UK MPs have voted to reject a social media ban for under-16s for the third time just two days after peers voted to bind the Government to curbing children’s use of online platforms.
Education minister Olivia Bailey told the Commons that a consultation was the way forward before any plan to tackle social media-linked harms should be implemented.
Members voted 260 to 161 – majority 99 – to reject an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which would have raised the age for access to social media deemed harmful to 16 within a 12-month window.
It is the third time MPs have voted to reject the proposal.
As part of a proposal tabled by Lord Nash, under-16s face being blocked from social media tools or websites which are thought to cause “obsessive, addictive or other unhealthy behaviours”.
They also face being banned from features which could expose them to “serious harm, manipulation or exploitation”, or illegal content such as extreme pornography or weapons sales.
Peers had previously backed an earlier proposal by Lord Nash for a default age limit on social media sites deemed “harmful”, which the Commons twice rejected.
In a stand-off between the two Houses of Parliament, MPs instead supported a flexible power for the Government to bring in measures such as curfews, scrolling limits or bans on specific websites.
Ministers have vowed to decide which action to take following a consultation, which closes next month.
But by backing Lord Nash’s new proposal on Monday, peers have agreed that ministers “must, rather than just ‘may’, raise the age of access for those harmful social media sites to 16 within 12 months”.
He pointed to Technology Secretary Liz Kendall’s appearance on TV when she said the Government must “look seriously” at how effective “highly effective age verification measures” are on social media.
Lord Nash said: “I listened very carefully to what she said yesterday, and if you can get a fag paper between us, it’s a pretty thin one indeed.”
In addition to giving the Government a 12-month deadline to bring in an age cap in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, peers have demanded ministers “seek to protect children under the age of 16” from features which meet a set of criteria, including programmes “likely to cause, encourage or facilitate compulsive, obsessive, addictive or other unhealthy behaviours among children”.
Lord Nash said: “At the heart of my amendment are ‘safety by design’ principles, with the responsibility resting firmly with the companies themselves.”
He told the Lords: “It is essential that we play catch up with the pace of change online much faster than we are.
“It would be such a small step for the Government to now accept the principles of my amendment, not to have what some have called a ‘blanket ban’, but merely to be used highly selectively and definitely not to apply to apps for particular vulnerable groups.”
