Sir Keir Starmer has changed his mind and signalled he is now prepared to consider backing a ban on social media for children under 16, a move that could have implications for families across the region.
The Prime Minister had previously warned that copying Australia’s strict age limits might push teenagers towards less regulated parts of the internet, but Downing Street now says he is open to new legislation that would require social media companies to block younger users.
Speaking on Thursday, Sir Keir said:
“We need to better protect children from social media. We’re looking at what’s happening in Australia, but all options are on the table in relation to what further protections we can put in place, whether that’s under 16s on social media, all options on the table.”
No 10 has also signalled that the Prime Minister would not stand in the way of a Conservative amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is due to be voted on in the House of Lords next week and would introduce an Australian style ban.
A policy expert close to the Government said the issue now had significant momentum, adding that a large majority of MPs would likely support such a move if given a free vote.
The development comes after Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said last weekend that the Tories would bar under 16s from social media if they win the next election. Her position has been backed by Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has also said he is “in favour of action”, arguing that social media had been allowed to grow without fully understanding its impact on young people.
In Australia, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese introduced a world first law last year banning under 16s from platforms such as Facebook, X, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok. Companies that fail to comply can face fines of up to £25m.
If the Conservative amendment passes in the Lords, it will move to the House of Commons for further debate.
However, ministers are understood to be considering other options short of a full ban. One possibility is restricting children’s use of VPNs, which can be used to bypass age controls by disguising a user’s location.
Local Labour MP Luke Charters said that age verification rules already exist for harmful content, and that it was reasonable to look at whether VPNs should be available to under 16s.
A government consultation on children’s use of social media is expected to be launched next week.
Campaign group Smartphone Free Childhood says it has gathered 100,000 letters from parents urging MPs to support a ban.
Within Government, recent appointments suggest a tougher stance on technology in schools. Children’s minister Josh MacAlister has previously backed bans on mobile phones in classrooms, while assistant chief whip Gregor Poynton has expressed support for Australia style measures.
Technology Secretary Liz Kendall is also reported to take a stricter view on social media than her predecessor.
Jonathan Hall KC, the Government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has said tighter controls could help prevent teenagers being radicalised online.
The proposed Australian model would require social media firms to take “reasonable steps” to keep under 16s off their platforms, potentially using ID checks, facial recognition or other age assurance technology.
However, the idea of a blanket ban is opposed by both the NSPCC and the Molly Rose Foundation, a charity set up after the death of teenager Molly Russell in 2017 following exposure to harmful online content.
The foundation’s chief executive has warned that a total ban could leave vulnerable young people with fewer sources of support.
Sir Keir himself said in December that he “personally” opposed a blanket ban, arguing that regulating harmful content was more important than blocking access altogether.
Meanwhile in Australia, some teenagers have already used VPNs to get around the new restrictions, highlighting the practical challenges any UK ban might face.
With cross party pressure growing, MPs are likely to face difficult decisions in the coming weeks about how best to balance online safety with access to digital platforms for young people in communities across the country.
Do let us know what you think. Do you have under 16s at home, and how do you think they would take this news? Would a social media ban make family life easier, or would it spark rows? Is this a sensible move to protect children, or an unrealistic clampdown that will be impossible to enforce? Have your say in the comments.
