The UK government, led by the Prime Minister, and the Labour party, led by Sir Keir Starmer, are unveiling a series of new proposals and actions aimed at significantly restricting children's online activity and enhancing their safety. These initiatives come amid growing concerns about the impact of social media and artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots on young people, particularly those under 16 years of age.

Key among the government's proposals is a potential ban for children under 16 from social media platforms, with action potentially being taken as early as this year. This move is supported by a consultation, set to launch in March and report back in three months, which will specifically consider an Australia-style ban. The Prime Minister has vowed that no social media or internet platform will receive a 'free pass' when it comes to children's safety, emphasizing the need to act swiftly on age concerns and address addictive features like 'auto-scrolling'.

A significant focus is also being placed on AI chatbots, following reports of them offering 'dangerous' diets as low as 600 calories a day to youngsters without age checks. The i Paper highlighted instances where OpenAI's ChatGPT provided 1,000-calorie meal plans and Grok offered 600-calorie plans, despite warnings of potential danger. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall expressed strong concerns shared by the Prime Minister and Sir Keir Starmer about the impact of these chatbots on children. The government aims to extend online safety rules to cover AI chatbots, ensuring they protect users from illegal content and do not form 'friendships' that lead children to inappropriate places, an issue highlighted by the Grok scandal where Elon Musk's X AI was found to generate sexualized images.

To facilitate rapid legislative changes, ministers plan to introduce 'Henry VIII powers' through amendments to existing bills: the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill and the Crime and Policing Bill. These powers would allow for the speedy implementation of measures, such as enforcing age limits via secondary legislation, restricting infinite scrolling, and setting age limits on Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) which can bypass age verification. While this approach allows for quick action, critics, including Lord Nash, have raised concerns that it might undermine parliamentary scrutiny. Downing Street has indicated that MPs and peers will have a chance to debate and vote on the specific policies emerging from the consultation.

Sir Keir Starmer has also pledged action on young people's access to social media, stressing that while a complete ban for under-16s is a possibility, the issue is nuanced. He acknowledged arguments from organizations like the NSPCC, which warn a ban might push children to 'even darker places', and concerns from young people who use social media for news. Starmer, like the Prime Minister, believes the 'status quo is not good enough' and immediate action is required, using the same legislative mechanisms to act 'within months, not years'. He emphasized the evolution of social media from simple platforms to complex systems driven by algorithms and endless scrolling, which he believes are 'quietly harming our children'.

Another crucial measure is 'Jools' Law', which aims to force social media companies to preserve children's data after death. This initiative is inspired by Ellen Roome's campaign after she was unable to access her son Jools' social media data following his death, which she suspects was linked to an online challenge. Amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill will require platforms to preserve a child's data within five days of a reported death, making it accessible to coroners or Ofcom.

Despite the government's stated urgency, opposition figures have expressed skepticism. Lord Nash described the consultation as 'delay dressed up as process' and urged Labour to support his amendment for a social media age limit of 16. Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott criticized the government for 'smoke and mirrors' and 'inaction', calling their claims of 'immediate action' incredible when the consultation 'does not even exist' yet.