Baroness Grender
Main Page: Baroness Grender (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)(2 days, 1 hour ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate
Baroness Grender (LD)
My Lords, I too congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, not just on this debate but on her tireless advocacy for online safety for all children. She has my lasting gratitude, especially as a current parent of a teenager. My interest as a recent chair of governors is in the register. I fear that we will look back on this particular cohort of children, who have grown up with all the challenges of the social media age, and ask ourselves what on earth we were thinking. I also congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Cass, on her thoughtful maiden speech. I look forward to hearing more from her in the future.
As any parent of a child in this digital age will be aware, parents feel as if they are constantly judged and endlessly failing when this issue is discussed, so the care and kindness in this debate has been extremely welcome. If you have ever been involved in a losing battle, while food is ready and on the table, for the end of FIFA, Minecraft, Roblox or my personal nemesis, Fortnite, you will understand. It is not easy. But our role here is to help, support and reinforce parents and teachers alike in their efforts to grow a future generation filled with joy and confidence. As all the speakers have made clear today, we are in serious peril right now of doing the exact opposite.
Only today, we heard the news from Ofcom that nearly a quarter of teenagers are lying about their age to access social media apps, which is a sharp reminder of just how important the Online Safety Act is and how much tech firms need to do to protect children from harmful content. It is a sharp reminder too of the urgent need to find the solution to the much-vexed issue of age assurance.
If, as the ONS states, one in five children has experienced online bullying, with nearly three in four having experienced it on school premises, the evidence, including from this debate, is becoming clear that we need to act now, and the direction of travel is pretty clear.
I will be interested to hear from the Minister what liaison there has been with the Australian Government regarding the decision by the Senate today to ban children under the age of 16 from social media sites.
The temptation throughout this debate is of course to go much broader than the issue of the safety of children online, but the question is about the period when they are in the care of our educators—in school. As set out by my noble friend Lady Thornhill and by the many teachers we have on our Benches, we believe ferociously in the right of head teachers and senior leaders in schools to call the shots. We are also fearful of further regulatory burdens being placed on them. At the same time, the lack of clarity for parents and teachers alike has led to the conclusion that more restriction is necessary, so we must now establish how to make it workable.
There are areas where we need to maintain discretion and safeguards, led by head teachers and senior leaders in schools—first, for young carers who need to stay in touch with family. I thank the Carers Trust for its briefing, which makes it clear that
“only 58% of schools and colleges in our survey said that young carers had access to a phone if needed. It is important that all young carers have access to a phone if they need to check on the person they care for, or to be contacted in relation to their caring role. Schools should ensure that sensitive phone calls can be made in a quiet, private space, rather than in the school office or toilet cubicles”.
There are some heartbreaking descriptions in the report of young carers having to make calls from the toilets to check on the people they look after.
As noble Lords will be aware, we Liberal Democrats highlighted the importance of care, both social care and carers, in the general election. Indeed, ours was the only manifesto to have a separate chapter on the issue. Ed Davey himself was a young carer and fully understands the significance of that role.
Secondly, as other Peers have referenced, school leaders need to be able to exercise discretion when it comes to children who need a phone for medical reasons.
Like the noble Baroness, Lady Goudie, I searched through all the evidence we were sent in preparation for this debate for some information on the inequality issue. I would be grateful if the Minister could elaborate on that. Some nations are moving towards greater restrictions or have had them in place for some time—for instance, France has enshrined such restrictions in law up to the age of 15 on school premises. However, I was interested to read in the Library briefing about the recent lifting of the ban in New York, which happened because it tended to be enforced only in low-income communities. If restrictions are introduced in schools, what measures will be taken or what exploration of that issue there will be? It is vital to ensure that there is no impact on those who suffer already from digital inequality.
If, as legislators, we are to take the step of some form of ban or—as the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, rightly points out—restriction, we need to understand the confusion that already exists, particularly from the perspective of the pupil. As the 5Rights research makes clear, pupils are regularly pushed towards various EdTech products to check their phones with homework apps such as MyEd, Satchel, Mathletics and so many more. In some schools, students are positively encouraged to use their phones to take pictures of what is on the whiteboard. How will that be handled?
As we have heard, the phone is a tiny item burning a hole in the blazer pocket, with updates on social media sites such as Snapchat and TikTok. It can connect to so many great things such as love, friendship and, in my son’s case, sport, but any parent who insists on their child going to secondary school with a “brick phone”—yeah, I definitely tried that—rather than a smartphone ensures that their child is absent from the relevant WhatsApp groups. We need a level playing field. Restrictions at school would fix this.
At the same time, smartphones in schools can be the source of huge pain from bullying, addiction and, in too many cases, blackmail. The recent horrific case in Northern Ireland of Alexander McCartney is still prominent in our minds, with over 3,000 children catfished and hundreds blackmailed into sending intimate images. We need to understand that any victim of a crime of that nature on school premises has to have a social worker assigned. Can the Minister look at this specific issue and see whether the Department for Education can understand just how prolific this is right now? Teaching staff tell me that it is, but what teenager is brave enough to talk within a school when they are a victim of crime within that school? Many of Alexander McCartney’s victims were unable to speak up at all until, tragically, it was too late.
If we are to continue, as the Government intend, with the approach of the previous Government, of guidance only and not regulation, what provisions can be put in place for children to report when they are victims of such crimes on school premises? I suspect that it is far greater than we currently have sight of. How will this be monitored so that we know the extent of the problem? How, within schools, can it be handled with sensitivity and care so that victims feel able to speak up?
From this debate, I think that we are heading in one particular direction, towards some form of regulation beyond guidance. The question is: what form will it take? I look forward to the Minister clarifying when and how.