Children face two-hour limits on Snapchat and TikTok as government cracks down on ‘compulsive' screen time
Peter Kyle, who is due to make an announcement in the autumn, warned of the effects on young people's sleep and their ability to focus on studying for exams, saying he was concerned about"the overall amount of time kids spend on these apps" as well as their content.
Among the ideas being seriously considered are a two-hour cap per platform, while a night-time or school-time curfew has also been discussed, according to reports. Last year Australia passed a law to ban all under 16s from social media, although the UK is not expected to go that far.
Mr Kyle said he was 'looking very carefully about the overall time kids spend on these apps'.
"I think some parents feel a bit disempowered about how to actually make their kids healthier online,' he told Sky News.
"I think some kids feel that sometimes there is so much compulsive behaviour with interaction with the apps they need some help just to take control of their online lives and those are things I'm looking at really carefully.
"We talk a lot about a healthy childhood offline. We need to do the same online. I think sleep is very important, to be able to focus on studying is very important," he added.
He added that he wanted to stop children spending hours viewing content which "isn't criminal, but it's unhealthy, the overuse of some of these apps".
"I think we can incentivise the companies and we can set a slightly different threshold that will just tip the balance in favour of parents not always being the ones who are just ripping phones out of the kids' hands and having a really awkward, difficult conversation around it," he added.
It comes after Angela Rayner warned on Tuesday that time spent online is a major factor in the weakening social cohesion in the UK, along with deprivation and immigration.
Warning that the UK faces a repeat of last year's summer riots unless 'the government shows it can address people's concerns', the deputy prime minister said that the issue was having a 'profound impact on society'.
She told colleagues: "Economic insecurity, the rapid pace of de-industrialisation, immigration and the impacts on local communities and public services, technological change and the amount of time people were spending alone online, and declining trust in institutions was having a profound impact on society."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
15 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump says he is reducing 50 day deadline for Russia deadline
TURNBERRY, Scotland, July 28 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said he was reducing the 50 day deadline he gave Russia over its war in Ukraine, saying he was disappointed in Russian President Vladimir Putin. "I'm disappointed in President Putin," he said, speaking alongside British Prime Minister Keir Starmer ahead of their meeting in Scotland. "I'm going to reduce that 50 days that I gave him to a lesser number." He did not give a new deadline.
Leader Live
17 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Minister insists fuel supplies not under threat despite oil refinery closure
State Oil – the parent company of Prax Group, which owns the Lindsey refinery in North Lincolnshire – collapsed into administration last month, putting hundreds of jobs at risk. Michael Shanks pledged to support the workers who are facing redundancy, but said there is little action the Government can take to improve the statutory redundancy offer. Speaking in the Commons, he said: 'We have worked urgently to ensure the safety of the refinery site, the security of fuel supplies and to protect workers. 'This has also allowed time for bidders to express an interest in the site. 'Following a thorough process, the official receiver has rigorously assessed all the bids received and concluded that sale of the business as a whole is not a credible option.' He added: 'A package has been offered to all those directly employed at the refinery, which guarantees their jobs and pay over the coming months. 'And alongside the usual support that is offered to workforces in insolvency situations, the Government will also immediately fund a comprehensive training guarantee for those refinery workers to ensure they have the skills needed and the support to find jobs, for example, in the growing clean energy workforce.' The Lindsey site is one of only five large oil refineries remaining in the UK after the recent closure of the Grangemouth plant in Scotland. Prax Group is led by majority owner and chairman and chief executive Sanjeev Kumar Soosaipillai, who bought the Lindsey oil refinery from French firm Total in 2021. Shadow energy minister Andrew Bowie, who tabled the urgent question, claimed 625 jobs are at risk as he pressed the minister for an update on its investigation into the collapse of the company. He also asked: 'What, if any, assessment has been made into the UK's resilience given the steep reduction in our refining capacity over the past six months? 'What, if any, assessment has been made on the increased reliance on imports that will be necessary as a result of the reduction in British refining capacity?' Mr Shanks said fuel supplies had 'adjusted' in the past few weeks, adding: 'Our assessment suggests there isn't an immediate risk to fuel supplies locally or in the wider area, but we'll continue to monitor that.' On the investigation, he said: 'There is not much I can update the House on at the moment, because the insolvency service is carrying out that investigation.' Conservative MP Martin Vickers, whose Brigg and Immingham constituency includes the oil refinery, said he wanted to see 'the maximum support given to those workers'. Mr Shanks replied: 'We have looked and pushed and pushed to see if there is more action Government can take to change or to give any additional payments. 'It's not possible for Government to do that, not least because the insolvency service has to follow very specific rules in terms of creditors and what their parameters are to operate in the event of an insolvency. 'But I do think the owners of this company have profited from this business, and they should do the right thing by the workforce that delivered that for them.'
The Herald Scotland
17 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
More economic trouble is coming. And there's only one escape route
Unfortunately, although politicians say they like economic growth they generally have no idea how to nurture it and often act in ways which seem designed to slow the economy down. The UK Government's latest Employment Rights Bill is a perfect example. There are many things which encourage faster growth: a stable and not stifling regulatory regime, opportunity, social attitudes to wealth creation. In general the direction of travel for these factors is unhelpful but there is another obvious key factor - arguably more powerful than all the rest - which is curiously overlooked. That is the availability of money. For an entrepreneur to turn a great idea into a fledging business takes money and to grow that business into a company which creates jobs and wealth takes more money still. If we look back to the last period of really strong growth in the UK economy, the mid-1980s to about 2007, a lot of favourable factors were at play but the one which mattered most was that money was available in a way which it isn't today. During that time of strong growth Scotland was extraordinarily lucky to have the Bank of Scotland as its key economic facilitator. RBS may have been bigger but it never fostered growth in the same way as the Bank of Scotland did. A business person needing money for growth could go to see their local bank manager, who actually existed and whose job was to grow the bank's business from their branch. If the amount needed was bigger, you went up to the Head Office on the Mound to see somebody, probably called Gavin, Peter or Colin, who took time to understand your business and provided funding to support its growth. There would have been no Stagecoach or Sports Division able to grow rapidly whilst the founders retained control without Bank of Scotland providing finance based not on lending against assets but against the expected cashflows of the business. No public subsidy was involved, no stupid questionnaires to make sure woke targets were being met, just sensible people making commercial decisions which enabled hundreds of companies to get off the ground and grow. Read more It's time to cast aside prejudice and go for the cash Can anyone truly say the Scottish Parliament been a great success? I can't Who will tell the truth? Economically, we are in a mess The financial crisis of 2008 put paid to all that funding for growth and it has never been replaced. What sank RBS and HBOS was not supporting entrepreneurs but the same good old mistake behind almost all banking crises: too much lending against overvalued property. The price of the state bailout though was the dismantling of a support system which had served us well. The UK and Scottish Governments have tried to put in place schemes which provide sources of investment. The SEIS and EIS schemes where investors receive tax relief when investing in young companies is effective, the various government-backed banks including the Scottish National Investment Bank, rather less so. These new schemes provide equity finance whereas most entrepreneurs want debt; they don't want to give up too much control of their companies. Where debt finance is available for companies it now nearly always requires a personal guarantee from the directors of the borrower which acts as a deterrent and negates the whole point of having a limited liability company. What is needed to increase significantly the supply of money to fund growth is to switch the banking system back on as a major provider of risk funding. This won't happen on its own, the UK Government has to give it a shove. The former Bank of Scotland HQ on The Mound (Image: Newsquest) Each of our banks should be given targets for entrepreneurial lending and their progress monitored and reported on regularly. Entrepreneurial lending needs to be defined but its definition should be broad: lending to a company of up to £10million, the company must be a trading company and not own property or land. No personal guarantees allowed. Keep it simple. What the bank should get in return for this lending is that the interest and fees they earn are not subject to corporation tax. One or more banks will see the opportunity to get tax-free revenue by extending loans which are risker in order to help businesses grow. The regulator's instinct to do everything possible to stop such lending must be curbed. Mistakes must be allowed to be made. Not a spectacular initiative for a politician to announce, no ribbons for them to cut but if something like this was introduced it really would help growth.
