Parliament backs flexible powers instead
UK MPs have rejected a proposal for a nationwide social media ban for under-16s, choosing instead to support flexible powers that could restrict access to certain platforms or features.
The vote in the House of Commons dismissed an amendment inspired by Australia’s recent social media ban, which prohibits children under 16 from using platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat.
Instead, ministers will pursue a more flexible regulatory approach through powers that could allow restrictions on children’s access to social media services.
Debate over risks and protections
The proposal had been introduced as an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill and had previously received backing in the House of Lords.
Supporters of the ban included actor Hugh Grant and campaigners concerned about the impact of social media on young people.
However, critics such as the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) warned that an outright social media ban could push teenagers toward less regulated areas of the internet.
Opponents also included the father of Molly Russell, the 14-year-old who took her own life after viewing harmful content online. He argued that the government should focus on enforcing existing online safety laws rather than introducing a blanket ban.
Government launches consultation
Education Minister Olivia Bailey urged MPs to reject the ban and instead support a consultation aimed at shaping future policy.
She said many parents and campaign groups had called for stronger restrictions but warned that a blanket social media ban could create unintended consequences.
The consultation will examine whether social media platforms should have minimum age requirements and whether certain addictive features, such as autoplay, should be disabled for younger users.
New powers for ministers
Under the government’s alternative plan, Science Secretary Liz Kendall would receive powers to restrict or ban access to social media services and chatbots for children of certain ages.
The government could also limit access to specific features deemed harmful or addictive.
Ministers would additionally be able to restrict children’s use of virtual private networks (VPNs) and change the age of digital consent in the UK.
Calls for stronger action
Conservative shadow education secretary Laura Trott urged the government to introduce an age limit for social media use and ban phones in schools.
She cited polling suggesting that 40% of children are shown explicit content during the school day.
“This is an emergency,” she said. “No more guidance, no more consultations. Legislate, do something about it.”
MPs ultimately voted 307 to 173 against the Lords proposal for an outright social media ban, backing the government’s more flexible approach instead.
However, more than 100 Labour MPs abstained from the vote.
During the debate, Labour MP Sadik Al-Hassan argued that if social media were treated like a drug, it would already be heavily regulated.
“We have an identifiable source, we have overwhelming evidence of harm, and we have the power to act,” he said.
Criticism after the vote
Conservative former education minister Lord Nash, who introduced the amendment in the Lords, described the Commons decision as “deeply disappointing”.
He said MPs had chosen to rely on a process that could lead to only partial measures.
Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat education spokesperson Munira Wilson criticised the government’s approach, saying families needed clear action rather than further consultation.
Source: BBC
Also read: UK under 16s social media ban considered under ‘consultation’
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
