More than 60 Labour MPs have appealed to the Prime Minister to ban children under the age of 16 from using social media platforms.
In an open letter to Sir Keir Starmer on Sunday, the 61 MPs said that "previous governments" have done "too little to protect young people from unregulated, addictive social media platforms."
They urged him to follow the example of Australia, which imposed a ban in December. According to reports, several other countries are considering similar legislation.
Sir Keir has not ruled out a ban, saying "all options are open." The House of Lords is scheduled to vote next week on a Lib Dem motion that would ban social media platforms based on age ratings, similar to films.
The letter, signed by several committee chairmen and former frontbenchers, said that many constituents have contacted MPs expressing concerns about the impact of social media on young people.
It read: "Across all our constituencies, we're getting the same message: children are anxious, unhappy, and unable to concentrate on their studies. They're not learning the social skills they need to thrive, nor are they getting the experiences that prepare them for adulthood." The MPs said that "across the world, governments are recognizing the severity of this crisis and taking action." They cited Australia's ban and said they hoped Denmark, France, Norway, New Zealand, and Greece would do the same.
They wrote that the UK "risks being left behind" on this issue.
The letter is believed to have been organized by Plymouth Moor View MP Fred Thomas and signed by several individuals, including Education Select Committee Chair Helen Hayes, former Whip Vicky Foxcroft, former Education Minister Catherine McKinnell, and former Shadow Cabinet Minister Richard Burgon.
This is the latest example of political pressure on the government to impose a social media ban.
Meanwhile, a Lib Dem proposal, soon to be considered in the Lords, would require social media platforms to be age-rated, similar to films.
Under this plan, platforms using addictive algorithmic feeds or hosting "inappropriate content" would be banned from users over 16, while sites containing "graphic violence or pornography" would be adult-only. Several children's charities and online safety organizations have opposed a complete ban on social media for those under 16.
The NSPCC, Childnet, and the suicide prevention charity Molly Rose Foundation were among 42 individuals and organizations who argued on Saturday that a ban would be the "wrong solution."
"This will create a false sense of security, leading children – and the dangers they face – to seek refuge elsewhere online," they wrote in a joint statement.
Read Also
"While well-intentioned, a blanket ban on social media will not deliver the improvements to children's safety and well-being that they so desperately need."
They stressed that existing laws should be "strictly enforced" to ensure that social media sites, personalized games, and AI chatbots are not available to those under 13, while all social media platforms should have evidence-based blocks for features deemed dangerous for children of various ages.
Ian Russell, father of 14-year-old Molly Russell, who took her own life in 2017 after viewing suicide and self-harm content online, said the government should enforce existing laws instead of "taking a heavy-handed approach."
The online safety campaigners – who founded the Molly Rose Foundation – have set up a foundation in their daughter's memory, and told that the ban could have "unintended consequences" and "cause more problems."
Thank you for reading this content.