MPs vote against social media ban for under-16s a second time | Social media ban
MPs voted against a proposal to ban under-16s from using social media for a second time, as the Prime Minister called on tech bosses to demand tougher measures on internet security.
The House of Commons has rejected an amendment to the House of Lords child welfare and schools bill that would impose a new age limit on the use of social media platforms, amid pressure from parents and campaign groups for greater urgency in tackling online harms. They voted by 150 votes to 256, with a majority of 106 votes to side with the government on its plan to tackle social media-related harm to children.
But MPs passed a Labor amendment giving the government extra power to impose age limits after completing their own consultation on the under-16 ban, which expires next month.
“Instead of the narrow change proposed in the House of Lords, our consultations allow us to consider a much broader range of services and features,” said Olivia Bailey MP, the government’s early education minister. “It also allows us to consider different views on the way forward and that is why it is so important that we do not impede government consultation.”
Conservative shadow education minister Laura Trott said: “I will continue to fight until the government bans social media in response to the bill.”
Government consultations are considering raising the age limit on social media from 13 to 16, as well as addressing the addictive nature of social media platforms by restricting features such as infinite scrolling. MPs also rejected the Lords’ under-16 amendment introduced by Conservative Party’s Lord Nash last month.
The vote comes as Keir Starmer prepares to meet senior leaders of social media companies TikTok, X, Instagram and Meta, which owns Facebook, YouTube and Snapchat, to demand faster progress on internet security.
Speaking ahead of the meeting scheduled for Thursday, Starmer said: “Parents rightly expect quick and swift action. That’s why we’ve already got the powers to act quickly once our consultations are over. I will take whatever steps necessary to keep children safe online. Today is the day to ensure social media companies step up and take responsibility.”
In Downing Street before the vote, bereaved parents and campaigners sent a letter to the prime minister urging the government to restrict social media access for under-16s, ban phones in schools and ban “addictive” social media features such as infinite scrolling and autoplay.
Esther Ghey, mother of murdered teenager Brianna Ghey, said government consultation had “delayed” action against online harms. “We know social media is addictive, we know the things young people are accessing online. We know young people are losing their lives. We know tech companies are worth billions of pounds and will be putting money into lobbying the government as this consultation continues. I hope they listen to other parents.”
Ghey said: “Brianna was extremely isolated. This was because of the people she spoke to online and the people who harmed her. “One of the arguments against the social media ban is that vulnerable, particularly LGBT, young people can find their community online, but Brianna cannot.
“We have an LGBT youth support group and he went there a couple of times and refused to join. Then he went back home and went to his phone and went back to the people who were hurting him. I think if he wasn’t on social media, he would be a lot more engaged in the real world. And that would have done wonders for his mental health.”
“There needs to be some kind of responsibility for what they did to our children,” said Stuart Stephens, father of 13-year-old Olly Stephens. In January 2021, her son was lured into a field by a girl and fatally stabbed by two boys. “We were very naive and believed that these companies had a duty of care. I don’t think any child under 16 should be on social media because their brains aren’t developed enough to handle it.”
Louise Gibson lost her 11-year-old son Noah in December 2021 due to a social media issue. He said he remained “hopeful” that the Lords’ amendments would be accepted. “As parents, we have a responsibility and we know we have a responsibility. But if there are restrictions, it makes our job much easier.”
Ellen Roome, along with Gibson and three other parents, are suing TikTok in Delaware following the death of their children. He said: “My son Jools died four years ago this week and I believe it was because of social media. It feels like we’re gaining momentum and moving forward.”
“We just need the government to catch up. We gave the tech companies a chance to really change, and they chose not to do enough. Now we need the government to say ‘enough,’ to take that away from them.”
Roome also described the Downing Street meeting as a “demonstration” designed to distract from the fact that the government had instructed its own MPs to vote against the under-16 ban.
