including:
-
- The basics of tax and how it impacts them.
- Types of employment and self-employment.
- How banking works.
- Saving, borrowing, interest rates and related issues.
- Renting and mortgages.
- How to avoid being conned and online security.
- How and when to ask for help, and who from.
They told me in face-to-face meetings with their CEO that there was no need for such education.
By the spring of 2024, what looked to be very much like trumped-up allegations of misconduct were being made against me via the ICAEW, and I quit because of the nature of their behaviour.
But I was right. That money, which is still unspent and enriching the members of that Institute as a result, could be spent for this purpose, fulfilling the public duty that the ICAEW is required to undertake by its Royal Charter, which they refuse to do.
As organisational failure goes, this takes some beating. The well-being of a privileged elite is being put ahead of public purpose. I think there are words to describe such behaviour. Unethical would be a place to start. You can decide where to go from there.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
While it might come under the heading of self employment I suggest something about ‘Companies’ should be added as clearly if you are looking at going down the self employed route you need to understand the various models of business and incorporation.
Certainly something that should be taught to those on courses likley to lead to self employment eg ‘building trades’ mechanics etc
Accepted
I wonder (purely out of idle curiosity, I must admit) whether the same sort of criticism could be made of the ICAS.
Not as much, I think.
Our knowledge needs are going to come last and sacrificed over our need for ‘stuff’ – or should I say the markets need to sell us stuff – whether we can afford it or not, no matter how it is to be paid and bet a lot more of that will be through debt.
It is so typically Neo-liberal not to be interested in money other than how to accumulate it.
Sadly, I think that all analysis is superseded. Richard`s work is without parallel, but is being no more than humoured by the mainstream press, although it is cutting through. There is little point in analysing the forces which will kill us. We are all, each of us, on the cusp of destruction, and that is a terrifying prospect which has been used since the era of `mutual assured destruction` in the last century to cow political thought. We pay tax, most people think it is directly connected to expenditure. It is not. It is not. All expenditure is the single means of control. There is no way out of this situation. We seem to be at the mercy of some system of overlords. People who protest that all of us will be killed by oil burning are imprisoned by the oil burners. Yes, I`m taking advantage of a blog, which teaches, informs and is the best syposium I`ve come across, and I do apologise to Richard for taking his time. up, possibly reading my rant. I`ve said that there is no way out of this situation, but argument and logic are the tradition; I hope that those might prevail.
i
I recognise your fear, and do not thi nk it misplaced.
But, I live in hope.
My takeaway from comments by ICAEW members about the rising costs of the courses required to meet CPD requirements is the organisation has come to view financial education as commercially driven profit centre for itself. So I’m not sure that the average member is seeing much benefit from that huge cash pile.
They are wholly profit driven as far as I can see. Any vestige of ethical concern has gone.
Profit Driven? Yes. Status driven? Yes indeed. I have years ago attended dinners with high profile guests eg Lawson eg Healey. The organisation has lost its way. Same could be said of Resolution Foundation, Institute of Fiscal Studies and Shelter to name but 3.
A look at governance of these bodies tells you all you need to know.
I do want to add this is not to condemn all they do.
Here are the ICAEW’s 2023 financial statements, published I think in March 2024. https://www.icaew.com/-/media/corporate/files/about-icaew/who-we-are/annual-review/2023/icaew_ar23_financial_statements.ashx
I see a reference to £108m of accumulated FRC fines since 2004 on the third page (page 100) but where is this carried on the balance sheet? Is it cash or investments or something else? Does the ICAEW see this windfall as in effect an endowment producing investment returns (seems to be about about £10m) that subsidies its other activities?
How many other statutory regulators use any fines they levy to subsidise the private purposes of their members?
The sum is held as cash and investments
They told me it is a strategic reserve – bit when I pointed out this would require that they account for it as such they changed their mind on that
They simply use it to subsidise members – anbd to pay very large salaries. The more they fail as a regualtor the better off they are. You could not make it up. You can see why they did not like me saying so.
And Michael Izza (ex CEO of ICAEW)) was paid in excess of £200k as a golden ‘goodbye’ – there is an interesting article on ‘Accounting Web’ regarding that and the ‘hoarding’ of fine income. The ICAEW Council members certainly look after themselves by way of remuneration etc. as per the Accounts. In year 1999/2000 there was a female ‘President’ – she wrote to all female members over a certain age, asking for their recollections – and a booklet was produced – surprise, surprise, it was mainly about her = she received complimentary publicity – most other older female members were allocated to digital archive – naturally I refused to allow them to use my career in such a way, and looking at how few female members of my advanced years (I qualified in 1967) have their recollections in the digital archives of that era, I believe that many others took the same view – for that female President, it was all about her. I retired and claimed free life membership – why pay more into ICAEW? Of course, if ICAEW were stretched in their finances, they have the marbled halls of One Moorgate Place to fall back on for wining, dining, socialising or using it for functions – interesting to note on the website re opening hours “One Moorgate Place Club welcomes members and their guests to a newly created modern and sophisticated members’ club in Chartered Accountants’ Hall. Membership to the club is an inclusive part of your ICAEW membership. The club opening times are 10:00 to 17:00 Monday to Friday. We have created a selection of menus which champion seasonal produce and are guaranteed to impress. Whether it’s a breakfast meeting in the morning, a relaxed lunch with a friend or entertaining clients in the evening over drinks the club is the perfect place to go.” My working hours started before 10.00 and ended after 17.00 and most would not consider entertaining clients ‘in the evening’ to be over by 17.00 hours – equally breakfast at 10.00.
So much to agree with
Reality and One Moorgate Place are only vaguely acquainted.
Might the facilitation of financial ignorance for the young of regular citizens be a consistent policy of the “deep state” aka the dominating plutocracy which, very largely, includes the mainstream media and the mainstream neoliberal political parties?
Debt management and the ripoff/s of extortionate credit card interest rates should be prominent. Also buy now pay later scams.
As an Irishman who went through the Btitish grammar school system in the 1980s, and who now teaches economics to kids as young as 12 in vocational education in the Netherlands, I’m very surprised to read that this seems to still be the case.
The law requires very basic education in this issue.
It is apparent that schools are ignoring the requirement
They also lack unbiased materials
I have an idea about that…..
After I retired I did some teaching including on financial topics. The six formers just laid down their heads and went to sleep
Why?
What did you cover?
With what materials?
Money makes the world go round.
No government wants youngsters to be financially savvy else their tax take would be depleted as folk stopped spending money which they can’t afford on products and services they don’t really need.
All governments really care about is economic growth. Businesses want to maximise sales. Football fans definitely shouldn’t realise clubs are fleecing them.
My city relies on betting and distribution centres for thousands of jobs. I admit I did well out of this location with 45 years as a van and artic driver. Most of our local skilled jobs have gradually been outsourced to China (ceramics) or Turkey (white goods).
Too many financially savvy citizens would be bad news for UK PLC.
Nor in FE, where I worked for 10 years, up until 20 years ago, as a Head of Department for Economics and Business Studies! I don’t think a single lecturer, including me, ever started a lesson with the question ‘right lot of budding business entrepreneurs, where does money come from’?
But should we / you have done that?
Thinking about it, probably not. Quite honestly, because I, at that time, did not have the understanding and clarity I have now. I was, I admit, more focused on students just getting good A-Level grades/BTEC Nationals and enhancing the reputation of the department. This, in essence, meant not staying too far away from the syllabus. I accept that ignorance is no excuse but, 20/30 years ago, even though my gut told me otherwise, I didn’t see neoliberalism resulting in the level of inequality we have today
I was concerned by 30 years ago and sure 20 years ago
But I still hoped it was avoidable
I now fear we will go further