MP says government must act on phones and social media for children

As I write this article, it has just been reported that the Education Secretary has written to all schools in England, updating them on the government’s guidance on smartphones.

In the letter, Bridget Phillipson said it was “not appropriate for phones to be used as calculators, or for research during lessons,” and they should be absent during break times and lunchtime as well. In other words, the government wants all schools to become phone-free.

This is a welcome move and a step change from a government that had robustly defended its previous guidance as strong enough. In response to my question last November, the Prime Minister said as much himself.

After I shared the transformational effect headteachers have seen after completely banning smartphones, the PM said: “the reality of the statistics is that the majority of schools already ban smartphones.” Clearly, since then, the government has dug into those statistics more.

Though the PM was right to say most schools have smartphone bans in place, only 11% are effective. We know how ingenious teenagers can be – using phones in the toilets, putting dummy phones in pouches, and so on.

While teachers have policed the classroom, heads have been left to assuage the concerns of parents who view a ban as a step too far. I visited Fulham Boys School recently to meet with headteacher David Smith, who instituted a complete smartphone ban in 2024.

I first met David at a roundtable I chaired with Generation Focus, where he spoke movingly about the abuse from parents who were against the ban. Sometimes, he said, the situation became so severe that the police were called.

I imagine David was looking forward to the government banning smartphones from schools, if only to take the decision-making, and in turn any pushback, away from headteachers. But I am sure he will share my concern that Ofsted has been tasked with enforcing the new guidance.

Headteachers have repeatedly told me the government is shirking responsibility on smartphones. They need more support, not additional stress during inspection time.

It is impossible to separate the Education Secretary’s letter from the ongoing conversation about banning social media for under-16s. In fact, the government announced a consultation on this issue in the same statement where they said schools should be “phone-free by default.”

I am pleased the government is consulting on this, rather than rushing ahead with a blanket ban, as some have called for. This is a contentious issue and requires a considered and nuanced approach.

Plenty of options are on the table, including one proposed by the Liberal Democrats, which would see film-style age ratings for social media.

Under our plans, platforms and apps that use addictive algorithmic feeds or host inappropriate content would be restricted to users over 16 years old, while those hosting or tolerating pornographic or violent content would be limited to over 18s. Games, platforms, and apps that pose no harm would have a younger age rating.

This is not about banning or demonising technology; it is about taking a harms-based approach, which allows children to experience the best bits of the online world while protecting their physical and mental health.

The dangers of social media are well-documented and so extensive they could fill this column and the next. But something that has really stuck with me is a comment the Children’s Commissioner for England made before the Education Select Committee in November 2024.

She described social media as the “wild west,” and fourteen months on, that description has sadly never felt more fitting. The recent Grok AI scandal has exposed not only the new and emerging threats of the online world but also the government’s inability to keep pace.

For too long, successive governments have turned a blind eye as addictive-by-design platforms mine our children’s data while exposing them to harmful content. It is time for us to take back control and put our children first.