More than 60 Labour MPs have called on the prime minister to impose a ban on under-16s access to social media platforms.
In a open letter to Sir Keir Starmer on Sunday, the 61 MPs said “successive governments” had done “too little to protect young people from… unregulated, addictive social media platforms”.
They urged him to follow the example of Australia, which brought in a ban in December. Several other countries are said to be considering similar laws.
Sir Keir has not ruled out introducing a ban, saying “all options are on the table”. The House of Lords is due to vote next week on a Lib Dem proposal that would see social media platforms restricted based on film-style age ratings.
The letter, which includes the signatures of a number of committee chairs and former frontbenchers, said many constituents had contacted the MPs to express concerns about the effects of social media on young people.
It read: “Across our constituencies, we hear the same message: children are anxious, unhappy and unable to focus on learning. They are not building the social skills needed to thrive, nor having the experience that will prepare them for adulthood.”
The MPs said that “around the world, government are recognising the severity of the crisis and taking action”, noting Australia’s ban and that “Denmark, France, Norway, New Zealand and Greece are expected to follow suit.
The UK “risks being left behind” on the issue, they wrote.
The letter, thought to be organised by Plymouth Moor View MP Fred Thomas, was signed by education select committee chair Helen Hayes, former whip Vicky Foxcroft, former education minister Catherine McKinnell, and former shadow cabinet minister Richard Burgon, among others.
It is the latest example of political pressure on the government to propose a social media ban.
Last week, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said she would introduce an under-16s ban if her party won the next election.
Meanwhile, the Lib Dems’ proposal soon to be considered in the Lords would see social media platforms graded with age ratings in the same way films are.
Under the plan, platforms using addictive algorithmic feeds or hosting “inappropriate content” would be restricted to users aged over 16, while sites with “graphic violence or pornography” would become adult-only.
Several children’s charities and online safety organisations have voiced opposition to a blanket social media ban for under-16s.
The NSPCC, Childnet, and suicide prevention charity the Molly Rose Foundation were among 42 individuals and bodies to argue a ban would be the “wrong solution” on Saturday.
“It would create a false sense of safety that would see children – but also the threats to them – migrate to other areas online,” they wrote in a joint statement.
“Though well-intentioned, blanket bans on social media would fail to deliver the improvement in children’s safety and wellbeing that they so urgently need.”
Existing law should be “robustly enforced” to ensure social media sites, personalised games and AI chatbots were not accessible to under-13s, they urged, while all social media platforms should have evidence-based blocks for features that are considered risky for children of different ages.
Ian Russell, the 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 rather than “implementing sledgehammer techniques”.
The online safety campaigner – who established the Molly Rose Foundation in his daughter’s honour – told the ‘s Newscast that a ban could have “unintended consequences” and “cause more problems”.
If you have been affected by the issues raised in this article, help and support is available via Action Line.
