Plan to ban smart phones in schools watered down by MP | Global News Avenue

The bill campaigner hopes that the MP who bans smartphones in schools admitted that he acknowledged that the proposal to obtain government support provided a contribution.

Josh Macalister told the BBC News that he is now “focusing on areas where we can get government support so that we actually take some action in this area”.

Macalister, a Labour MP in Whitehaven and Workington, said earlier that the legislation would provide principals with Legal support makes schools free.

A new version of the so-called safer mobile phone bill calls for further research and advice on parents on smartphones and children’s use of social media.

Members of Congress will hold a second reading in the House of Commons on Friday, and the bill will be debated on Friday.

It has been watered since it was first proposed in October last year. It was originally intended to ban smartphones in schools and ban addictive social media algorithms, but it will now allow the government to study the issue further, rather than change it immediately.

Asked about changes to the legislation to his plan, former teacher Macalister said he was “working closely with the government” to propose “practical measures” and that it was “optimistic” that ministers would support it.

Private members’ bills rarely include them in the law without government support, but they are opportunities for backseaters to ask questions.

There are growing calls for restrictions on the use of children’s smartphones, including local schools’ merger to modify their mobile phone policies, while parent groups are joining forces to postpone the use of smartphones for children.

However, some in favor of smartphones say they provide opportunities for children to develop, including socializing, with little evidence to support the limitations of school equipment.

McAllister said the proposal to ban schools from smartphones was removed from the bill after the government said it was “not something they were going to consider.”

The bill initially included in October 2024:

• All schools have no legal requirements for mobile zones
• Age online companies can obtain data consent from children without their parents’ permission, up from 13 to 16
• OFCOM’s authority needs to be strengthened so that a code of conduct can be implemented to prevent children from being exposed to applications and services “addiction”
• If needed

These recommendations have been removed and the bill now calls for:

• Chief Medical Officer provides guidance on children’s use of smartphones and social media within 12 months
• Education Minister proposes a study to study the impact of social media on children within 12 months
• The government is going to come back within a year to say whether this will raise the digital consent era from 13 to 16, meaning online companies can receive child data without their parents’ permission until that age

Joe Ryrie, leader of the smartphone free childhood movement, said the final provisions of the bill were “far from enough.”

The Liberal Democrats accused the government of making “heavy progress” on the issue and recommended that the minister succeed in pushing the bill to “downset”.

McAllister said he “hopes the sport to be a persuasive movement, put the issue at the center of national debate and bring it to parliament”.

He added: “What we will see in the government’s response to the bill is that they are ready to take some positive steps on this issue and are committed to taking further action, which I think is really positive.”

The debate in the House of Commons on Friday was raised in a report where most young people support the idea of ​​putting stricter rules on social media, while more than 60% say they think the harm outweighs the benefits.

The study came from think tanks, the New UK project and voting companies even more jointly surveyed more than 1,600 people, aged 16 to 24.

It found that three quarters say stronger rules are needed to protect young people from social media, which has been rated as the most negative impact on the mental health of adolescents.