Angela Rayner has broken the cover of urging Sir Keir Starmer to push ahead with a total ban on social media for under-16s, ratcheting up the pressure on a prime minister already grappling with one of the most politically charged decisions of his premiership.
The former deputy prime minister told Sir Keir to “just make a decision and do it”, arguing that the case for banning under-16s from accessing platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and X was “so clear” that further delay was unavoidable. His intervention, made on Alastair Campbell's The Rest Is Politics podcast, came as Whitehall closed a government consultation on Tuesday that weighed in on an Australian-style ban on underage social media.
For Britain's small and medium-sized businesses – particularly owner-managers who have come to rely on social media as their shop window, sales channels and marketing department are rolled into one – the costs can be high. Any move to limit access to under 16s would force a rethinking of age verification technology, advertising targeting and content moderation, at a cost that would come equally to small operators.
Cabinet split, open consultation and prime minister in two minds
While Westminster has recently speculated that Sir Keir will eventually bring back a full ban as part of the “low-hanging political fruit”, Labor is clearly divided over the proposal. Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, and Wes Streeting, the health secretary, are both said to have cooled on a blanket refusal, favoring stricter working rules around strict age limits.
Doubts are confirmed by the first evidence from the southern hemisphere. Five separate studies have suggested that at least 60 per cent of Australian children under the age of 16 either ignore the ban outright or have already found ways around it. Data published by the Australian regulator confirms that between 60 and 64 percent of children who still use major platforms reported that no action was taken against their accounts, a figure described in the eSafety Commissioner's review of age limits for eSafety social media.
Mr Campbell, Tony Blair's former communications director, told the newspaper he did not understand the government's reluctance. “I don't understand why the government doesn't just stop social media until you're 16,” he said. “I think the country has decided to do this, but we've just had a bloody, seemingly endless process.”
Ms Rayner agreed, citing the delay as a sign of a wider drift. “It just makes people feel 'make a decision and do it',” she said. “Why wouldn't you just make a decision when it seems obvious that's what you have to do? This is the working state that is exactly what we need to be.”
Bereaved families urge caution before any announcement
On Tuesday, Sir Keir is scheduled to meet parents who have lost children as a result of their online experiences. But campaigners have warned the prime minister of a politically correct announcement that goes ahead of the evidence.
Ian Russell, whose daughter Molly took her own life at 14 after being deluged with internet depictions of self-harm and suicide, said: “Any government announcement now would make a mockery of consultation. They need to see the results before they make a decision.
Another model that is gaining ground within Whitehall is the banning of so-called “jobs” – a surgical approach that would force social media companies to turn off features such as infinite scrolls, recommendation algorithms aimed at children, autoplay, live streaming and “scores” that reward daily access. That approach would be consistent with guidance already set out in Ofcom's tougher rules on malicious algorithms aimed at young users under the Online Safety Act. The regulator's own protection of children's performance codes already requires platforms to implement more than 40 practical safety measures by 2026, including age verification and content controls covering suicide, self-harm and eating disorders.
What the policy means for British business
The poll suggests parent and bench desire for an Australian-style ban remains strong, and at least one Whitehall source told The Sun on Sunday that the policy was “liberal and popular”, the kind of legacy announcement Sir Keir could push hard-working MPs.
For SMEs, the results go far beyond the theater of Westminster. The compliance costs from the Online Safety Act are already reshaping the way UK businesses operate online, with fines of up to 10 per cent of global profits taking a toll on employers. A legal ban would widen that perimeter of strict compliance, potentially reducing advertising inventory aimed at family audiences and forcing smaller consumer-oriented brands to redraw acquisition strategies built around the skewed youth landscape.
Sir Keir has always kept an “open mind” on the question, pointing out the real benefits children get from going online and emphasizing his preference for freeing up addictive design features rather than blocking access outright. Worse, the government has already legislated for flexibility to introduce any agreed change, up to and including a total ban, without bringing a new primary law before Parliament.
“We will discuss, but I think I will be absolutely clear: things will not stay as they are,” said the prime minister. “This is going to change. I don't think the next generation will forgive us if we don't act now.”
Whether that change comes in the form of a hard age cap or a subtle structural overhaul, business owners would be wise to start war games for both scenarios now. Political pressure from Sir Keir's own cabinet suggests the decision is no longer a matter of if, but when – and how much – the net will be released.
