The United Kingdom is seeing mounting political momentum behind a proposal to ban children under the age of 16 from using social media platforms, following the landmark implementation of a similar law in Australia and growing concerns about the impact of online environments on young people’s mental health and wellbeing. More than 60 Labour Members of Parliament (MPs) have this week signed an open letter urging Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to back an Australia-style restriction as part of amendments to the Children, Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
The letter — organised by Labour MP Fred Thomas and co-signed by members across the party’s spectrum — calls on the government to raise the minimum age for social media access from the current effective threshold up to 16, or to legislate similar protective measures that compel technology firms to enforce this limit. MPs argue that unregulated access to platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and X exposes children to addictive use patterns, anxiety-inducing content, and decreased wellbeing, citing feedback from constituents and young people alike.
Australia’s example has played a significant role in shaping the debate in Westminster. In December 2025, the Australian Parliament’s Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act formally prohibited under-16s from holding accounts on major platforms, with enforcement beginning in December. The legislation requires tech companies to implement robust age-verification measures or face substantial fines, and has already led to the removal of millions of suspected youth accounts from social networks — a development sparking both praise and criticism internationally.
While Prime Minister Starmer has signalled openness to stronger protections, his government has not yet formally adopted a ban, instead emphasising the need to review evidence from the Australian rollout before committing to similar UK legislation. Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has acknowledged the strength of public concern but also highlighted worries from organisations like the NSPCC about potential unintended consequences — including children migrating to unregulated corners of the web where harmful content could be even more prevalent.
Critics of a blanket prohibition argue that placing a universal ban might inadvertently push minors toward less secure or anonymous digital spaces that are harder to oversee, making children more vulnerable rather than safer. They propose solutions that focus on technology-company responsibility, better age-verification tools, and enhanced educational programmes about healthy digital engagement.
Despite continuing debate, the government may soon face a decisive moment when peers in the House of Lords vote on an amendment mandating an under-16s ban within 12 months of the Children, Wellbeing and Schools Bill becoming law. If passed, the measure could trigger significant shifts in how digital platforms enforce age restrictions and how families and schools approach online safety over the coming years, aligning the UK more closely with emerging global norms on child digital protection.
