UK MPs reject social media ban for under-16s as government explores new restrictions

Parliament has voted down a proposal to block under-16s from social media, opting instead to give ministers broader powers to regulate platforms as debate grows around screen time, online harms, and students’ wellbeing.

UK MPs have rejected a proposal to ban social media for children under 16, voting instead to give ministers new powers to introduce targeted restrictions following a government consultation on online safety.

The decision comes as concerns grow across schools and families about screen time, online harms, and the role social media plays in students’ wellbeing and learning.

The amendment, introduced during debate on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, was defeated by 307 votes to 173 in the House of Commons.

Instead, MPs backed a government proposal to give ministers broader powers to restrict children’s access to social media services, with any measures expected to follow the outcome of a consultation launched last week.

MPs rejects blanket ban and back flexible regulation

Under the alternative approach, the UK government could introduce restrictions on social media access for certain age groups, limit children’s use of VPNs, restrict features considered addictive such as autoplay, and review the age of digital consent.

Launching the consultation, Liz Kendall says: “create a digital world that gives young people the childhood they deserve and prepares them for the future”.

During the parliamentary debate, ministers argued that an outright ban could create new risks. Jess Phillips says: “Many parents and campaign groups have called for an outright ban on social media for under-16s.”

She adds: “Others, including children’s charities, have warned that a blanket ban could drive children towards less regulated corners of the internet or leave teenagers unprepared when they do come online.”

The proposal had been supported by campaigners and some MPs who argue parents face an impossible position managing the effects of social media on children.

Sadik Al-Hassan, MP for North Somerset, says: “Parents like me are locked in a daily battle that they simply cannot win alone, fighting platforms that have been specifically designed to keep children hooked.”

He adds: “As a pharmacist, I know if a drug were causing such measurable harm for 78 per cent, it would be withdrawn, reformulated or placed behind a counter with strict controls on who could access it.”

Students say bans alone may not address online challenges

The parliamentary vote comes as debate continues among students and educators about how social media affects focus, wellbeing, and relationships.

SimpleStudy, an online learning platform for UK secondary school students, says young people are already discussing the idea of restrictions versus an outright ban as they navigate high levels of screen time and social media use.

One student says: “Banning social media platforms for under 16s doesn’t address the real mental health challenges young people face. Instead we should focus on educating about responsible uses, creating safe spaces for support”.

Hannah, 16, from Dublin, says: “I believe that a social media ban for under-16s is not the best solution. While I understand the concern around online safety, I think the real issue is how social media is used rather than its existence.”

She adds: “Instead of banning it completely, we should introduce stronger age-based limits and clearer consequences for harmful behaviour online.”

Magdalene, 15, from Monaghan, also questions whether a blanket ban would work in practice. She says: “As a teenager navigating the digital landscape, the proposed social media ban for under 16s raises a lot of concerns. We’re all connected online; social media is how we as teenagers stay in touch, a ban could serve these vital connections, impacting friendships and creating isolation.”

She adds: “Empowering young people to manage their lives online thoughtfully helps build resilience and confidence while a ban would limit opportunities for connections and growth.”

Schools continue to assess impact of phones and social media

The debate around regulation also intersects with ongoing discussions in education about phones, student focus, and classroom behaviour.

Eva, 17, from London, says: “A phone ban may encourage young people to talk more face-to-face, building their communication skills which is helpful in the real world.”

She adds: “A ban could reduce distraction lessons, improving students' concentration levels as phones can make it tempting to multitask.”

However, other students argue that removing social media entirely may not address underlying challenges. Michela, 17, from Dublin, says: “A proposed social media ban for under 16s comes from a place of concern, but as a 17 year old who uses social media every day, I see how much good it can actually do.”

She adds: “Taking social media away doesn’t take away the problems we deal with in school, at home, or in our heads. It just takes away one of the few places where we feel can connect with people our age all across the world.”

The UK government’s consultation will now examine options for regulating social media access for children, including minimum age requirements and restrictions on certain platform features.

ETIH Innovation Awards 2026

The ETIH Innovation Awards 2026 are now open and recognize education technology organizations delivering measurable impact across K–12, higher education, and lifelong learning. The awards are open to entries from the UK, the Americas, and internationally, with submissions assessed on evidence of outcomes and real-world application.