Liz Kendall
MP for Leicester West · Labour · United Kingdom
“That power should be in people’s hands to live or die as they choose, not as anybody else thinks they should or tells them they should. It should not just be the privilege of those with money, knowledge or resources.”
“Many have talked about having the option as a kind of insurance policy or as a comfort for them when they are going through those difficult times. That principle of choice and how important it is leads me to my second point, which is that we need better palliative care and social care before any change in the law.”
“This is the first time during this Parliament that I have been able to speak publicly about assisted dying and why I support a change in the law and, indeed, this Bill—a decision I voted for 11 years ago when the then MP for Wolverhampton South West, Rob Marris, put his assisted dying Bill to Parliament.”
“I remember reading it and thinking how amazing it was. In it, he argued that medicine in particular and society as a whole do not give the attention that we should to helping people die a good death.”
“I see today’s debate very much within that context: what makes for a good death. Alongside a change in the law on assisted dying, we must also improve palliative care and social care for families.”
“Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse) for the very powerful speech he gave earlier on this point. I have the greatest respect for the many knowledgeable, experienced and highly principled Members of the House of Lords, but it is not right and not acceptable that a tiny minority should be able to talk out the Bill with hundreds a…”
The complete record
Every one of 605 lines we hold for Liz Kendall, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 13.
“As I said earlier, we have the ability under the Children Act to restrict certain features and functions. That is why we are able to say that we will ban live streaming and stranger communication for those under 16, and that we will have that turned off by default for 16 and 17-year-olds. We do not want all gaming to come under a blanket ban, but if we think particular functions are a risk to children, as we know stranger communication is with gaming, we will act.”
“First, young people can still go online. I think that this announcement will actually support news organisations—the BBC, Sky and all sorts of others—to do even more to provide news information, perhaps created by children for children, in an appropriate and effective manner. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts, who is also a Minister in my Department, is specifically looking at that issue. It is not only five-second TikTok reels that can teach children about news; there are other ways of doing that, and we want to support them.”
“As the hon. Lady knows, the Prime Minister said that we want to act on devices to stop children taking, viewing or sharing nude images. What we are talking about today is highly effective age-verification measures on social media platforms. Sometimes when we debate this issue in the House it is a question of either/or, but we need to take action on all those fronts. We need to keep the implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, we need to tackle devices to stop kids taking, sharing and seeing nude pictures, and we need to put restrictions on AI chatbots and social media platforms, because that is how we will keep kids safe.”
“I agree with every single word my hon. Friend says. This is about liberating children from what can sometimes be a terribly oppressive life online. It is about helping parents to do what they want. They have faced a tidal wave of stuff that they have been trying to fight off. We are just saying, “We want to back you to do what is right for kids.” I personally thank my hon. Friend for her support.”
“We will bring in highly effective age-verification measures, because we want to ensure that we learn the lessons from what has happened in Australia. The Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan), who has responsibility for online safety, went to learn all those lessons. There is much more that we will be saying as we draft the regulations and take this forward, but in my view that is one of the big lessons. However, I want to be honest about this: kids will get around this. Kids have always got around smoking and drinking—we have all done it. Maybe not! [ Laughter. ] That is what kids do.”
“We had a specific survey and consultation with children, 14,000 of whom replied, and I personally met young people in many constituencies. I understand why people say that responsibility should be put on to the companies—that they have got to keep their products safe, and that if they do not, they should not be able to provide them to children and young people. Well, they have not kept them safe, so they are no longer going to be able to provide them to children and young people. In response to the consultation, many of the children did not want an outright ban, but two thirds wanted a whole load of different restrictions. In the end, it is for adults and the Government to decide what is best. Children’s views have been heard, but we think that it is too risky, and we want to have a reset for them and future generations.”
“First, kids are savvy; social media has been an integral part of their lives, and they want to get around restrictions. I will be careful what I say this time, but just because children try to get around things does not mean that we do not have rules and boundaries. Secondly, we are trying to learn the lessons from Australia. It does not have the highly effective age-verification measures that we have. We want to put those measures in place here, but I am not going to claim that even those measures will mean that no kids are on social media platforms. We have got to take a decision and draw a line in the sand. This is as much about resetting the expectations of eight, nine and 10-year-olds, by saying, “You won’t be going on this until you’re 16.””
“As I said, I will make a further statement to the House in July, which will include issues such as raising the digital age of consent, so that we have greater protections around the use of children’s data. That is an important issue. Privacy must be at the heart of this measure, because many parents and young people are worried. We have got further things to say in July, and I am more than happy to discuss that issue with my hon. Friend.”
“I am going to come back to the House in July and say more about that. Chatbots telling kids not to eat, and all that dreadful stuff, is wrong, but if there are mechanisms for supporting therapy that could get my child and adolescent mental health services waiting list down in Leicester, I would be interested. Properly regulated therapy sites could be good, but I will come back and say more about that. I want to get rid of the bad ones and protect the good ones, but that is more complicated, so we need to take a bit more time.”
“There is a process that we normally go through when regulations are laid, and there is a certain amount of time for parliamentary scrutiny. I am trying to balance giving Members a say on the regulations—looking at them, and ensuring that we have got them right and that they are going to work—with cracking on as soon as possible. I would still say that early 2027 is much quicker than the time it normally takes for a whole Bill to go through Parliament, but I do hear my hon. Friend’s determination to push this policy forward, and I will do what I can do get it over the line as quickly as possible.”
“Alongside the matter of supporting young people who might like things or live or love in a different way, another thing that I am really concerned about is the question of how they actually connect with people—that trusted support is really important. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport is working hard to boost things like mentoring and support services, and has just announced £10 million for a new youth opportunity programme with the King’s Trust and Sir Gareth Southgate. There is more that we can do there. I am more than happy to talk to the hon. Gentleman about his ideas, because we have to ensure that people can get trusted advice easily. On balance, though, I feel that the risks of social media exploiting vulnerabilities outweigh the potential benefits. Let us try to find a way through.”
“My hon. Friend is right to say that what I have announced today is not a silver bullet for all these challenges; I am setting out what we can do specifically on the online world, but the truth is that we have to provide that wider support. As always, I am very happy to talk to her about what more we can do across Government to protect those vulnerable children and young people in order to deal with the issues she raises.”
“It is not an either/or—either enforce the Online Safety Act or introduce a ban. There are clear requirements on tech companies to remove illegal content for everybody and harmful content for children, and we will continue to enforce them. Just because we know children will try to get around these measures does not mean we should not put them in place. There is more that we can do on enforcement. It is for the tech companies to keep children safe—they have had ample opportunity to do so, and now we are saying that they can no longer provide their services to children.”
“I absolutely agree that this is not a one-and-done; we have got to do more. The tech companies need to abide by our law in our land: the Online Safety Act. My hon. Friend is a powerful champion for her constituents. I want to avoid that cliff edge, and I want to take further action on restricting features and functions. As I said, there is more to come in July.”
“Yes. As I said, under the Online Safety Act we already have powers to fine companies up to 10% of their qualifying worldwide revenue and, should companies repeatedly refuse to obey the law, Ofcom can apply to the courts to block their services. We have not finalised the fines and consequences, but what I have said shows the direction of travel.”
“We will come back to VPNs in July; I have commissioned further research about their usage. There are really important issues to balance here. Many people want to use VPNs for privacy—that is important—but we know that some children use them to get around restrictions. I will come back to that in July in our response to the consultation.”
“I understand that this announcement will be extremely difficult for many children who are on social media today—I know that it will cause a lot of worry and disquiet. I want to ensure that their views and voices continue to be heard. In the results of our survey, I was quite struck by just how many children want risky features restricted: two thirds said they did. More than half want restrictions on infinite scroll, as do almost two thirds on explicit image sharing and location sharing, and almost half on live streaming. I think children do want to see change. It will be hard for them to manage the transition, but that is what we need to do to build a better future.”
“We have not set any targets or goals. I do think that more highly effective age verification measures will make a difference. As I said—I want to be honest—this is about today’s children, but it is even more about resetting the expectations and cultural norms of children growing up now so that kids will know they will not be on social media until they are 16.”
“I am glad that my hon. Friend believes his constituents will support this action. The Minister for Online Safety spent a week in Australia learning the lessons, including about how kids are getting around the ban. That is why we have already said that we want more highly effective age-assurance measures. I will come back to VPNs and young people in July; it is really important that we continue this discussion. We want this action to be as effective as possible, but we need to help parents with younger children to begin to shift the social norms. What happens is this: the kids really want it—all their friends are on it—so even if parents set their boundaries and rules, they are under constant pressure. We are just saying, “We’re on your side. We’re going to help you do the right thing for your kids.””
“This is a wake-up call for the companies: “You had your chance. You didn’t fulfil your existing obligations under the law. Enough.” That is really important for us to say. They will remain responsible for fulfilling their obligations under British laws to remove illegal content and to remove harmful content for children. That is hugely important. We stood up to Grok, X and Elon Mus, saying, “Enough is enough.” We are now drawing a line in the sand now, too.”
“I am really glad that my hon. Friend has raised this issue. There was an important point in the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges’ response precisely about the physical health implications, as well as mental health implications, for young people. She will know that we have already published guidance on screen time use for under-fives, and we are currently reviewing it for five to 16 year-olds. I listened carefully to that medical evidence, and that is one of the reasons that we are taking this action—although, of course, I know that there will be more to do.”
“That is not part of the announcement that I have made today. I am always willing to look at people’s arguments on different issues. On a separate issue, we have now taken action to try to preserve some of the data, through data preservation notices, for parents who have lost their children, and who want to see what they were looking at online, so I think we have to tread carefully on this.”
“I thank my right hon. Friend for her question; she has campaigned tirelessly on this. The model in Australia that we plan to use captures user-to-user platforms that have enabling social interaction as their sole purpose, or a significant purpose, and that allow users to post material, alongside algorithms and recommender actions. The model that we plan to follow is precisely about saying that children cannot access social media platforms that can be defined in that way. I think that is a big step forward. I know that she would like us to look at this further, and I am always open to discussion, because as I have said, I am very aware of all the other issues, and we want to take action where we can.”
“We have a brilliant, fantastic, world-leading gaming industry in this country. That is why we are not including games under the blanket ban. However, I have been really concerned by issues raised not just by hon. Members, but by the police and others, who have shown that a real, substantial risk is posed by strangers who are not playing with but directly communicating with and messaging children, and then taking them on to WhatsApp and grooming them. We are narrowly focusing on that issue.”
“Absolutely. I have been very clear throughout this statement that the responsibility is on the social media platforms, not on parents or children, and that it is up to them to take the action they need to take.”
“The hon. Lady is right to raise the issue of enforcement. That is why I have specifically asked the new incoming chair of Ofcom to hold an urgent review of its capabilities, to ensure that it focuses rigorously on enforcement—including on riskier sites, in case children go off the main platforms and go further underground—and to publish a clear strategy and a proper report to Parliament on how that enforcement is going. In the end, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.”
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have made great strides, with the £500 million in our Youth Matters national youth strategy, on rejuvenating our youth services and giving more access to sport and the arts. The Department for Education has a new enrichment framework that will help schools and colleges. It will be backed by a £22 million enrichment programme—there will be details soon—to help 400 schools in England create an excellent offer on enrichment. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport is also investing an additional £130 million in activities such as arts and culture, sport and physical activities, adventure and life skills, and much more besides.”
“Yes, absolutely. The Department has already published new help and guidance for parents on how to talk to children about their life online. That will need to be done differently at different ages, and it is sometimes difficult to talk to children about this. The ban will support parents in doing the right thing, but I recognise that this will be a big change for many children and young people, and of course we want to do everything we can to support them through it.”
“The Online Safety Act 2023 requirements remain. This is not an either/or; the companies have to make sure that they remove illegal content for everybody and remove harmful content for children. I have personally introduced a whole series of priority offences under the Act, including those to do with self-harm and suicide. The companies have to not just take this stuff down but actively look for it, and those requirements will remain.”
“Yes. I have had detailed conversations with the Culture Secretary and the Education Secretary about all these issues. There is much more to do, but we are determined to give children the very best start in life, and the freedom to be children again.”
“I hope that the new powers in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 will allow us to be more agile, but if they do not, I will always look again, because we have to keep up with how technology is changing.”
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. There is obviously overwhelming support among parents, teachers, the police and others for an outright ban; then there are those who say that we just need to restrict certain features and functions. The truth is if that if we dealt only with the features and functions, the tech companies would come up with another feature and another function, and then another one—and another one, and another one. We are saying, “No, this is the line in the sand. No one under 16 on these.” If there are specific features and functions that go beyond social media, such as in gaming or on other sites, we want to restrict those, too.”
“As I said in response to an earlier question, this was the issue that I wanted to grapple with the most. People want to find people who love in the same way, or who like the same things, and they may be worried about doing so where they live with their friends. This is hugely important. There is potential for a life online that still enables those things to happen, but just not on the social media platforms. I want to continue working with my hon. Friend, for whom I have the greatest respect, and the Department for Education to ensure that the chances that social media offered to some are still in place for people who want to experience and believe in different things. We want to give everybody the freedom to express who they are.”
“I am so sorry to hear about what happened to Leo. I heard what my hon. Friend describes so many times during the course of the consultation, and many of the representations we had—from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Royal College of General Practitioners and others—raised precisely the issues that she talks about. One of the reasons why the ban is so important is that we must protect children from those serious harms. Two thirds of GPs and two thirds of hospital clinicians say that every single week they see something that they think is a direct consequence of social media. That is a wake-up call to us all.”
“There are already requirements under the Online Safety Act for companies to remove illegal content, and those deal with the issue of foreign interference, particularly during elections. As I said, I am looking again at some of what the Science and Technology Committee recommended on this issue, because of exactly the concerns that my hon. Friend raises.”
“Absolutely. This is about the social media companies putting their house in order. Lots of people have said, “Won’t you bow to pressure? You’ll cave under it.” I hope that today, we are showing our intention: we want a better life for children; we want to put power into parents’ hands; and we want to reset social norms. That is what this Government are absolutely determined to do.”
“Ensuring that children have healthy and safe lives online is one of my top priorities. From making cyber-flashing and self-harm and suicide content the subject of priority offences under the Online Safety Act 2023 to banning nudification apps and standing up to Grok and X, I will leave no stone unturned to ensure that children are protected. Our consultation on growing up online closes next Tuesday, so there is still time to respond. I will bring forward proposals before the summer, and I intend to pass any legislation required by the end of the year.”
“Yes, that is absolutely my objective. I remind the House that our consultation is looking at not just whether there should be a ban on social media for under-16s but a whole range of other issues, including whether platforms should be required to switch off addictive features, whether there should be mandatory overnight curfews, whether there should be age or other restrictions on artificial intelligence chatbots, how age verification should be strengthened, and how to help children and parents navigate the online world and thrive. We are determined to act, and we will be prepared to act on all of those issues.”
“Yes, I do agree. We have legislated, and we are prepared to go further. I have already made strangulation and suffocation in porn a priority offence under the Online Safety Act. We are determined to ensure that rules about what happens in online pornography are the same as the rules for what happens offline, and we are coming forward with proposals on that. This is something that deeply worries parents across the country. The question is not whether we act but how, and I am determined to use all possible levers to protect children online.”
“Not for the first time, and not for the last time, the right hon. Gentleman raises an extremely important issue. He may not be aware that we have made the decisive move to back more British tech companies, because we believe that as artificial intelligence and tech become the engine of economic and hard power, we need more sovereign control. There are many wonderful examples of technology provided by big tech companies. I have seen that in my own constituency, with AI tutors to help poor kids catch up. We want to make sure that the benefits of technology are felt by everybody in this country, not just a powerful few, and that we shape this powerful technology, so that it works for all. I say to the right hon. Gentleman: watch this space, because there will be more to come.”
“I remind the hon. Lady that I have already made it a requirement in law that chatbots must protect users from illegal content. I banned nudification apps, through a new criminal offence. We are requiring platforms to take down non-consensual intimate images within 48 hours, and we are requiring platforms to act faster on all those things. It is not true to say that we have not legislated to go further to protect children online. Is she right that there is more to do? Absolutely, and we will act.”
“My hon. Friend is right: follow the money. I am highly aware of that, and we are determined to act. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Digital Government and Data is chairing the digital advertising taskforce, which is a joint effort between this Department and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to look at precisely these issues, because we want to ensure that illegal and harmful content is not rewarded.”
“I or one of my Ministers will meet the hon. Member. She is right to say that once you have seen something, you cannot unsee it. That is especially true for young minds. We all know that young children will wake up in the night and talk to us about things that they remember seeing, but do not understand because they are too young. Either one of my Ministers or I will be more than happy to meet her, see those images for ourselves, and speak to Ofcom and others about what we can do to try to stop that.”
“Making it as simple as possible for parents and children to get involved in our consultation is really important to me personally, because I know that this is an issue that so many families grapple with every single day. We have dedicated surveys for parents and young people. Almost 38,000 parents and 12,700 young people have completed the survey so far, and there are also other events that my Ministers and I have taken part in. However, there is a still a week to go, so I say to anybody who is watching questions to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology: please, get involved and answer. We want to know what you think. We want your views, because we have to get this right.”
“Let me just reassure my hon. Friend on some of those points. We have had 38,000 parents respond to the surveys, which I think is good, but there is more to be done there. In terms of medical professionals, we have had a response from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, multiple individual medical doctors, Health Professionals for Safer Screens and local providers such as Cardiff children’s services. We also have an expert panel that is chaired by the eminent paediatrician Professor Russell Viner, and there are many psychologists and psychiatrists on that. We are actively seeking the views of medical professionals and parents. There is still a week to go. Many hon. Members have fed in views from their constituencies. I encourage everybody to do that in the remaining six days.”
“We will come forward with proposals before the summer. We have already taken powers in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 to implement the results of that consultation, which I intend to do by the end of the year. In the meantime, we are not waiting. I have taken a number of steps to amend various Acts to give greater protection, and we also produced really brilliant advice for parents—“You Won’t Know until You Ask”—about how to talk to kids of different ages about social media. It is available for free online, and I have personally found it very helpful.”
“This Government believe that Britain’s national interests are strengthened, not diminished, when we work with like-minded countries. That is why next week I will be joining other G7 nations coming together as democracies to discuss how we shape tech and AI to work for all, and why I will be proud to showcase the best of Britain’s AI strengths on the world stage at London Tech Week in June.”
“I know the hon. Gentleman is a powerful advocate of life sciences nationally and in his constituency. We see them as one of our greatest national assets, not only helping to save lives but drive jobs, growth and innovation. I am proud that this Government have made the largest ever investment in research and development, including in life sciences, and that we are investing £730,000 to support seven projects in Wokingham, because we know that is good for his constituents and the country.”
“We want to ensure that people from all walks of life and in every part of the country can seize the opportunities that tech and AI bring. That is why we are upskilling 10 million workers—a third of the workforce—in AI skills, why we are investing £170 million in the TechFirst programme to help young people get skills and training, and why we have launched the first ever level 4 apprenticeship in AI, so that young people in Harlow can fulfil their ambitions and we build a better country for all.”
“This Government want to ensure that we have a closer relationship with Europe, because we see every day the terrible impacts that the Conservatives’ Brexit deal brings. But I am also clear that we will continue our pragmatic, not dogmatic, approach to regulation, because Britain is the second country in the western world in AI, and we want to retain those benefits to grow the economy and create good jobs throughout the country.”