Bereaved parents have urged lawmakers to back an immediate ban on under-16s using social media as MPs prepare to vote on proposed restrictions for the first time.
MPs will debate the Lords-backed ban for the first time on Monday, which proposes a default block for young people effective within 12 months of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill becoming law.
However, the government has suggested replacing the amendment with more wide-ranging powers, allowing it to impose restrictions such as social media curfews, depending on the outcome of a consultation launched last week.
Now 23 parents whose children lost their lives due to social media are now urging MPs to reject the government’s consultation, and instead back a default block proposed in the Lords to prevent further delays.
The parents have been joined by a coalition of organisations including National Education Union, Mumsnet, Health Professionals for Safer Screens and Safe Screens, who are also calling for MPs across parliament to back an immediate ban.
Esther Ghey, the mother of murdered teenager Brianna Ghey, said MPs should back the amendments this week “to stop the harm without delay”.
‘‘Children on social media, including gaming platforms are currently being exploited, radicalised, and harmed emotionally and physically, and in the most tragic cases, young lives are being lost,” she said.
“Brianna was one of these children. Parents across the country are crying out for help as they watch the devastating impact these platforms can have on young people.
“We cannot afford more delay while the damage continues every single day.”
She is one of the parents who wrote to MPs last week, warning mothers and fathers "cannot regulate billion-dollar technology companies from their kitchen tables".
Rather than back the strict age limit proposed in the Lords, the government is instead pushing for more flexible powers.
If MPs were to approve this amendment within the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, ministers would acquire new authority to impose social media curfews or restrict screen time, following the consultation launched last week to decide the precise action.
Lord Nash, who steered the proposed default ban in the Lords, said the government’s changes would only give big tech companies time “to mobilise against action”.
“The incredibly brave parents of 23 young people who lost their lives in connection with social media have told MPs that further delay is nothing more than an opportunity for big tech to mobilise against action,” he said.
“MPs can listen to these calls for action and vote for my cross-party amendment – which would raise the age to 16 for the most harmful platforms, within 12 months, and be written into law before the summer.
“Or they can take a gamble on a consultation with no fixed age and no guaranteed outcome. Just more delay while children continue to be harmed. The choice couldn’t be clearer – I implore every MP to vote today for my cross-party amendment.”
The online safety consultation launched last Monday explores several themes including whether social media platforms should come with a minimum age requirement, and whether platforms should switch off addictive features such as autoplay.
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”.
Responding last 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”.
