Campaigners have raised fears that parents and children who take part in Labour’s consultation on banning social media could have their information shared with big tech companies.
The small print on the Government’s consultation states that participants may have their ‘personal data’ shared with Google and Meta – the very companies that campaigners want to see regulated.
Parents have raised concerns about this and called on Labour to make changes to the terms of ‘Growing up in the online world: a national consultation’ to ‘ensure this does not happen’.
However the Government insisted that this is a standard privacy policy that can only collect ‘basic technical data such as an IP address’ – not personal answers to the consultation.
It comes as MPs are next week set to debate a social media ban for under-16s after the House of Lords backed an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill that would see this become law.
However Labour has instead suggested a wide-ranging, flexible power that would allow it to introduce measures such as curfews or time limits. The Government this week launched a consultation to decide what action it should take.
The consultation requires parents and carers of young people aged 21 and under, and children and young people aged 10 to 21 to accept the privacy policy of Savanta, the Government’s survey platform contractor.
The privacy policy states: ‘We may share your data with the below suppliers to help us improve our services and targeting: Google, LinkedIn [and] Meta.’
Sir Keir Starmer attempted to head off a looming backbench rebellion by announcing plans for a consultation on banning social media for under-16s
The Government is consulting on measures ‘to prepare children for the future in an age of rapid technological change’, which could include a social media ban for under-16s
Lord Nash, the Conservative Peer behind the Lords bid for a social media ban for u16s, described the revelation as ‘deeply concerning’.
‘It has long been clear that this consultation is a gift to big tech, providing cover for delay while the companies mobilise opposition to any meaningful action,’ the former schools minister told the Daily Mail.
‘The Government now urgently needs to make clear that every parent and child who takes part in this consultation will not have their personal data shared with the very companies they want regulated.
‘I urge every member of the public who is rightly alarmed by this to tell their MP at raisetheage.org.uk to reject the Government’s compromised consultation on Monday and vote for my amendment, which would raise the age limit for harmful social media platforms to 16 now.’
Harry Amies – founder of online child protection parents group Unplug.Scot, which discovered the small print – called on the Government to suspend the consultation ‘until this mess is sorted out’.
He said: ‘The discovery that not only parents’ but children’s personal data may be shared with Meta and Google, without their explicit consent or knowledge, is extremely concerning. The Government needs to urgently change the terms of this consultation to ensure this does not happen.’
It comes as 23 bereaved parents urged MPs to support an Australia-style social media ban for under-16s, saying mothers and fathers ‘cannot regulate billion-dollar technology companies from their kitchen tables’.
‘Our children should be here. They should be at school, at home, arguing with their siblings, planning their futures,’ the group of parents that includes Esther Ghey, whose 16-year-old daughter Brianna was murdered by two teenagers, said in a statement.
‘Instead, we are left trying to understand how platforms designed and engineered by some of the most powerful companies in the world were allowed to reach into their bedrooms and shape their lives without meaningful protection.’
The parents, led by Ellen Roome, who believes her 14-year-old son Jools Sweeney died while attempting an online challenge in 2022, warned tech firms ‘have extraordinary resources and access’.
They added: ‘Every additional delay gives them more opportunity to dilute or weaken reforms behind closed doors. Meanwhile, children remain exposed to products we already know can cause harm.’
A DSIT spokesman said of the privacy policy concerns: ‘These claims are utterly absurd.
‘The reference in question has nothing whatsoever to do with the views people share in this consultation.
‘Like every major website, including the Daily Mail’s own, Savanta are legally required to state that if someone is already logged into platforms like Facebook, Instagram or X when responding to the survey those companies may collect basic technical data such as an IP address.
‘It has no connection to, and no impact on, the personal views or details people choose to share to help us make the next steps on online safety policy.’
Savanta was approached for comment.