
Laws may need to be bolstered to crack down on exploitation of child 'influencers', senior MP suggests
Chi Onwurah, chair of the science, technology and innovation committee, said parts of the Online Safety Act - passed in October 2023 - may already be "obsolete or inadequate".
Experts have raised concerns that there is a lack of provision in industry laws for children who earn money through brand collaborations on social media when compared to child actors and models.
This has led to some children advertising in their underwear on social media, one expert has claimed.
Those working in more traditional entertainment fields are safeguarded by performance laws, which strictly govern the hours a minor can work, the money they earn and who they are accompanied by.
The Child Influencer Project, which has curated the world's first industry guidelines for the group, has warned of a "large gap in UK law" which is not sufficiently filled by new online safety legislation.
The group's research found that child influencers could be exposed to as many as 20 different risks of harm, including to dignity, identity, family life, education, and their health and safety.
Ms Onwurah told Sky News there needs to be a "much clearer understanding of the nature of child influencers 'work' and the legal and regulatory framework around it".
She said: "The safety and welfare of children are at the heart of the Online Safety Act and rightly so.
"However, as we know in a number of areas the act may already be obsolete or inadequate due to the lack of foresight and rigour of the last government."
Victoria Collins, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for science, innovation and technology, agreed that regulations "need to keep pace with the times", with child influencers on social media "protected in the same way" as child actors or models.
"Liberal Democrats would welcome steps to strengthen the Online Safety Act on this front," she added.
'Something has to be done'
MPs warned in 2022 that the government should "urgently address the gap in UK child labour and performance regulation that is leaving child influencers without protection".
They asked for new laws on working hours and conditions, a mandate for the protection of the child's earnings, a right to erasure and to bring child labour arrangements under the oversight of local authorities.
However, Dr Francis Rees, the principal investigator for the Child Influencer Project, told Sky News that even after the implementation of the Online Safety Act, "there's still a lot wanting".
"Something has to be done to make brands more aware of their own duty of care towards kids in this arena," she said.
Dr Rees added that achieving performances from children on social media "can involve extremely coercive and disruptive practices".
"We simply have to do more to protect these children who have very little say or understanding of what is really happening. Most are left without a voice and without a choice."
What is a child influencer - and how are they at risk?
A child influencer is a person under the age of 18 who makes money through social media, whether that is using their image alone or with their family.
Dr Francis Rees, principal investigator for the Child Influencer Project, explains this is an 'escalation' from the sharing of digital images and performances of the child into 'some form of commercial gain or brand endorsement'.
She said issues can emerge when young people work with brands - who do not have to comply with standard practise for a child influencer as they would with an in-house production.
Dr Rees explains how, when working with a child model or actor, an advertising agency would have to make sure a performance license is in place, and make sure 'everything is in accordance with many layers of legislation and regulation around child protection'.
But, outside of a professional environment, these safeguards are not in place.
She notes that 30-second videos 'can take as long as three days to practice and rehearse'.
And, Dr Rees suggests, this can have a strain on the parent-child relationship.
'It's just not as simple as taking a child on to a set and having them perform to a camera which professionals are involved in.'
The researcher pointed to one particular instance, in which children were advertising an underwear brand on social media.
She said: "The kids in the company's own marketing material or their own media campaigns are either pulling up the band of the underwear underneath their clothing, or they're holding the underwear up while they're fully clothed.
"But whenever you look at any of the sponsored content produced by families with children - mum, dad, and child are in their underwear."
Dr Rees said it is "night and day" in terms of how companies are behaving when they have responsibility for the material, versus "the lack of responsibility once they hand it over to parents with kids".
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Public think Labour will use new online laws for censorship
New laws will be used by the Government to censor content posted online, a majority of the public believe. There is strong backing for the aims of the Online Safety Act to protect children from online harms but deep scepticism about the consequences for people's privacy and whether it will work in practice, a major poll of more than 2,000 adults by Ipsos has revealed. While 69 per cent supported age verification for platforms hosting harmful content, half of those polled were not confident it will stop under-18s accessing it, according to the poll, published exclusively today by The Telegraph. More than six in 10 (61 per cent) believe the Act will lead to personal data being compromised and a similar proportion (58 per cent) expected increased government censorship. More than four in 10 say it will threaten free speech online. It follows The Telegraph's disclosure of a secretive 'spy' unit which has been used by the Government to target social media posts criticising migrant hotels and 'two tier policing'. Last week the US state department criticised the Online Safety Act over its potential impact on free speech as it warned the British Government had 'repeatedly intervened to chill speech' after the Southport attack. The Act also sparked a political row after Reform UK leader Nigel Farage pledged to repeal the Act as a threat to free speech, prompting Labour to accuse him of being on the side of sex offenders like Jimmy Savile. Keiran Pedley, Ipsos director of UK politics, said the poll exposed a 'significant paradox in public opinion'. 'While there is a clear and broad desire to protect children online, reflected in the strong support for age verification, this is matched by deep-seated scepticism about whether the Act can deliver on its promises,' he said. 'Data breaches and the potential for censorship are highlighted, as the public doubt these measures will be effective against tech-savvy young people. This creates a major challenge for platform operators and regulator, Ofcom: how to implement robust age assurance systems that the public actually trusts and is willing to use.' Nearly half (48 per cent) believe the Act will enable parents to better protect their children from online harms and 46 per cent said it will enable adults to more easily block inappropriate material. However, 44 per cent believe it will limit free speech online, against 40 per cent who do not. A similar proportion (43 per cent) fear it will limit adults' access to 'non-harmful' information online. Half of those polled (48 per cent) said they would be likely to submit proof of age to access a platform or website, against 30 per cent who would not. However, this dropped to 14 per cent for porn sites and 19 per cent for dating apps. More than half (56 per cent) were comfortable with using their email as proof of age but the public drew a line at financial information, with fewer than one in five saying they would use a credit card or banking information. Almost seven in 10 Britons (69 per cent) believed it would be easy for children and young people to get around safeguarding procedures by social media platforms. More than half (51 per cent) feared that it would lead to children using less safe parts of the internet such as the dark web. Nearly a quarter (24 per cent) admitted that they used a VPN when browsing the internet, a technology that enables users to encrypt their communications and hide their IP address. A similar proportion (22 per cent) said they had considered or downloaded a VPN since the introduction of the Online Safety Act. Despite this, four in 10 (40 per cent) believed the Act would prevent children and under 18s from seeing illegal or harmful material, although 52 per cent did not believe it would. While 37 per cent believed the legislation would make platforms and websites remove harmful and illegal content, 51 per cent did not.


The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
Tens of thousands of renters booted out of homes as ‘no-fault' evictions surge – despite government plan to crack down
TENS of thousands of renters have been booted out of their homes amid a rise in "no-fault" evictions. Section 21 notices enforced by bailiffs have risen by 8% over the last year, according to Ministry of Justice figures. 2 That's despite the Labour Government promising to crack down on "no-fault" evictions, which allow landlords to force renters out during their tenancy without needing a specified reason. A total of 11,402 repossessions by county court bailiffs following a Section 21 notice were reported in the year up to June 2025. That's up from 10,576 over the previous 12 months. Labour had pledged to push through new rules that would give more power to tenants and ban Section 21 notices. The rules mean landlords will need to apply for a hearing before they can evict a tenant. But the Renters' Rights Bill hasn't been made into law yet and some landlords have been selling off their properties ahead of the reforms. It was due to come into force this autumn but a report in the Financial Times has suggested it will be pushed back because of delays in Parliament. Campaign group the Renters Reform Coalition raised fears the delay could mean the bill until spring next year. Director Tom Darling said at the time: "Renters will feel let down yet again on hearing that Section 21 no fault evictions are now unlikely to be scrapped until 2026 - a year and a half since the government was elected on a manifesto pledge to 'immediately abolish' them… "Everyone needs a decent, secure home, but with every month that passes thousands more renters are faced with a no-fault eviction." Landlord Responsibilities Homelessness charity Shelter has reacted angrily to the latest Section 21 figures. Spokesperson Mairi MacRae told The Telegraph: "It is unconscionable that more than a year after the Government came to power, thousands of renters continue to be marched out of their homes by bailiffs because of an unfair policy that the Government said would be scrapped immediately." A Government spokesman told the paper: "No one should live in fear of a Section 21 eviction and these new figures show exactly why we will abolish them through our Renters' Rights Bill, which is a manifesto commitment and legislative priority for this Government. "We're determined to level the playing field by providing tenants with greater security, rights and protections in their homes and our landmark reforms will be implemented swiftly after the Bill becomes law." What else is included in the Renters' Rights Bill? It's not just a ban on Section 21 evictions covered in the Renters' Rights Bill. A host of other changes are included in the legislation. These are just a few of the major ones: Ensuring possession grounds are fair to both parties - this will give tenants more security but also allow landlords to recover their properties "when reasonable" Providing stronger protections against backdoor eviction - this will ensure tenants can appeal above-market rents which are designed to force them out Introduce a new Private Rented Sector Landlord Ombudsman - this will mean renters can get impartial help if they have a grievance with their landlord Give tenants strengthened rights to request a pet in the property - a landlord will have to consider this and cannot refuse it unreasonably Apply " Awaab's Law" to the sector - this will set clear legal expectations about the timeframes within which landlords in the private rented sector have to take action to make homes safe where they contain serious hazards. What to do if you've been served a Section 21 notice Here is what you can do, according to the Renters' Reform Coalition… Check the form - a Section 21 notice must be on an official form, known as a 6a form. Your landlord can't issue an eviction notice just by telling you in person or by text/email. Check if the form is valid - you must be given at least two months notice to vacate a property. You also can't be given a Section 21 if your tenancy started less than four months prior. If you are on a fixed-term contract you can't receive a Section 21 unless there is a break clause in it. These things can also make a Section 21 notice invalid: The council has given your landlord an improvement notice to fix things, or an emergency works notice, in the last six months Your deposit isn't in a deposit protection scheme. In that case the landlord must return it to you before they can issue a Section 21 The property is a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) but it doesn't have a HMO licence from the council. In some areas all rented properties need a licence - check with your council The landlord has charged you illegal fees - such as a deposit worth more than five weeks rent, or admin fees. In this case they must return the money to you before serving a Section 21 You never received key paperwork for the property - the Energy Performance Certificate, the 'How to rent' guide, and a gas safety certificate (if there is gas) What to do if the Section 21 is valid You don't have to leave the property at the end of your Section 21 notice. Your landlord still has to apply to court for a possession order and a warrant for eviction, to use court bailiffs to evict you. If you are remaining in your property after the end of a Section 21 notice, make sure you inform your landlord and continue to pay rent while you look for another place to live. If you can't find somewhere to rent and are facing homelessness, tell your council immediately. They should be able to advise you on what to do and provide emergency temporary accommodation or other support. What is the section 21 rule and what are your rights as a renter? THE law - known as Section 21 - means a landlord can ask you to move out without needing a particular reason. The first step of every procedure is the section 21 notice - a letter of notification that the landlord must serve to the tenant, prior to the eviction. The notice to quit is purely informational and doesn't carry any legal power. If you've got a good relationship with your landlord, it might be worth asking them if you can stay in your home for longer. Send a letter to your landlord explaining your situation and keep a copy of any reply you get. Your landlord can't make you leave your home unless they've gone to court to get a possession order and a warrant for eviction. You might be able to challenge your eviction and stay in your home. A section 8 notice can require you to move sooner, but can only be served if the landlord has a reason, such as you breaking the terms of your tenancy. New rules introduced in October 2015 have made it harder to evict you for reporting problems with the property. If you're asked to leave because you've asked for repairs then you should see advice immediately. You can find more tips on how to challenge your eviction on Citizens Advice. 2


Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Rayner embroiled in hypocrisy row over war on allotments
Angela Rayner has campaigned for allotments in her own constituency while overseeing the sell-off of communal gardens elsewhere, it has emerged. The Deputy Prime Minister has been accused of hypocrisy for praising local allotments as vital spaces for children and adults to socialise, while allowing councils to sell off such assets elsewhere. Last month, The Telegraph revealed her department, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, has given the green light for cash-strapped councils to sell off allotments to raise funds. The decision fuelled a backlash from MPs, including Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader, who said it would 'fill many with deep dismay'. The selloff is at odds with comments Ms Rayner made in April that championed a community allotment in her constituency that helps special needs children. She told the Tameside Correspondent the allotment gave the children 'the chance to have fun and meet other local families in an environment that was secure'. While serving in opposition, Ms Rayner Minister also praised the role that allotments in her Ashton-under-Lyne constituency in Greater Manchester played in helping to build a community spirit. In April 2024, just before the election, she visited Curzon Ashton football club which runs an allotment programme for veterans. Ms Rayner praised the scheme, funded by the Armed Forces Covenant Fund Trust, which is aimed at helping ex-servicemen and women suffering from loneliness. In October 2022, she visited a community garden allotment in Droylsden, describing it as a 'fantastic initiative'. Writing on her website at the time, she said: 'Those that work on the allotment say the initiative has also helped them through some tough times and reduced loneliness and isolation in the area. 'Members have used donated wood to make planters, trestles and troughs to grow tomatoes, strawberries, corn and pumpkins. 'They hold regular open days where residents can turn up and take food for free. The fruit and veg bags are topped up with store cupboard essentials to help those struggling with the cost of living crisis. 'The ultimate NIMBY' However, since Labour came to power, Ms Rayner has personally approved the sale of eight allotment sites. Those that have already been sold include a site in Storrington, West Sussex, that will make way for 78 new homes. Two allotments and two in Bolsover, Derbyshire, are also to be closed. Paul Holmes MP, the shadow housing minister, said: 'Rayner has been exposed as an arch-hypocrite, the ultimate NIMBY who thinks selling off everyone else's allotments is fine – just not in her back yard. 'By declaring war on Jeremy Corbyn's treasured allotments, she has sown the seeds for the next iteration of Labour's Left-wing civil war. 'Rather than trying to prune her rivals by any means necessary, perhaps she should grow up and focus on what the country really needs to cultivate.' Under the Allotment Act 1925, any disposal of allotment sites requires Westminster to give the go-ahead. 'No need to sacrifice vital green spaces' Mr Corbyn, who is forming a new Left-wing party to challenge Labour, accused her of hammering a 'nail in the coffin' of community allotments. Writing for The Telegraph, he said: 'Of course, social housing is desperately needed, but we need not sacrifice these vital green spaces to build it. 'We can build on ex-industrial land and take over empty properties. Even then, we should ensure social housing is accompanied by community gardens and adequate growing space.' Ms Rayner's department said in response to the controversy that the rules surrounding the sale of allotments had been in place since 2016. It added that ministerial approvals for sales in 2024, only the second half of which Labour was in power for, had been lower than in previous years. A spokesman said: 'Councils have been able to sell assets since 2016 and these rules have not changed. They should only do so where it is clearly necessary and offers value for money. 'We know how important allotments are for communities and that is why strict criteria are in place to protect them, as well as school playing fields.'