Shortly, families across the country will gather to celebrate Christmas. Elves will have been busy making presents for Children, and Santa will be loading his sack. Parents will look forward to the joy on their children’s faces as they unwrap them.
For many teenagers, this joy might take the form of a new computer game to play with friends over the holiday. Maybe Minecraft, Fortnite, or the latest Mario Kart.
Yet if one Liberal Democrat peer has her way, no one under the age of 16 would be able to play an online game that allows them to talk or interact with another player.
Baroness Benjamin is backing a series of illiberal amendments to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
require all regulated user-to-user services to use highly-effective age assurance measures to prevent children under the age of 16 from becoming or being users.
While the stated intent is to ban under-16s from social media, the definition of a “user-to-user service” under the Online Safety Act 2023 is far broader. It covers almost any service that allows users to create content or communicate online. This includes social media, messaging apps, forums, and, critically for teens (and gamer parents who game with their children), Multiplayer video games.
In practice, this would ban under-16s from:
Fortnite, Roblox, Minecraft (multiplayer modes)
Xbox Live chat and PlayStation Network messaging
Any online game with friend requests, group chats, or in-game messaging
Millions of teenagers would lose the freedom to enjoy games and social interaction in the name of “safety.” Even complaining on family WhatsApp would be impossible, as they would be banned from that too.
Such a restriction would severely impact not just young people’s ability to play games or socialise, but also access support services, or engage in or discuss political content or ideas. For a party that welcomes young people’s involvement in political life, this seems to go against some of our core values.
If that weren’t enough, Baroness Benjamin is pushing another amendment that would require software installed on every device that spy on all private communication in an attempt to automatically detect child sexual abuse material (CSAM):
Any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software which is highly effective at preventing the recording, transmitting… and viewing of CSAM using that device.
This is Orwellian in scope: government-mandated software that you can’t tamper with installed on every device. Automated systems cannot be perfect. They risk locking users out of their own devices, punishing legitimate activity, or failing to detect harmful material. Only this week, there were reports of a developer working on AI safety being banned from their Google services as CSAM was accidentally found in a data set they were working on. Beyond the practical problems, this represents a profound intrusion into private life and a threat to civil liberties.
Rather than imposing blanket bans or invasive monitoring, there are smarter, more liberal ways to tackle online harms.
Open Rights Group has proposed measures that focus on:
Interoperability: Allowing users to move safely between platforms, which encourages competition and gives parents and children more control over their digital lives.
Empowering users: Giving children, parents, and educators tools and education to manage risks without sweeping restrictions.
Targeted regulation: Focusing on harmful content rather than punishing lawful activity, protecting both safety and freedom of expression.
Liberty is not a burden to safety; it is the foundation of it. We should be equipping families and communities with choices, not imposing authoritarian controls over their digital lives. My door is open to any Liberal Democrat politician who wants to discuss interventions that achieve safety without restricting liberty.
* James Baker is a Liberal Democat member who works for the Open Rights Group
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
Tom Bailey
Daniel Walker
Matt (Bristol)
Hywel
7 Comments
Well, we’ve all seen the Netflix series Adolescence. The International Classification of Diseases, created by the World Health Organization, has classified (ICD-11) and included new diagnosis for both ‘Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder’ and for video game addiction ‘Gaming Disorder’.
The link between Gaming and ‘Softcore’ porn is a real and present danger to children and young people. Perpetrators or ‘CamGirls’ are engaged in providing livestream content against the apparent veneer of bedrooms and Gameboys..
Society is exploiting tens of thousands of young ‘Adrian Moles’ (!) …
@James Baker
Action is needed now and I support these proposals. The ‘better’ measures should be close behind but, sadly experience shows that will not happen any time soon as tech works against them.
Online games rooms in controlled environments could be a way forwar. Encouraging young people out of their bedrooms and into social engagement.
Thanks for replying David. I play online games with both my sons who are under 16. I don’t see why any Government has the right to deprive my family of engaging in a pastime that we all enjoy and which doesn’t harm anyone. Isn’t liberalism about letting people do what they want? All sorts of other activities carry much higher chances of harm.
Here we go again….
Just like with porn age verification, these measures could be easily circumvented and the idea of “tamper-proof system software” on “any relevant device” is just technically illiterate.
I’m not sure if these proposals are just performative because someone wants to be seen to be doing *something*, or if they genuinely have so little understanding of the technology that they don’t realise how ineffective it will be?
I definitely don’t consent to the government robbing me of my right to communicate with people without being forced to provide ID. Since when did the UK become a papers please society? I’m legitimately sick of all the orwellian stuff that’s been coming into force this year like the OSA and now their digital ID plans.
The dangers to young people of the internet are, I would argue, outweighed by the value of finding like-minded peers who share their interests, their conditions, their disabilities or their life situations. I don’t know what my neurodivergent child (now adult) would have done without the support and solace from an online community of people with similar differences and interests. She has online friends whose life situations are truly dreadful and whose online community is the only support they have – the trans adolescent with an evangelical family comes to mind.
I agree James, though, I take issue with lots of screen time for children under 16. The crack cocaine of this is gaming.
Typical knee jerk nonsense from peers and government. Liberals, unite. If this is Democracy, I want no part of it. The hegemons of the tech industry have taken their stance, one of massive corrupting influence on the population. How should government react? Educate the people, mandate for change in corporate reach into our lives and personal data, lessen the burden on us and protect the consumer and our sovereign rights. Do not restrict us further, the repressed individual, or your children will suffer like we do.
As the world coalesces into ‘spheres of influence’, with US > Venezuela, Russia > Ukraine, China >Taiwan. People need to listen the the call of the Individual>Community, rather than the call of the weak self, where we get picked off like fish in a barrel.