Government accused of ‘gutting’ potential bill to ban children from social media
The government has been accused of “gutting” a potential landmark bill to stop children “doom scrolling” after its proposals were watered down.
Labour MP Josh MacAlister had originally planned for his Safer Phones legislation to include a ban on the devices in classrooms, a well as raising the “digital age of consent” at which social media can be used to 16.
But in the face of ministerial opposition, the bill now just calls for chief medical officers to review the evidence on screen-based harms within a year – before deciding if there should be higher age restrictions on access to apps such as TikTok and Snapchat.
Former Tory education secretaries hit out at the changes during a debate on the bill’s second reading in the Commons on Friday, which ended with the bill being adjourned for further consideration until July.
Kit Malthouse, who held the post under Liz Truss, said the bill is a “hollowed out gesture” and accused the government of “capitulating to big tech”.
“I will be speaking not to celebrate progress, but to lament the gutting of what could have been a landmark bill,” he said.
He also acknowledged his own party’s past failures in getting the legislation passed, adding: “This government, sadly like the last… has dithered, diluted and capitulated.
“What remains, I’m afraid, is a hollowed out gesture and an opportunity missed.”
Damien Hinds, who was education secretary under Theresa May and an education minister under Rishi Sunak, praised Mr MacAlister’s campaigning but called the current version of the bill a “huge missed opportunity”.
He said that while the Conservative’s Online Safety Bill “made very good progress” on protecting children from harmful content, “we have a lot more to do on the topic of time and the addictiveness of social media”.
Tory MP Sir Ashley Fox claimed nothing in the bill requires legislation and the watered-down proposals “could all be achieved by a minister just deciding to ask the chief medical officer to produce a report or the minister to produce a plan”.
He asked: “What has happened to the legislative action that was clearly in earlier drafts in his legislation?”
Responding, former teacher Mr MacAlister said the bill had to be changed to “secure explicit government backing”.
He said the bill had been written “to achieve change rather than just highlight the issue”.
“That is why the bill before us is narrower than where I started when this campaign began six months ago,” he added.
Changing the law ‘not a big bang event’
Mr MacAlister has brought forward the legislation using the Private Members Bill (PMB) mechanism, which allows backbench MPs to propose changes to the law.
PMBs are rarely successful without government backing.
Josh MaCalistair. Pic: Parliament
Introducing his bill – officially known as the Protection of Children (Digital Safety and Data Protection) Bill – Mr MacAlister said reducing smartphone harms in law relies on a “process” not one “big bang” event.
He said that the average 12-year-old spends 21 hours a week on their smartphone, which is “the equivalent of four full days of school teaching per week”.
“This is a fundamental rewiring of childhood itself and it’s happened in little over a decade,” he said.
Sticking to what’s workable won’t please everyone
This bill is the product of months of, at times emotional, hearings in parliament, many of which I attended.
Josh MacAlister took evidence – away from the cameras – from bereaved families who believe social media played a part in their children’s deaths.
That evidence included medical professionals who say screen time is fuelling anxiety and destroying children’s concentration spans, along with teachers, regulators and yes, even those publicity-shy tech companies who talked behind closed doors about the measures they have already put in place, and where they can go further.
It was a painstaking process, and Mr MacAlister, a former teacher, made clear he wanted a proposal government would back with action, not an ideal that wouldn’t be workable.
Ministers made clear that a smartphone ban in schools was off the agenda – they wanted it to be left up to headteachers.
Instead, he pushed forward with restricting “addictive by design” apps from under-16s. The objection there? This is the year the Online Safety Act, with huge ambitions to protect children from harmful and illegal content, is being implemented in stages by Ofcom.
Ministers and some campaigners feared additional laws to limit “doomscrolling” would distract from that work, which some worry is already a tall order.
Hence, this final draft calls for a review of evidence lasting a year, and no firm commitment from government.
Mr MacAlister says tackling smartphone harms will be a series of small steps and continued pressure, a marathon, not a sprint.
It’s not what many parents and MPs wanted to hear, but the government is prepared to work with it.
Many countries have already taken steps to strengthen laws on children’s phone usage.
The French and Norwegian governments have set a 15-year age limit while last year Australia passed a world-first law banning under 16s from having social media accounts.
It is understood that Technology Secretary Peter Kyle wanted to make sure the Online Safety Act, which was passed by MPs in 2023 and is being implemented in stages this year, is completed first before any potential social media ban.
This intends to protect young people from illegal and harmful content with fines for tech companies who break the rules.
The government has opposed a smartphone ban in schools, saying this should be up to headteachers.
Most young people say social media causes harm
Ahead of the debate, extensive polling of young people aged 16-24 showed that 62% of this age group say social media does more harm than good.
Four in five also said they would try to keep their own children off social media for as long as possible.
Half of this generation, who grew up with smartphones, agree they spent too much time on their phones and social media during childhood.
Read More:
Son’s mental health ‘severely impacted’ after pornography shared
Instagram unveils new feature as govt tightens online safety rules
Has Trump influenced the government?
Speaking during the debate, technology minister Chris Bryant said he was “not going to make arguments against action” and “everybody accepts that action is inevitable in this field”.
He said the task the governent faces is “harnessing the good” of social media while losing what is bad, as children who are struggling with their sexuality or are neurodivergent can benefit from certain apps.
However, he admitted he had “no role” in negotiating with Mr MacAlister or Downing Street about changing the contents of the bill, leading to Mr Malthouse raising a point of order over whether the relevant minister had been put foward to take questions.
Mr Malthouse also asked whether Donald Trump had influenced the “filleting of this bill” as it would upset US tech firms.
Mr Byrant accused him of “subscribing to conspiracy theories”, adding: “I haven’t taken into consideration anything Donald Trump might think in this field.”