The Government’s proposal to block social media access for under-16s is being sold as a noble effort to protect children.
On the surface, who could object to keeping young people safe online? But I fear this policy is less about protecting children and more about expanding state control over the internet.
The inevitable consequence of such a ban is that users will be required to prove their age through increasingly intrusive forms of identification.
Once that principle is established, anonymity online is effectively dead.
Read more
Powys Council explains why residents won't get refunds for missed bin collections
Trio who murdered mid Wales child killer will never be released from prison
It could be you - Welsh multi-millionaire has yet to claim £12 million lottery ticket
We are told this is only about protecting children from harmful content, but governments have a habit of expanding powers once they have acquired them.
How long before “harmful content” is redefined to include unpopular opinions, political criticism, or controversial viewpoints?
Recent history shows how quickly emergency measures and restrictions can become normalised.
If ministers were genuinely focused on protecting children, there are far more effective measures available.
Parents already have access to parental controls, child locks and monitoring software on phones, tablets and computers.
The Government could do far more to educate parents about these tools. It could also ensure that those producing, distributing and consuming indecent images of children face severe and meaningful punishment.
Instead, the public too often sees offenders receiving suspended sentences that appear wholly inadequate given the seriousness of their crimes.
Likewise, there is understandable frustration that authorities seem far more enthusiastic about regulating online speech than confronting organised child exploitation and grooming.
Many people will therefore view these latest proposals with scepticism.
Protecting children is a worthy goal. But we should be wary whenever politicians invoke the phrase “think of the children” to justify measures that expand surveillance, reduce privacy and increase government oversight of everyday life.
A free society should not have to choose between protecting children and preserving freedom and liberty.
Roman Jones, Welshpool
Share