Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg has criticised proposals to increase age limits on social media.
Speaking on GB News he said: “The government announced today that it will consult on proposals for an Australian style ban on social media for all children under 16, affecting apps such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram.
“This is the latest in a long standing power struggle between the over-mighty state and the family, and it’s important to remember that the protection of children is always the censor’s excuse.
“Social media is not fundamentally evil. It is, fundamentally, good. When I look at my children’s lives, if they want to speak to each other, they can do it in an instant.
“It’s much easier than when I was their age, assuming I ever was young, having to write or ring up, bothering parents and not even getting through – sometimes getting through the operator. It was a much more complicated means of communicating.
“Of course, the ease with which young people now communicate brings some risks with it, but there are always risks in childhood. In the 19th century, people sent hate Valentines, so it’s not new that there should be difficult and unkind communications.
“It’s part of life which parents can control.
“Under these government plans, technology companies could also be forced to block or limit addictive features…which encourage users to log on every day, and infinite scrolling once again.
“But this could easily be resolved by parents. I can, and I do, set the hours during which my children can use their telephones and tablets. I can set time limits for individual apps, as well as in total.
“On some occasions, my children have asked if they could have less time because they want to concentrate on revising for exams and wanted to remove a distraction. But also, on a day-to-day basis, I can adjust them. I’ve just extended Sixtus so he can let Nanny watch GB News’ State of the Nation before I came out.
“Parents have an idea of what is in their children’s interests, so I set limits on a day to day basis. During the holidays, they may want a little more time. They want to speak to their friends a little bit later in the evening, and that’s fine. It’s a discussion. It’s not a totalitarian regime.
“I wish I were the Victorian pater familias, but I’ve never managed that. I can place limits on age related content to stop them getting stuff that’s really pretty grisly.
“But children also grow up and they want more independence, more freedom, more liberty, and that’s the conversation with their parents, not the state, as they grow up at different rates.
“What may be suitable for one 15-year-old is unsuitable for another 15-year-old. It’s not something the state can deal with on an individual basis, and you can’t disinvent modern technology.
“And what happens when they’re 16 and they get thrust into this dangerous world of modern technology regardless? Apparently, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has written to ministers to warn that the use of mobile phones among children has become a public health emergency, with screen time and harmful online content having a dangerous effect on their wellbeing.
“This may be a problem for some; of course it is. But overall, it sounds as over the top as the claims of climate emergency made by hysterical local councils. It is, in fact, a subtle way of giving the state more control, which is bad news for all of us.
“It’s bad for parents because it takes control and responsibility for them, and it’s bad for children because it stops them developing in a natural home environment.
“It seems to me that we don’t want our children to grow up at all. We now want to wrap them in cotton wool to stop them taking any risks. A childhood is a period of growing up when proportionate risks need to be taken. As a father of six, I think social media is a matter for parents, not the state.”
