Day One of her cool new job in the UK NHS she was handed a stack of paperwork that she had to fill in. Needless to say she did badly; it took her forever and everything was misspelled. She lasted a month before they let her go, and she was glad to go. Her degree was very vocational - there aren't many opportunities for qualified OTs outside the health industry - and every single OT needs to deal with stacks of paperwork every day. [0]
There's no point getting people qualified in an area they can't actually deal with. Making people who don't get on with maths work in an area that requires a decent understanding of maths is just going to make everyone unhappy.
I understand the need to even out results and provide opportunity for people who are less STEM-oriented. But (as with the ex-gf) it doesn't work like this. If she had had less help in her degree, she would have wasted less time trying to get into an industry she was fundamentally unsuited for and everyone would have been better off, including her. Providing her with all the help was well-intentioned but ultimately hurt everyone.
Except the university, of course. By providing assistance to an extremely dyslexic student they got another win on the board. Another "disadvantaged" student passed. Social goals met, etc. Everyone else suffered, but the uni got a win. Which was the point of the policy.
I suspect the same is true here - the change in maths teaching is about making it easier for the schools to claim their wins, not about making it easier for students, or providing a better education. It's all about education metrics, not actual education.
[0] Just to close out the story: she ended up getting another degree in Fashion and Textiles which was her real passion and what she was really good at. The OT thing was about making her mum happy; she came from a long line of nurses.