Social Media: Ban for Under-16s
Debate between Tony Vaughan and Wera Hobhouse(2 days, 6 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Tony Vaughan
Can I just clarify something? Is the off-ramp part of the features and functions piece, which is post spring, or will that be part of the ban in the regulations that will be put before Parliament before December?
Wera Hobhouse (in the Chair)
Order. Before the Minister replies, may I encourage everybody to speak through the Chair? I do not want to be too pompous about it, but the convention is that the debate goes this way, not that way. Before you start a conversation among yourselves, please remember that.
Tony Vaughan
I thank Leo and all the 217,682 signatories to the petition, as well as all hon. Members who spoke today. Each speaker agreed that the Government need to be tougher on social media companies and to crack down on harmful and addictive features, which we all agree that children should not be subject to.
The hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) spoke powerfully about the impact of eating disorder content. My hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington) shared nine solutions, including on algorithmic feeds and other things that should be cut out. My hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth Moor View (Fred Thomas) quoted numerous statistics about social media companies crowding out young people’s time and having awful impacts on them.
We all agree that the status quo is not acceptable. The reality is that, today, under-16s across the country are subject to these platforms. The Ofcom report, which many Members referred to, acknowledges that children’s access to these platforms is not materially reducing. I support a ban, but with a possible off-ramp where, if social media companies can show that their products are safe, we should allow children to access them. I accept the premise of Leo’s petition, which is that young people should have access to social media if it is safe and can safely provide a place of connection, community and support. It is important that we as parliamentarians acknowledge that, and that young people do not feel that we are paternalistically telling them what they should be able to do.
The reality, however, is that with these platforms in their current form, we cannot wait. We cannot allow our children to continue to be subject to those harms while we work out how to force social media companies to clean up their act. In fact, the ban will drive innovation. If those companies ultimately want to allow children to access them, the ban will drive them to find products that are safe and suitable for children.
My hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling), and others, made the important point about regulating harms rather than platforms. I understood that the Minister ultimately agreed with that analysis.
Wera Hobhouse (in the Chair)
Order. May I remind the hon. and learned Member that a winding-up speech is not a new speech? It is two minutes. If he could come to an end, that would be great.
Tony Vaughan
I think we have a lot more consensus than we did at the start of the debate, and I again thank the petitioners and everyone who spoke. Let us hope that this Labour Government will deliver the change that we have all been waiting for on this issue.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered e-petition 757233 relating to the proposed ban on social media for under 16s.