Debate contribution: Social Media: Children and Young People

Debate contribution by Ms Sinéad McLaughlin on 10 February 2026.

MLA

Ms Sinéad McLaughlin

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

10 February 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Social Media: Children and Young People

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5435986

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank all the Members who contributed to the debate. I honestly believe that, although we might use different words or place a different emphasis on things, we are all on the same page. A lot of the evidence on this issue is still evolving, but, at its heart, the motion is about simple responsibility: our responsibility, as legislators, to begin the conversation. This is not the end of the conversation; it will go on every day in our constituencies, schools and homes, as well as with those big tech companies and billionaires who create the platforms that damage our families and our people. Our responsibility is to protect children and keep them from harm. Social media is part of everyday life for our young people. It shapes how they communicate, learn and see themselves. It is not all bad, however: there is some good in there. It influences how they measure success, judge their own worth and understand relationships. The fact that something is normal does not, however, mean that it is harmless. As a grandmother now, I thank my lucky stars that I did not have to contend with social media platforms as a mother. My children had Bebo on a computer that sat in the middle of my kitchen. We would look over at them, and they spoke only to their friends. That is going back a little bit, and I am deeply concerned about the type of world that our children and grandchildren are growing up in. Technology has moved faster than our protections, and young people are too often left alone in digital spaces that were never designed for their mental well-being. For many parents and grandparents, that creates constant anxiety that we are playing catch-up while the damage is already being done. We would not put a child in a car without a seatbelt, but a report released today by CyberSafeKids in the Republic of Ireland states that 51% of children have no parental restrictions on their access to online content. That is a scary figure. Just 39% of eight- to 12-year-olds say that their parents can check, monitor and control what they do and see online. So, we do have a problem. There is a growing and credible body of evidence that links excessive social media use to anxiety, depression, poor sleep, poor body image and attention problems in children and young people. Those risks are not abstract; they are real harms that parents see at home, that teachers see in classrooms and that mental health professionals see every day. We are dealing not with neutral platforms but with systems that are deliberately designed to be addictive. Many Members talked about that addiction in their contributions this afternoon. With algorithms that monetise attention, and business models that profit when young people stay online longer, those platforms do not just host content; they shape behaviour, expectations and the way in which young people see themselves and others. It is worth noting that many of the people who design and profit from such platforms do not allow their own children to use them. That should give us pause. Across families, schools and communities, people are sounding the alarm. Teachers report increased distraction and anxiety; parents are struggling to set boundaries in an online world that never switches off; and mental health professionals warn that the pressures facing young people today are fundamentally different from those that were faced by previous generations. For far too long, we have hoped that the tech industry would regulate itself, but it has not done so. Other countries have recognised that doing nothing is no longer an option. Governments across the world are beginning to step in, because the cost of inaction is simply too high. There are multiple levels to this complex subject. I accept and agree with all the contributions and with the angles from which Members made them. The problem will not be solved through legislation alone, or, indeed, banning, because it is a multi-level problem. However, we must listen to the evidence and make interventions at all levels. We in the SDLP do not think that there is one solution, and one solution only; we accept that we need to work on multiple levels. The British Government's consultation reflects the growing recognition that stronger protections are needed and that the status quo cannot continue. The debate has rightly —

— recognised that no single intervention is sufficient on its own. Restrictions alone are not enough. I urge Members to support our motion.

762 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:52 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification