June 15 (UPI) — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced Monday a full social media ban for children younger than 16 that he said he expected to become law within a year.

Speaking at a news conference in Downing Street, Starmer said the ban would block all children from access to social media in an effort to ensure a “happy and safe environment” that parents wanted for their children, but that the platforms had failed to deliver.

The current legal minimum age at which children are permitted to open an account is 13.

“This is not something I do lightly. And I will not present it as cost-free, as if social media has brought no benefits to young people, because clearly that is wrong. But government is always about choices. And it’s clear to me that a full ban is the right choice,” said Starmer.

Starmer said that as a parent himself he understood “exactly” parents’ fears around social media use.

“Do we truly believe that social media creates a happy environment for our children? Do we truly believe that it’s a place where they can feel safe? I don’t think I even need to answer those questions. Every parent can see it with their own eyes. Social media is making children unhappy. It’s making it easier for bullies to harass and abuse them. And it could even be harming their mental health, exposing them to content that is dangerous because that’s what grabs the attention. It’s designed to be addictive. Of course it is,” said Starmer.

He said at the very least there was an “opportunity cost” to children because it robbed them of time where they could be doing their homework, reading, playing with friends outside or going to bed at a decent hour — things he said helped children develop into well-rounded adults.

Starmer said the legislation, which the government would put to Parliament before Christmas, would also include “world-leading action” on gaming services and live streaming platforms where currently strangers can contact any child unchecked and without their parents’ knowledge.

He did not name the apps covered by the ban but a Department for Science, Innovation and Technology news release said that the list included, but was not limited to, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X.

Messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal would be exempted.

The measures, which follow a three-month public consultation in which 90% of parents said they supported a ban, come on top of a series of other interventions, from a mobile phone ban in schools to an ultimatum to tech firms last week giving them three months to block nude images on children’s phones.

Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Conservative opposition, welcomed the ban but in a post on X, she said it had only been achieved due to pressure from her side of the aisle.

“It is fantastic news that the Government has finally woken up to the dangers of social media for young people. This is an important step in helping parents protect childhood for children. Huge credit goes to [Shadow Education Secretary] Laura Trott and my Shadow Cabinet for relentlessly fighting for this. Conservatives welcome this latest Labour U-turn and will continue to work for the best implementation of the policy,” said Badenoch.

Starmer’s government used its large House of Commons majority to repeatedly block efforts by the House of Lords, the upper chamber of Parliament, to tack on a social media ban to the government’s flagship Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, as recently as April 15.

YouTube, which is owned by Google, and Snapchat said a ban would push children toward less safe platforms.

“YouTube is a vital resource for young people, educators and parents. Blanket bans push kids out of such curated, supervised, beneficial experiences and towards anonymous, less safe services,” said a spokesperson for YouTube.

Snapchat argued that children spent the bulk of their time on the platform “private messaging” with their friends and family.

“An outright ban that disconnects teens from those relationships doesn’t make them safer — it may simply push them to less safe platforms,” said a spokesman.

However, the firm said it backed “thoughtful and proportionate regulation” and protecting young people from online harm but said that it was critical that the government was careful about how it went about it.