Government to ban social media for under-16s as critics warn of risks for vulnerable children

Children under the age of 16 will be banned from accessing major social media platforms under plans announced by the government, in what ministers have described as a landmark move to “give kids their childhood back”.

The proposals, which are expected to be brought before Parliament before Christmas and come into force in spring 2027, would prevent under-16s from using platforms including TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, YouTube and X. Messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal are not expected to be included.

The government also plans to introduce what it describes as world-leading restrictions on harmful online functions, including livestreaming and communication between children and strangers. The measures would apply more broadly than social media platforms alone, extending to other online services including gaming sites.

Announcing the plans, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “Parents want to keep their kids safe and happy, but the online world has made that harder than ever.

“I’ve heard first hand from families crying out for change and we will do right by them.

“That’s why we’re going further than any country in the world by banning social media for under-16s and putting wider protections in place to give kids their childhood back.

“This is a line in the sand. Tech giants had their chance and failed, but we’re stepping in to protect children, back parents and set a new normal for future generations.”

The government said the approach would mirror the model being introduced in Australia and follow a consultation that received more than 116,000 responses from parents, children and experts. According to ministers, nine in 10 parents support a social media ban for under-16s.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said: “Today we take a bold and significant step, towards creating a safer, healthier life online, for our children and future generations.

“Tech companies have had countless opportunities to keep children safe, yet they have failed to act. That is why we are a taking power away from the tech giants and putting it back in parents’ hands.

“My driving force has always been to give every child, from every background, the best possible start in life. That is what these regulations will deliver.”

Alongside the ban, the government said so-called AI “romantic companion” chatbots designed to simulate sexual relationships or roleplay with users will be restricted to adults aged 18 and over. Ministers are also considering overnight curfews and mandatory breaks in infinite scrolling for under-18s, with further details due next month.

The announcement has received support from some children’s advocates. Mary Glasgow, chief executive of Children First, described the proposals as “a welcome indication of the desire to protect children in the face of a national childhood emergency”.

However, she cautioned that restrictions alone would not address the underlying causes of online harm.

“Given children are likely to find ways around a ban, they will continue to be harmed unless tech companies are forced to implement changes to ensure their products are safe from the start,” she said.

“Bans on social media and smartphones in schools can begin to shift cultural norms, but they will not fix a system designed to maximise profit and ignore protection.”

The British Association of Social Workers (BASW) said the government's proposals represented "a step in the right direction" but warned that a ban alone would not address the underlying causes of online harm.

Responding to the announcement, interim chief executive Professor Samantha Baron said: "The responsibility for keeping children safe shouldn't fall entirely on young people, parents and carers. We need to ask why platforms are designed in ways that can be harmful to children in the first place."

While acknowledging growing concerns about online harms such as grooming, exploitation, cyberbullying and exposure to harmful content, BASW argued that greater responsibility should be placed on technology companies alongside any restrictions on children's access.

Professor Baron said: “BASW believes that children need support to develop the skills, confidence and understanding to navigate the digital world safely, rather than being excluded from it altogether. Keeping children safe online is essential, but safety, rights and participation should go hand in hand. We need solutions that tackle harmful platform design, strengthen safeguarding, and help young people build the skills they need to thrive in an increasingly digital world”.

The association said social media could provide important sources of support and connection for some vulnerable children and young people, including those in care, disabled children, LGBTQ+ young people and unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.

Professor Baron added: "Everyone wants children to be safer online, but we need to be careful that we don't create new problems while trying to solve existing ones. Social media can expose young people to risks, but it can also provide support, connection and a sense of belonging, particularly for children who may feel isolated or vulnerable. We will consider the government bill when it is brought forward, and ensure that social workers are heard on this crucial issue.”

Similar concerns were raised by Nicola Killean, who questioned whether a ban would be effective or proportionate.

“we are disappointed that the uk government has announced today its intention to ban children under the age of 16 from social media,” she said.

“the available evidence does not currently show a blanket ban would make children safer online, and it may inadvertently push children to less regulated or riskier parts of the internet.”

Killean also warned that “enforcing a ban on children takes away the responsibility on platforms to make social media safer” and called for stronger regulation of technology companies instead.

By contrast, Rachel de Souza welcomed the announcement, saying it reflected concerns repeatedly raised by children and young people.

“Children have told me time and again that they want to be protected online,” she said.

“Today’s announcement – banning certain social media platforms for under 16s and stopping children accessing harmful functions such as livestreaming and stranger communication – is a positive response to what children have been telling me. However, these measures will only be as strong as their enforcement – which I will be watching closely.”

She added: “We need to reset the debate – from banning children to banning the companies who fail to show that their services protect children’s safety and wellbeing.”

The government said it would work with Ofcom to develop robust age-assurance measures and enforcement arrangements. Ministers have also pledged to ensure the regulator has sufficient resources to oversee the new regime alongside its existing responsibilities under the Online Safety Act 2023.

The proposals represent one of the most significant interventions in children’s online activity ever attempted in the UK and are likely to fuel ongoing debate across social work, education and child protection sectors about how best to balance safeguarding, participation rights and young people’s access to digital communities.