MPs Reject Under-16s Social Media Ban for Third Time, Opting for Consultation Instead
MPs have once again voted against proposals to ban social media access for children under the age of 16, marking the third time such a measure has failed to pass in the House of Commons. The decision came as MPs voted 260 to 161, with a majority of 99, to reject an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
Amendment Details and Government Response
The amendment sought to raise the minimum age for accessing social media platforms deemed harmful to 16 within a year. However, Education Minister Olivia Bailey told the Commons that a comprehensive consultation was the necessary way forward before implementing any strategy to address the harms linked to social media use.
Ms Bailey emphasised, "There is a clear consensus across this House on the need to protect children online. But our consultation goes further than these amendments, considering a wider set of options, including risks beyond social media such as gaming and AI chatbots. It is not a question of whether the Government acts, but how the Government acts to deliver strong and enduring protections for children online."
New Powers Under the Bill
Despite the rejection of a direct ban, the Bill is set to grant ministers flexible new powers to regulate children’s online activity. These include:
- The ability to impose curfews on social media usage.
- Setting scrolling limits to manage screen time.
- Restricting location sharing to enhance privacy and safety.
Furthermore, the government could also gain the authority to block under-16s from accessing specific social media platforms entirely, providing a targeted approach rather than a blanket ban.
Consultation and Legislative Commitments
The education minister confirmed that the Government will respond to a consultation, which is set to close next month, by the summer. A legislative commitment has been made to report to parliament within six months, ensuring ongoing scrutiny and action.
Ms Bailey noted there has been "constructive engagement" from Conservative former minister Lord Nash, who put forward the amendment, and the Government intends to "return to these matters on Monday" in the Lords, indicating further parliamentary discussions ahead.
Opposition Criticism and Parental Concerns
Conservative shadow education secretary Laura Trott criticised the Government's approach, stating that parents will "not forgive the continued delay" in protecting children from extreme and violent content online. Speaking ahead of the vote, she said, "Twice already, Labour MPs have voted against a ban. Parents will be forgiven, for not only feeling deeply let down, but being quite frankly baffled by what is going on. They’ve heard the Prime Minister promise action, yet, once again, he’s preparing to lead his party through the lobbies to vote against it. If the Government truly wanted change, they could deliver it today."
Related Measures and Exceptions
In a related move, the Government committed to a statutory ban for phones in schools earlier this week. However, Education Committee chairwoman Helen Hayes highlighted the need for exceptions, explaining, "There will be children who still need to have a phone in school for a whole variety of different reasons, because they are young carers, for example, or because they rely on phone-enabled software to support with a particular disability or special educational need. There will be some exceptions, and how that is worked through in the guidance is important for protecting those children from the pressures that might come with being the only child in the classroom who is able to have access to their phone."
This nuanced approach reflects the broader strategy of balancing protection with practicality, as the Government continues to navigate the complex landscape of children's online safety.
