MPs Reject Under-16 Social Media Ban
Members of Parliament have voted against implementing an Australia-style ban on social media use for children under 16, instead endorsing more adaptable ministerial powers to regulate access.
Australia introduced a ban on platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat for under-16s at the end of last year, becoming the first country to do so. Similar proposals received backing from members of the House of Lords in January.
Supporters of a ban include actor Hugh Grant, while critics such as the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) cautioned that such restrictions might push young users toward less regulated and potentially harmful areas of the internet.
Following the vote, the Liberal Democrats criticized the government's refusal to commit to a ban, calling it "simply not good enough."
Opposition also comes from the father of Molly Russell, who tragically died by suicide at age 14 after exposure to harmful online content. He advocates for the government to focus on rigorous enforcement of existing legislation.
Government's Alternative Approach
Proposals for a ban were initially introduced as amendments to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
However, during the Commons debate on Monday, Education Minister Olivia Bailey urged MPs to reject the outright ban and instead support more flexible restrictions.
"Many parents and campaign groups have called for an outright ban on social media for under-16s," she said.
"Others, including children's charities, have warned that a blanket ban could drive children towards less regulated corners of the internet or leave teenagers unprepared when they do come online.
That is why last week, the government launched a consultation to seek views to help shape our next steps and ensure children can grow up with a safer, healthier and more enriching relationship with the online world."
The consultation will examine whether social media platforms should enforce minimum age requirements and consider disabling addictive features such as autoplay.
Bailey's alternative plan grants Science Secretary Liz Kendall the authority to "restrict or ban children of certain ages from accessing social media services and chat bots."
Kendall would also have the power to limit access to "specific features that are harmful or addictive" on social media, regulate children's use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), and adjust the digital age of consent in the UK.
Parliamentary Vote and Reactions
MPs voted 307 to 173 against the House of Lords' proposal for an outright ban, instead supporting Bailey's approach, which leaves the possibility of some form of ban open.
More than 100 Labour MPs abstained, including North Somerset's Sadik Al-Hassan, who compared social media to a drug that would be banned if it caused similar harm.
"Parents like me are locked in a daily battle that they simply cannot win alone, fighting platforms that have been specifically designed to keep children hooked.
As a pharmacist, I know if a drug were causing such measurable harm for 78%, it would be withdrawn, reformulated or placed behind a counter with strict controls on who could access it.
We would act, because that is what the evidence demanded. The same logic must apply here.
We have an identifiable source, we have overwhelming evidence of harm, and we have the power to act."
Conservative former Education Minister Lord Nash, who introduced the amendment in the Lords to restrict under-16s from social media, described the Commons vote as "deeply disappointing."
He said MPs had "chosen to gamble on a process which may lead to half measures," adding he will collaborate with peers to "do all that we can" to revive the amendment.
Liberal Democrat education spokesperson Munira Wilson criticized the government's stance.
"The government's failure to commit to a ban on harmful social media is simply not good enough - families need concrete assurances now.
We need the government to confirm that their consultation will not result in yet more dither and delay."
for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
