A parliamentary deadlock over protecting children from harmful online content has been resolved, as peers backed down after the government committed to new social media restrictions for under-16s.
The House of Lords and the House of Commons had been deadlocked over the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, specifically concerning the digital content accessible to young people.
The breakthrough came on Tuesday when ministers pledged to implement social media curbs for those under 16, irrespective of the ongoing public consultation.
This move was accepted by Lord Nash, a Conservative peer and former education minister who had spearheaded the pressure within the Lords. Peers had previously voted on four occasions to push the Commons towards accepting a ban on such content.
Lord Nash told the upper chamber: “(I) thank the Government for their active engagement in the matter of social media, albeit rather last minute, and for making a binding commitment to impose some form of age or functionality restrictions for children under 16, and to be focused on addictive features, harmful, algorithmic-driven content and features such as stranger pairing that we know can be most damaging to children’s safety and privacy and we know have led to so much harm and a number of deaths.
“This is very welcome to the millions of parents, voters, teachers, health professionals, and others who have been asking for it, and it is exactly what my amendment would have achieved.”
Education minister Baroness Smith of Malvern paid tribute to Lord Nash and his commitment to children’s safety.
She said: “The Government’s power now reflects the commitments we have made repeatedly in this House that it is a question of how we act, not if we act on this issue.
“The Secretary of State must now use this power following the consultation rather than may. The status quo cannot continue.
“We are consulting on the mechanism, and that is the right thing to do, but we are clear that under any outcome, we will impose some form of age or functionality restrictions for children under 16.
“And I can also confirm that consideration of restrictions such as curfews will be in addition, not instead of, this.”
Baroness Smith added that ministers have “tightened the timeframe for delivery”, with a three-month progress report followed by a 12-month timeline for making regulations.
A single six-month extension can only be used in exceptional circumstances.
However, Liberal Democrat peer Lord Clement-Jones accused the Conservatives of having “effectively laid down their arms” by accepting the concession, saying they should have kept pushing for the Government to act more quickly.
He said: “Giving platforms nearly two years to comply is simply unacceptable and unsellable to the parents whose children are suffering at this moment.”
He pushed an amendment which would “slash the Government’s bloated timetable down” to a vote, but it was rejected 91 to 181, majority 90.
Lord Nash said he shared the concerns over the timeframe but said he had heard the Government’s statement that they intend to work more quickly than they have allowed themselves.
Technology Secretary Liz Kendall told the Press Association that they will come forward with restriction proposals “before the summer” and she hopes legislation will be in place by the end of the year.
Campaigners welcomed the restrictions commitment as a “massive step forward”, but said they have felt “frustrated” by the Government’s pace of action.
In a statement signed by 21 parents whose children have died in circumstances where social media played a role, including Ellen Roome and Esther Ghey, they said: “The Government’s legally binding commitment last night to impose some form of age or functionality restrictions for children under 16 is a massive step forward.
“It is the first time we have heard a clear acknowledgement from the Government that the status quo cannot hold, and that the safety of children online matters more than the convenience of the platforms that have failed them.
“Of course we will hold them to it. Of course we will keep campaigning – each of us owes that to the memory of our children, and we will not stop until the detail matches the promise.
“But this is a real victory, and it belongs to every parent, peer, MP and supporter who refused to let this go.”
