Exclusive:Parents condemn Labour MPs' vote against under-16s social media ban despite manifesto pledge
Parents have expressed frustration with Labour over its lack of urgency in implementing a social media ban for under-16s
Parent campaigners have branded Scottish Labour “duplicitous” after its MPs failed to back a key Holyrood election pledge.
An amendment to legislation currently passing through Westminster would ban social media use for under-16s.
Scottish Labour’s manifesto includes a promise to introduce such a ban.
However, some 25 Labour MPs - including cabinet minister Douglas Alexander - voted against the amendment.
The rest of the Westminster group abstained.
Harry Amies, the founder of parent group Unplug.Scot, said: “I can't believe this is pre-meditated - they must have not thought it through, but currently from the outside, it comes across to parents as duplicitous.
"It says it in black and white on their publicity - we will back a UK-wide ban on social media for under-16s.
“But, simultaneously, 500 miles away in the corridors of Westminster where few can see, 25 of them, including Douglas Alexander, have walked through lobbies to block that exact legislation. “None have voted for it. That is the opposite of “backing”. This is blocking a ban.”
Nine of the MPs who blocked the amendment are in government roles, Mr Alexander is in cabinet and two of the Scottish Labour MPs are whips.
The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is in the final stage of the UK legislative process, known informally as “ping-pong.”
It is due to return to the Lords for consideration of Commons amendments on Monday.
Last month peers voted 266 to 141 in favour of Conservative former minister Lord Nash's amendment that would stop social media use for children.
It was the second time peers defeated the government over the proposal, which would give ministers 12 months to decide which social media platforms should be unavailable to under-16s.
The UK government has plans to run pilot projects in the homes of 300 UK teenagers to look at the effects of social media bans, digital curfews and time limits on apps.
Mr Amies added: “It makes their manifesto promise look like a barefaced lie.
“Corporate ministerial responsibility is a fundamental principle of our constitution.
“It means Government ministers can’t tell voters they support one policy, while implementing the diametric opposite, because it destroys trust in politics as a whole.
“Given the conflict in policy they cannot support both the government and the Scottish Labour manifesto. An MP’s life is full of tough choices.
“This is one.
“What is so upsetting to parents here is they appear to be putting misplaced party loyalty before
protecting children and what they know is the right thing to do.
“They clearly know it’s the right thing to do because they’ve put it in their Scottish manifesto.
“I hope the Government makes this a free vote and lets the Scottish Labour MPs vote with their
manifesto pledge, or better, simply adopt the ban amendment and make it Labour policy.”
At the Westminster debate last month, Lord Nash became emotional as he spoke of bereaved parents who have campaigned for a change in the law following the deaths of their children.
The peer, a former education minister, said: "I don't want to be standing up here in six or 12 months banging the same old drum with even more bereaved parents in the gallery."
Scottish Labour education spokesman Paul O’Kane said the part is “fully committed” to taking action to keep kids safe online and tackling harms related to social media.
“On May 7 Scotland is electing a new Scottish government, and I am clear that a Scottish Labour government will ban mobile phones in classrooms after years of dither and delay by the SNP, and will back a full ban on social media for under 16s,” he said.
In Edinburgh, a pilot scheme launched in May last year has seen pupils at Portobello and Queensferry High Schools sealing their phones in "Yondr" pouches – which can only be opened at the end of the day for most students.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.