The UK government is pondering a bold move to ban social media for under-16s amid mounting concerns over young people's safety online. This deliberation comes as Ofsted is tasked with tightening phone use policies in schools, with an expectation of creating “phone-free” environments. Following appeals from over 60 Labour MPs and voices like Esther Ghey, mother of the slain teenager Brianna Ghey, there's increasing pressure to address this pressing issue.

Brianna's mother highlighted the negative impact social media had on her daughter, limiting real-world interactions. A similar ban was enacted in Australia in December 2025, marking a pioneering step that other nations are reportedly considering. The UK consultation will gather opinions from parents, youths, and community groups on whether such a ban would be beneficial.

Experts are contemplating methods to enforce stricter age verifications by social media companies, possibly requiring them to curtail features that encourage excessive use. Ofsted is also preparing to provide more rigid guidelines to reduce phone usage in schools. The UK government has scheduled a response to this consultation for the summer.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall clarified that existing Online Safety Act laws were only beginning points, affirming the government’s commitment to preventing harm to children. Meanwhile, conservative leader Kemi Badenoch criticised the government's pace, claiming it's merely replicating her party's previous suggestions. There’s urgency from figures like Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson, who warned against further delays in “protecting our children.”.

Educational figures and organisations, such as the National Education Union and the Association of Schools and College Leaders, have welcomed the consultation but stressed the need for prompt, effective action. However, concerns remain about Ofsted being responsible for monitoring school phone policies, with calls for more governmental support instead.

While the House of Lords prepares to vote on a potential ban, Professor Amy Orben and Dr Holly Bear caution that evidence of effectiveness remains limited. Suggestions lean toward reducing harmful content exposure and enhancing digital education. Organisations like the NSPCC, Childnet, and the Molly Rose Foundation view the proposed ban as insufficient, suggesting it might shift issues rather than resolve them, according to the BBC.

Key Takeaways

• UK considers under-16 social media ban, inspired by Australia's law.

• A consultation will gather feedback from the public and organisations.

• Experts suggest age checks and content regulation instead of a full ban.

  

Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2026-01-21

 

 

will this impair the activities of the muslim grooming gangs ? of course not but its a lot easier than vetting our guests and less likely to upset their apologists. A starmer classic

Stop snowflake culture cancelling free speech.

This tyrannical Labour government is becoming increasingly hard line.

1. Proposed Social Media Bans and Online Censorship

2. Expansion of Digital Identification Systems (The "Brit Card")

3. Establishment of Elite Police Task Forces for Online Monitoring

4. Use of Anti-Terrorism Laws Against political protestors/opponents

5. Crackdown on Free Expression and Social Media Posts

6. "Two-Tier" Policing and Justice

7. Proposed Liability for "Offensive" Workplace Conversations

8. Continued Use of Draconian Public Order Acts

9. Cancelling local elections

10.  Proposals to Abolish Jury Trials for Specific Offenses

If it looks like a fascist and smells like a fascist...

 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

This tyrannical Labour government is becoming increasingly hard line.

Ignoring facts and repeating the same old tired nonsense 24 hours later doesn't make it any more true.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Proposed Social Media Bans and Online Censorship

So social media and the internet should be completely unregulated then?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Expansion of Digital Identification Systems (The "Brit Card")

On-line identification systems obviously already exist. What's your objection to this new scheme?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Establishment of Elite Police Task Forces for Online Monitoring

There are already specialist police units e.g. anti-fraud squad, anti-terrorist units. What's the problem in having a unit which specialises in on-line crime?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Use of Anti-Terrorism Laws Against political protestors/opponents

Would be a problem if it were true.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Crackdown on Free Expression and Social Media Posts

Posts which invite rioting, racial hatred, etc are against the law. Are you suggesting that they shouldn't be?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. "Two-Tier" Policing and Justice

Again would be a problem if it existed outside of your imagination.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Proposed Liability for "Offensive" Workplace Conversations

If employers are aware that their employees are breaking the law then they beat some responsibility and should be prosecuted. Don't you agree?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Continued Use of Draconian Public Order Acts

Such as?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1. Cancelling local elections

Is not happening (How many more times do I have to post the same link?)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9y32nkxgzo

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

1.  Proposals to Abolish Jury Trials for Specific Offenses

Yes, specific offences not all offences.

You raised this point before and I posted a link - I can't be bothered to search for it again - outlining the rationale for this proposal. In essence, the UK justice system cannot cope with the number of cases and needs reforming. Serious crimes e.g. rape, murder, terrorism, etc will still be st jury trial.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

If it looks like a fascist and smells like a fascist...

 

Indeed, although clearly we have a different idea of what a fascist looks and smells like.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

This tyrannical Labour government is becoming increasingly hard line.

1. Proposed Social Media Bans and Online Censorship

2. Expansion of Digital Identification Systems (The "Brit Card")

3. Establishment of Elite Police Task Forces for Online Monitoring

4. Use of Anti-Terrorism Laws Against political protestors/opponents

5. Crackdown on Free Expression and Social Media Posts

6. "Two-Tier" Policing and Justice

7. Proposed Liability for "Offensive" Workplace Conversations

8. Continued Use of Draconian Public Order Acts

9. Cancelling local elections

10.  Proposals to Abolish Jury Trials for Specific Offenses

If it looks like a fascist and smells like a fascist...

 

It's the Conservatives, in both the Lords and Commons, who are mostly pushing this. Hopefully Starmer will put a brake on it, at least until the results of Australia's ban are known (10 years should do it).

8 minutes ago, RayC said:

Ignoring facts and repeating the same old tired nonsense 24 hours later doesn't make it any more true.

So social media and the internet should be completely unregulated then?

On-line identification systems obviously already exist. What's your objection to this new scheme?

There are already specialist police units e.g. anti-fraud squad, anti-terrorist units. What's the problem in having a unit which specialises in on-line crime?

Would be a problem if it were true.

Posts which invite rioting, racial hatred, etc are against the law. Are you suggesting that they shouldn't be?

Again would be a problem if it existed outside of your imagination.

If employers are aware that their employees are breaking the law then they beat some responsibility and should be prosecuted. Don't you agree?

Such as?

Is not happening (How many more times do I have to post the same link?)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9y32nkxgzo

Yes, specific offences not all offences.

You raised this point before and I posted a link - I can't be bothered to search for it again - outlining the rationale for this proposal. In essence, the UK justice system cannot cope with the number of cases and needs reforming. Serious crimes e.g. rape, murder, terrorism, etc will still be st jury trial.

Indeed, although clearly we have a different idea of what a fascist looks and smells like.

Another apologist for the fascist Labour government.

Revolting stuff.

12 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

It's the Conservatives, in both the Lords and Commons, who are mostly pushing this. Hopefully Starmer will put a brake on it, at least until the results of Australia's ban are known (10 years should do it).

Starmer's back benchers want it therefore it will happen.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-social-media-teen-labour-lords-b2904979.html

Starmer himself wants it as well of course, but is paying lip service to "giving it careful consideration" to try to minimize the backlash when he does it.

42 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Another apologist for the fascist Labour government.

Revolting stuff.

Anyone who has the temerity to offer a coherent counter argument to your simplistic, bigoted worldview is labelled an apologist and fascist.

An obvious example of someone unable to defend their position.

2 minutes ago, RayC said:

Anyone who has the temerity to offer a coherent counter argument to your simplistic, bigoted worldview is labelled an apologist and fascist.

An obvious example of someone unable to defend their position.

I gave 10 examples of fascistic behavior by the Labour government. I could have given 20.

The fact that you support them speaks volumes.

Hiding behind some #bekind mantra no longer works for you leftist authoritarians Ray. We see you. The country sees Starmer. He's toast.

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I gave 10 examples of fascistic behavior by the Labour government. I could have given 20.

The fact that you support them speaks volumes.

Hiding behind some #bekind mantra no longer works for you leftist authoritarians Ray. We see you. The country sees Starmer. He's toast.

You gave examples of actions which you describe as fascist. I showed that they were nothing of the sort. It is just another example of you attempting to redefine a word (something fascists are adept at).

I'm not the one doing the hiding, Jonny. Your mask is slipping. For all your superficial championing of free speech, you'd like nothing better than to silence those opposed to your diversive views. That's fascism.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

I gave 10 examples of fascistic behavior by the Labour government. I could have given 20.

The fact that you support them speaks volumes.

Hiding behind some #bekind mantra no longer works for you leftist authoritarians Ray. We see you. The country sees Starmer. He's toast.

Early morning, late night arrests at home so nobody sees it happening.

Straight out of the fascist playbook.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Starmer's back benchers want it therefore it will happen.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-social-media-teen-labour-lords-b2904979.html

Starmer himself wants it as well of course, but is paying lip service to "giving it careful consideration" to try to minimize the backlash when he does it.

Well, if all parties vote for it, it will happen. Disappointing but democratic, although I'd prefer it to have been in a manifesto. I still hope that sense will prevail, and more research will be done. Knee-jerk laws are never good.

16 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Early morning, late night arrests at home so nobody sees it happening.

Straight out of the fascist playbook.

Maybe the police should send a SMS to drug dealers, terrorists, etc along the lines of, 'We'll be calling @05:00 tomorrow morning. We do hope that you'll be in, but if this is inconvenient please let us know and we will arrange a more suitable time'.

1 hour ago, RayC said:

Maybe the police should send a SMS to drug dealers, terrorists, etc along the lines of, 'We'll be calling @05:00 tomorrow morning. We do hope that you'll be in, but if this is inconvenient please let us know and we will arrange a more suitable time'.

You equate drug dealers and terrorists with someone making nasty tweets?

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

You equate drug dealers and terrorists with someone making nasty tweets?

No.

8 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Stop snowflake culture cancelling free speech.

Free speech from kids?

it is not banning for under 16's
it is enforcing KYC for ALL users.

15 hours ago, still kicking said:

Free speech from kids?

We coul pretty much see. read or say anything during my early education in the 1940s and 1950s in the UK. In those days we were expected to be tough enough to deal with any fallout.