logo
France's toddler screen ban is pure state overreach

France's toddler screen ban is pure state overreach

Spectator5 hours ago

The French government is preparing to ban all screen time for children under the age of three. The measure, announced by the Minister of Labour, Health, Solidarity and Families, Catherine Vautrin, will form part of a broader national plan to combat screen use among the very young. Due to be launched in the autumn, the policy will ban tablets, televisions and smartphones in nurseries, hospitals, and other childcare settings, with sanctions for anyone who breaks the rules. The aim, according to the minister, is to change behaviour around early childhood and screen use.
What next? A ban on loud toys? Fines for bedtime past eight o'clock?
'This is how you change things', Vautrin told Le Journal du Dimanche. 'You state a principle, and little by little, it becomes anchored in people's minds.'
A 2022 study by Inserm, France's national medical research body, tracked 14,000 children from birth and found that early screen time, particularly before age two, was associated with delayed speech development and reduced socialisation at nursery school. The same children were more likely to show concentration problems later in primary school. Vautrin cites this research to justify the governments agenda. But what's interesting is that the researchers stopped short of calling for a ban. They pointed instead to the importance of parental interaction and content quality. In other words, common sense.
And there it is. Not content with banning smoking at bus stops and removing outdoor heaters from café terraces, the French state has now decided to parent the parents. And it starts with Teletubbies. The measure may sound harmless, even well intentioned, but it marks yet another step in the Macronist habit of turning private judgement into public regulation.
Nobody disputes that toddlers don't benefit from screen time. The NHS in Britain advises parents to avoid it entirely before age two. But in Britain, such advice remains just that: advice. Ofsted does not bar nurseries from showing a short film or using a digital device if it's part of a wider educational context. The state leaves space for discretion.
France will not. Vautrin's move echoes the earlier French ban on outdoor smoking, not because enforcement is practical, but because stating a principle is seen as a way of reshaping society. The technique is always the same. Issue a prohibition, turn it into a campaign, publish guidelines, introduce fines, and wait for the culture to shift. Screens today, sugar tomorrow, and after that who knows.
It's this compulsive reflex to legislate behaviour that reveals the French state's underlying philosophy. Trust is not part of the equation. Citizens, even parents, are not to be guided or encouraged, but managed. And if we push back, we're branded irresponsible or worse.
The irony is that a government that cannot staff its own schools properly now wants to police what toddlers watch in a hospital waiting room. French nurseries, already under pressure, will now be expected to enforce rules that have little to do with care, and everything to do with performance. The spectacle of state virtue.
By contrast, the UK's approach is more relaxed and arguably more effective. The NHS's guidance on screen use is based on moderation and common sense. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health explicitly declined to set arbitrary limits for parents, saying what matters most is context, content and family interaction. British ministers assume most parents are capable of knowing that ten episodes of Teletubbies in a row probably isn't ideal. They don't necessarily reach for the statute book to enforce what can be solved with a bit of judgement.
Of course there'll always be parents who overdo it, who hand over a screen too often or for too long. But why impose rules on everyone else? There are times when giving a child an iPad makes perfect sense. In a waiting room. On a flight. We've all done it. The problem is not the occasional screen. It's turning rare indulgence into routine. And that is something most parents are perfectly capable of managing.
But Macron's France is different. Every issue, however small, becomes a matter for the state. And every household, a target for reform. Behind the screen ban is something bigger. The idea that family life must be shaped, top down, in accordance with the latest official theory on wellbeing, risk and social cohesion. One can only imagine what is next. A ban on loud toys? Fines for bedtime past eight o'clock?
The real risk is that even reasonable advice becomes politicised. What might have worked as a gentle public health message will now land as another round of social engineering. And those who resist will not be engaged, but blamed.
I don't need the government standing over my shoulder while I raise my child. Children belong to their parents, not to the state.
Good parents already know that too much screen time isn't healthy. They do not need a government minister telling them what to do. What they need, what everyone needs, is a government willing to trust them. It's not the screen ban itself that is the problem. It's the belief behind it, the idea that the state always knows better. That's what needs to be switched off.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Government recognises financial challenge in mitigating two-child cap
Government recognises financial challenge in mitigating two-child cap

The Independent

time7 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Government recognises financial challenge in mitigating two-child cap

The Scottish Government recognises paying for the flagship policy of ending the two-child benefit cap will be a 'challenge', a minister has said. Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said applications will open for mitigation of the welfare policy on March 2, with payments being made 'as soon as possible' afterwards – meaning it will likely take place just ahead of the Scottish Parliament election. She said the move will lift 20,000 children out of relative poverty, according to Scottish Government estimates. However the minister also told MSPs she is 'deeply disappointed' that Scotland's interim child poverty targets have not been met, saying there is no single reason for them being missed. Plans to mitigate the two-child cap were first announced last year but First Minister John Swinney said his Government needed time to set up the system. Introduced under the Conservatives, the two-child cap limits benefits in most cases to the first two children born after April 2017. Labour has cited fiscal constraints for keeping the cap, but in May the Prime Minister said he will be 'looking at all options' to tackle child poverty. Ms Somerville said Scotland cannot wait for a decision at Westminster and implementing it in March – 15 months after the initial announcement – will be the fastest a new social security has even been introduced in Scotland. Following an announcement on Tuesday morning, Ms Somerville addressed MSPs on the Government's 'tackling child poverty delivery plan'. She said it is 'deeply disappointing' that interim child poverty targets have not been met, but rates are nevertheless coming down, and she pledged to 'build on that progress' ahead of 2030 targets. Conservative MSP Liz Smith pressed the minister on how the mitigation policy will be funded, saying the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) has noted a 'widening gap' between the Scottish Government's welfare spending and its funding. She said: 'Can I ask where the other cuts will be made to pay for that mitigation?' Ms Somerville said her Government is 'resolute' in tackling economic inactivity, saying people should not be punished for having children. Decisions from the UK Government have pushed more people into poverty, she claimed. Discussing the SFC's forecasts, she said: 'Those are choices that we have taken – to ensure that we are protecting disabled people and children. 'Because we need to protect them from the effects of poverty. 'Those are decisions which will obviously be set out in the work that is being taken forward by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance as we look to the sustainability of our finances. 'We recognise that challenge.' She said the 'easiest way to deal with that challenge' would be for the UK Government to scrap the two-child cap and proposals to cut disabled benefits. Scottish Labour's Paul O'Kane said: 'For all the rhetoric we've had from the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary after 18 years in office, relative child poverty after housing costs has only fallen by 1%. 'When the Cabinet Secretary says rates are broadly stable, what she means is that the dial hasn't shifted.' The Scottish Fiscal Commission said the mitigation will cost around £150 million next year, before rising to nearly £200 million by the end of the decade. Ms Somerville said around 43,000 children would benefit initially, rising to 50,000 by the end of the decade. In March, the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned the policy could harm incentives to work because some of the lowest-paid workers could earn more on welfare than in employment. The move has been welcomed by anti-poverty charities, who have urged the UK Government to scrap the cap, with the Child Poverty Action Group saying the move would lift 350,000 children across the UK out of poverty.

Starmer: US not poised to intervene in Middle East conflict
Starmer: US not poised to intervene in Middle East conflict

The Independent

time7 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Starmer: US not poised to intervene in Middle East conflict

Sir Keir Starmer has played down the prospect of imminent US intervention in the Middle East after Donald Trump abruptly left a major global summit amid raging conflict between Israel and Iran. The Prime Minister said 'nothing' he had heard from the US president suggested Washington was poised to get involved as western leaders continue to press for de-escalation between the two long-time foes. Mr Trump departed the G7 conference in Canada a day early for 'big stuff' and urged Iranian citizens to evacuate Tehran, which triggered speculation that American forces might join Israel. Asked whether the US could get involved as the conflict threatens to spiral into all-out war, Sir Keir told reporters with him at the conference in Kananaskis: 'There is nothing the President said that suggests he's about to get involved in this conflict, on the contrary, the G7 statement was about de-escalation.' In a statement on Monday before Mr Trump's departure, leaders had reiterated their 'commitment to peace and stability' but stopped short of calling for a truce between Israel and Iran. The Prime Minister said the wording 'faithfully reflects' the discussions of allies around the table. 'I don't think anything that the President said either here or elsewhere suggests that,' he said when pressed on the prospect of imminent US involvement. 'I think that the statement really speaks for itself in terms of the shared position of everybody who was here at the G7.' The Prime Minister was asked whether Britain would potentially support the US if it took action to limit Iran's nuclear programme, which leaders have condemned. 'On nuclear, Iran's nuclear programme, I've been very clear. We are deeply concerned about the programme. I certainly do not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon,' he said. 'But the thrust of the statement is in accordance with what I was saying on the way out here, which is to de-escalate the situation, and to de-escalate it across the region rather than to escalate it.' Hours after signing the Middle East agreement, Mr Trump has suggested that he was not interested in a truce while also attacking French President Emmanuel Macron, who had told French media that the US leader was leaving early to negotiate a ceasefire. Asked whether he was disappointed in the apparent US move to act unilaterally in relation to the conflict amid concerns the G7 could be sidelined, Sir Keir played down divisions. He told reporters: 'I think what (the president) said was he wanted to go beyond a ceasefire effectively and end the conflict. 'And I think he's right about that. I mean, a ceasefire is always a means to an end.'

From Channel crossing to channel surfing: Migrant arrivals' TV licence fees, bowling trips and trampoline visits have been funded by the taxpayer
From Channel crossing to channel surfing: Migrant arrivals' TV licence fees, bowling trips and trampoline visits have been funded by the taxpayer

Daily Mail​

time13 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

From Channel crossing to channel surfing: Migrant arrivals' TV licence fees, bowling trips and trampoline visits have been funded by the taxpayer

Illegal migrants' TV licence fees, bowling trips, cinema visits and even trampoline park outings were paid for by the taxpayer, Reform UK says. The party's 'Doge' unit found more than £24,000 had been spent by Kent county council on the extravagant visits, alongside spending sprees at JD Sports and PCWorld. They claim the finances also shows spending on crazy golf trips, skating and luxury hair extensions. The extraordinary audit discoveries came after the Nigel Farage-led group vowed to slash spending at the authority, having seized it from the Tories in the local elections earlier this year. It comes as the number of illegal migrants who have crossed the Channel so far this year passed 16,000 - with 1,500 already making the journey this month. Almost 40,000 have crossed in 713 inflatable dinghies since Labour took power last year. 'For too long, British citizens have been prosecuted for not paying for a TV licence, yet asylum seekers are having theirs paid for by taxpayers,' Reform's Doge leader Zia Yusuf said. 'The old Tory regime at Kent county council has a lot to answer for. Reform will fight for taxpayers.' The party's 'Doge' unit found more than £24,000 had been spent by Kent county council on the extravagant visits, alongside spending sprees at JD Sports and PCWorld. Pictured: File photos The Reform cost-cutting squad follows the US Doge, which was launched during Donald Trump's presidency with the Tesla billionaire in charge to cut federal spending. Reform's previous efforts to root out what it sees as unnecessary spending by authorities it controls have so far struggled to make any impact. New Greater Lincolnshire mayor Andrea Jenkyns vowed to remove diversity officers from the county council, which later confirmed it did not employ any. And a recent claim by Mr Yusuf that the party would scrap low traffic neighbourhoods in the 10 council areas it controls was undone when it was found that there were none. But the spending on migrants will likely be a bitter pill for taxpayers a week after it was announced that the average home's council tax bill will increase by £359 by 2029. Ministers are working on the basis that councils will increase the rate by 5 per cent a year for the next three years, the Spending Review revealed. More than 900 migrants crossed the Channel in small boats on Friday, with a further 228 in four boats intercepted yesterday. The number to cross so far this year now stands at 16,543 in 290 boats. This shows a 42 per cent increase year-on-year and is up 79 per cent from the same date in 2023. But Friday's total number of migrant crossings was not the highest daily number so far this year. On May 31, 1,195 people arrived into Britain via the Channel in small boats. Last year, almost 37,000 people left the northern French coastline and arrived in the UK.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store