Meeting of the Parliament 01 October 2025 [Draft]
Pam Duncan-Glancy quoted young people welcoming the change of policy on phones in classrooms, and she talked about having a sensible boundary during lessons. I welcome that, and I will support the motion, but it is disappointing that Labour does not support the Government amendment, which also seems sensible and balanced to me. It seems that Labour wants to present the idea of a simple blanket and uniform rule while still acknowledging the need for exceptions and individual reasons and acknowledging different circumstances. I agree that we need to recognise the autonomy of schools.
That being said, I support the motion and the Government’s amendment. The cabinet secretary said that Labour’s motion is missing something, but I think that both the motion and the amendment are missing something, because the debate is not just about distraction in class but about young people’s ability to learn to navigate an increasingly fraught, hostile and disturbing information landscape. Many aspects of today’s permanently online life do not stop when the school day ends—far from it. Young people face multiple issues, including bullying, targeted abuse against minorities, marketing, conspiracy theories and racist and far-right content—all beaming at them 24 hours a day through these devices. It is not accidental. It is built into the business models of social media platforms and others.
I cite the death of 23-year-old Paloma Shemirani. Paloma’s mother had been radicalised against science-based healthcare by that type of content, and that influence led Paloma to refuse chemotherapy that could have saved her life. Her story has become a tragic example of the way that social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and X have become sources of health information and disinformation, with millions of people—increasingly, young people—relying on them for advice and being misled.
Health conspiracies on other issues, such as anti-vaccine conspiracies and the promotion of fake treatments, also circulate. Recently, days after Donald Trump promoted dangerous rubbish about paracetamol and autism, a member of this Parliament echoed that baseless idea. Scotland is by no means immune.
Prejudice, racism, anti-migrant propaganda, homophobia and transphobia have been growing in intensity to the point that, even at the highest level of politics in the United Kingdom, there are politicians who openly debate whether black or brown people can ever be British, English or Scottish—ideas that, not so long ago, would have been the preserve of the British National Party. Much of that activity is promoted and even directly paid for by social media platforms—X, YouTube and others are paying people huge sums of money to produce it and then aggressively pushing it out to audiences, especially young people. That torrent of far-right and conspiracist propaganda is the information landscape that young people are growing up in. If phones are switched back on as soon as young people leave the classroom, they are still vulnerable.
I will back the motion and the Government amendment at decision time. The policy stance on phones in classrooms is fine as far as it goes, but I am not sure that the debate about whether it should be a blanket decision by a cabinet secretary or up to the autonomy of individual schools and headteachers is really where the issue is at. We must not allow that action to result in complacency about the wider issue—the world of abusive, bigoted, conspiracist and untrue content that we have all created and the impact that it is having on everyone, including the young people who are growing up on it.
A policy of no phones in classrooms is fine, but it will not end the need to take a far more robust approach to regulating social media and tackling the far-right and toxic culture warriors.
15:14