Social Media Ban for Under-16s

Viscount Camrose Excerpts
Tuesday 16th June 2026

(2 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
My driving force, and the reason I came into politics, has always been and will always be to give every child, from every background, the best possible start in life, because that is how they and our country succeed. Today, we take a decisive step towards creating a safer, healthier life for our children and future generations. We are giving children their childhood back. I am clear-eyed about all the challenges that social media brings, for adults as well as children, and technology constantly changes. Today’s announcement is not “one and done”, or the end of the story. There is still much more to do, but this is a landmark day—a day when we stand with parents, charities, bereaved families and all those who have campaigned for change. This is your moment. It is a day when we take power away from the tech giants, who have had countless opportunities to keep children safe, and put it in back in parents’ hands. It is a day when we give our children the freedom to be children again, so that they have the best possible start in life. I commend this Statement to the House”.
Viscount Camrose Portrait Viscount Camrose (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the Statement and indeed for alerting me in advance of the announcement, which was much appreciated. This announcement—although coming, I am afraid, rather later than many noble Lords would have hoped—is extremely welcome on these Benches. I thank in particular my noble friends Lord Nash and Lady Barran for their tireless campaigning on this issue. Had they and others not developed their arguments so well and expressed them so compellingly, I do not believe we would have reached this important moment. Needless to say, most of all I thank and offer my respect to the parents of the children who have lost their lives at the hands of social media. They have bravely and wisely directed their unthinkable pain into a legacy that will protect countless children for the future, and their efforts will not be forgotten.

A social media ban for this age group has been something that Conservative parliamentarians, both here and in the other place, have long advocated. We have been joined in support by Labour Back-Benchers, Liberal Democrats, campaigners, parents, schoolteachers and charities in calling for action to be taken to protect children. Yet just months ago, the Prime Minister directed his Members to vote against the same policy he is now so urgently championing. During the passage of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, noble Lords were instructed by the Government Whip to vote against the amendments tabled by my noble friend Lord Nash. Save for a small handful of admirably brave, principled Labour Peers, more than 150 voted against the ban not once but three times.

The Government explained that they did so in order to conduct a consultation, but the evidence and support in favour of a social media ban were already overwhelming. In fact, it had already been adopted by other countries. It is not clear at this point what value this consultation has added. I think it is worth highlighting two opportunity costs of inaction. First, as the bereaved parents have stated, the longer you leave change, the worse it can be for children. Secondly, had the Government acted decisively at the time, the consultation could have been used as a means of refining the detail of the ban. With that in mind, I have several questions for the Minister.

First, are the Government yet ready to set out a detailed timetable of what legislation is coming, and roughly when, to bring this about? Given the extra work that will fall on Ofcom, what additional resources will it be provided with? Will tech companies be obliged to contribute towards the budget, or will the funding come from the taxpayer? When will which platforms fall into scope be published? I thank the Government for listing some platforms that will be banned, but we need a clearer, principles-based explanation as to what platforms and what functionality will be banned or limited for which age group. Can the Minister confirm today that digital ID will not be a mandatory requirement for those wishing to access social media, both children and adults alike? Can the Minister comment on reports today that age verification will be conducted at operating system level rather than by the platforms themselves? Lastly, do the Government feel that new frictions for all users, including adults, of age-gated platforms are unavoidable?

The social media ban is welcome. I was surprised to learn, however, that the Government are also considering overnight curfews and infinite scrolling interventions for those under 18. There may well be a case for this, but I do not see how it is possible to believe simultaneously that 16 year-olds have the wisdom and judgment to vote to elect a Government but not the wisdom and judgment that 18 year-olds might bring to bear on what social media functionality to use. It strikes me as psychologically wildly incoherent.

But, to conclude positively, although we are disappointed by the time it took the Government to arrive at this position, we should not lose sight of the significance of the step being taken today. The protection of children online should never be, and I think is not, an area of disagreement between us. These Benches will of course continue to scrutinise the detail of the proposals and hold the Government to account for their delivery. However, where measures genuinely strengthen protections for children and support families, the Government will find in us a constructive and willing partner. I look forward to working collaboratively with Ministers to ensure that these reforms are implemented effectively and provide the lasting protections that children deserve.