Bereaved parents urge MPs to back default social media ban for under-16s

MPs are set to debate the Lords-backed ban on Monday, which the Government has suggested replacing with a wide-ranging, flexible power.

Peers have proposed a default block on children aged under 16 accessing regulated user-to-user services, which would come into effect within 12 months of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill becoming law.

But the Government’s proposal would allow ministers to prevent or restrict children’s access to “specified internet services”.

This could include bans, curfews or limits on the amount of time per day a user can spend on a particular platform.

The Government earlier this week launched a consultation to decide what action it should take.

“We are writing not as campaigners or politicians, but as bereaved parents,” the group of parents said in a statement.

“Our children should be here.

“They should be at school, at home, arguing with their siblings, planning their futures.

“Instead, we are left trying to understand how platforms designed and engineered by some of the most powerful companies in the world were allowed to reach into their bedrooms and shape their lives without meaningful protection.”

The group added: “Online safety has already been debated at length.

“The harms have been examined extensively and the evidence continues to grow.

“Families are living with the consequences every day.”

The Bill has cleared both Houses of Parliament.

But both the Commons, where the Government has a majority, and the Lords, where it does not, must agree on a final draft before it can become law.

The parents, led by Ellen Roome, warned tech firms “have extraordinary resources and access”.

They added: “Every additional delay gives them more opportunity to dilute or weaken reforms behind closed doors.

“Meanwhile, children remain exposed to products we already know can cause harm.”

Ms Roome, from Gloucestershire, believes her 14-year-old son Jools Sweeney died while attempting an online challenge in 2022.

Also among the signatories were: Esther Ghey, whose 16-year-old daughter Brianna was murdered by two teenagers; George Nicolaou, the father of 15-year-old Christoforos; and Hollie Dance, the mother of 12-year-old Archie Battersbee.

Lord Nash, who steered the default ban through the upper House, has previously said the Government’s proposal amounted to a “blank cheque”.

The Conservative peer told the Press Association: “The Government’s amendment confirms that they remain firmly on the fence on how best to protect children.

“In fact, it is patently clear that raising the age limit to 16 for harmful social media platforms is far from their preferred option.

“MPs must choose on Monday whether to act now and raise the age limit for harmful social media to 16, or vote for the Government’s amendment, which is in effect a blank cheque, committing only to further delay while their consultation runs its course.

“That consultation is simply yet another opportunity for big tech to mobilise their lobbyists and water down any prospective measures before they reach the statute book.”

Victoria Collins, the Liberal Democrat technology spokeswoman, told PA: “It is vital that we have a reset moment for children while setting guidelines to keep safe spaces for children to connect with friends, family and learn online.

“First and foremost, however, we need action, which is why the Lib Dems have continuously pushed for banning addictive algorithms for under 16s, a doomscroll cap and voting to put children before big tech.”

Ms Collins said her party had proposed “banning harmful social media for under-16s, based on a film-style age rating”.

She described her proposal as a “harms-based approach” to “embed future-proof principles for tackling a broad range of online harms from AI to gaming”.

Launching the consultation, Technology Secretary Liz Kendall vowed to “create a digital world that gives young people the childhood they deserve and prepares them for the future”.

A petition on the UK Parliament website titled “do not ban social media for under-16s” has gathered more than 61,000 signatures.

“I think the Government shouldn’t ban social media for under-16s,” the petition reads.

“This is because for many young people social media is how they communicate with their friends.

“Some people view social media as a lifeline, a community, a supportive network.”

Responding earlier this week, a Government spokesperson wrote the “short, sharp consultation of three months” would allow ministers “to hear all perspectives, build consensus where we can, and then act decisively”.

The spokesperson also said: “There will be no delay and Government will explain our next steps by the summer.”