Social media companies will be fined up to £60,000 each time a post relating to knife crime is not removed from their sites in a bid to stop children viewing “sickening” content.

The new sanction expands on previously announced plans to fine individual tech executives up to £10,000 if their platforms fail to remove material advertising or glorifying knives following 48 hours of a police warning.

It means tech platforms and their executives could collectively face up to £70,000 in penalties for every post relating to knife crime they fail to remove, with the new laws applying to online search engines as well as social media platforms and marketplaces.

Crime and policing minister Dame Diana Johnson said the content that young people scroll through every day online “is sickening” adding: “That is why we are now going further than ever to hold to account the tech companies who are not doing enough to safeguard young people from content which incites violence, particularly in young boys.”

The sanctions for tech platforms will be introduced via an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill.

It is separate to the Online Safety Bill, which aims to protect children from online harm, which some campaigners and parents have criticised for not going far enough.

The Home Office said today’s announcement follows “significant consultation” with the Coalition to Tackle Knife Crime, launched by Sir Keir Starmer in September as part of his bid to half knife offences in a decade.

Patrick Green, chief executive of The Ben Kinsella Trust, a knife prevention charity which is part of the coalition, welcomed the measure, telling Sky News social media companies have “proved themselves to be incapable of self-regulation”.

“There’s been a real reluctance of social media companies to take action sufficiently quickly. It’s shameful, we shouldn’t need legislation,” he said.

The Ben Kinsella Trust is named after teenager Ben Kinsella who was fatally stabbed in 2008 on the way home from the pub after celebrating his GCSEs.

Months earlier, Ben had written to then prime minister Gordon Brown to urge his government to tackle knife crime.

Knife crime rates soar

However, the problem has soared since then.

In the year to March 2024, there were 53 teenage victims aged 13-19 in England and Wales, according to the Office for National Statistics. That is a 140% increase on the 22 teenage victims a decade earlier.

Overall, police recorded 54,587 knife-related offences in 2024, up 2% on the previous year and more than double the 26,000 offences recorded in 2014.

Mr Green told Sky News that while knife crime has been happening “long before social media took hold”, online content glamorising the possession of a knife is hindering efforts to reduce it.

“There will be pictures of these knives [on social media] with ‘follow me’ luring young people onto places where these knives are sold. It’s never been easier for a child to buy a knife.”

‘One part of a larger problem’

However, while welcoming today’s announcement he said social media was “one part of a larger problem”, adding that “provisions of youth services have been decimated” and “much more needs to be done”.

The government’s plan to halve knife crime in a decade includes banning zombie-style knives and ninja swords, with a nationwide surrender scheme launching in July, and stronger laws for online retailers selling knives.

Ministers also want to increase prison sentences for selling weapons to under-18s and introduce a new offence for possessing a weapon with intent for violence, with a prison sentence of up to four years.

Read more:
Young people in Birmingham drill recording studio on reality of knife crime
What are the UK’s knife crime laws – and how could they be tightened?

Government ‘can’t police the internet’

Last month, Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty suggested violent videos viewed online should be used as evidence to prosecute under the new law. He was speaking during a debate he secured on knife crime, in which he criticised a wider culture which “valorises” criminality and gangs in music and the media.

On the measures announced today, the Huntingdon MP told Sky News that while “any measures to help reduce instances of knife crime are hugely welcome”, he was doubtful that the sanctions could be effectively enforced.

“The sheer scale of content on social media that glorifies or incites violence is staggering, let alone content returned by search engines,” he said.

“The government can’t possibly hope to realistically police the internet.

“The government must tackle the culture that promotes and encourages the use of knives and ensure that there are robust consequences to doing so, not simply pretend they will have online content removed.”

Water regulators and the government have failed to provide a trusted and resilient industry at the same time as bills rise, the state spending watchdog has said.

Public trust in the water sector has reached a record low, according to a report from the National Audit Office (NAO) on the privatised industry.

Not since monitoring began in 2011 has consumer trust been at such a level, it said.

At the same time, households face double-digit bill hikes over the next five years.

The last time bills rose at this rate was just before the global financial crash, between 2004-05 and 2005-06.

Regulation failure

All three water regulators – Ofwat, the Environment Agency and Drinking Water Inspectorate – and the government department for environment, food and rural affairs (Defra) have played a role in the failure, the NAO said, adding they do not know enough about the condition or age of water infrastructure and the level of funding needed to maintain it.

Since the utilities were privatised in 1989, the average rate of replacement for water assets is 125 years, the watchdog said. If the current pace is maintained, it will take 700 years to replace the existing water mains.

Water firms have grappled with leaky pipes and record sewage outflows into UK waterways in recent years, with enforcement action under way against all wastewater companies.

Despite there being three regulators tasked with water, there is no one responsible for proactively inspecting wastewater to prevent environmental harm, the report found.

Instead, regulation is reactive, fining firms when harm has already occurred.

Financial penalties and rewards, however, have not worked as water company performance hasn’t been “consistent or significantly improved” in recent years, the report said.

‘Gaps, inconsistencies, tension’

The NAO called for this to change and for a body to be tasked with the whole process and assets. At present, the Drinking Water Inspectorate monitors water coming into a house, but there is no entity looking at water leaving a property.

Similarly no body is tasked with cybersecurity for wastewater businesses.

As well as there being gaps, “inconsistent” watchdog responsibilities cause “tension” and overlap, the report found.

The Environment Agency has no obligation to balance customer affordability with its duty to the environment when it assesses plans, the NAO said.

Company and investment criticism

Regulators have also been blamed for failing to drive enough funding into the water sector.

From having spoken to investors through numerous meetings, the NAO learnt that confidence had declined, which has made it more expensive to invest in companies providing water.

Even investors found Ofwat’s five-yearly price review process “complex and difficult”, the report said.

Financial resilience of the industry has “weakened” with Ofwat having signalled concerns about the financial resilience of 10 of the 16 major water companies.

Most notably, the UK’s largest provider, Thames Water, faced an uncertain future and potential nationalisation before securing an emergency £3bn loan, adding to its already massive £16bn debt pile.

Read more from Sky News:
Hundreds of jobs at risk as The Original Factory Shop launches survival plan
Government to decide on ‘postcode pricing’ plan for electricity bills by summer

Water businesses have been overspending, with only some extra spending linked to high inflation in recent years, leading to rising bills, the NAO said.

Over the next 25 years, companies plan to spend £290bn on infrastructure and investment, while Ofwat estimates a further £52bn will be needed to deliver up to 30 water supply projects, including nine reservoirs.

What else is going on?

From today, a new government law comes into effect which could see water bosses who cover up illegal sewage spills imprisoned for up to two years.

Such measures are necessary, Defra said, as some water companies have obstructed investigations and failed to hand over evidence on illegal sewage discharges, preventing crackdowns.

Meanwhile, the Independent Water Commission (IWC), led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, is carrying out the largest review of the industry since privatisation.

What the regulators and government say?

In response to the report, Ofwat said: “The NAO’s report is an important contribution to the debate about the future of the water industry.

“We agree with the NAO’s recommendations for Ofwat and we continue to progress our work in these areas, and to contribute to the IWC’s wider review of the regulatory framework. We also look forward to the IWC’s recommendations and to working with government and other regulators to better deliver for customers and the environment.”

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We have worked closely with the National Audit Office in producing this report and welcome its substantial contribution to the debate on the future of water regulation.

“We recognise the significant challenges facing the water industry. That is why we will be working with Defra and other water regulators to implement the report’s recommendations and update our frameworks to reflect its findings.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “The government has taken urgent action to fix the water industry – but change will not happen overnight.

“We have put water companies under tough special measures through our landmark Water Act, with new powers to ban the payment of bonuses to polluting water bosses and bring tougher criminal charges against them if they break the law.”

Water UK, which represents the water firms, has been contacted for comment.

The Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman has “clarified” the 2010 Equality Act, Harriet Harman has said – as she urged people to feel “confident they can use their common sense”.

The Labour peer and former minister put forward the Equality Bill, now the Equality Act 2010, which protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society.

The legislation had become the centre of controversy in the debate about transgender rights as it was not clear whether the term “sex” referred to biological sex or “certificated” sex as legally defined by the 2004 Gender Recognition Act (GRA).

Politics latest: PM joins troops aboard flagship aircraft carrier

Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the definition of a “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to “a biological woman and biological sex”.

It means that some single-sex service providers will be able to exclude trans women if they deem it proportionate and necessary.

But speaking to Beth Rigby on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Baroness Harman said the providers of single-sex spaces were always able to do this under the Act.

She said: “What we’ve got to do now, is with the Supreme Court having clarified what we said all along in the 2010 act, that consensus has got to be rebuilt.

“I strongly believe that most people don’t like to see trans people discriminated against and persecuted, and they want to just live and let live and let people get on and live the best lives they can.

“And most people understand that if you’re dealing with women who’ve been traumatised by male violence, it might be that actually a trans woman there prevents them feeling they can be comfortable in a refuge or in a counselling session.”

During the podcast, Baroness Harman, Beth Rigby and Baroness Davidson were played audio sent in from Ellie, a 25-year-old trans woman from Glasgow.

She said she was “devastated” by last week’s ruling.

“I’m scared and I am angry,” she said.

“I don’t think there’s clarity yet as to what this ruling actually means for my community in law.

Read more:
JK Rowling calls for Sir Keir Starmer over Supreme Court ruling
Supreme Court decision has immediate real-world consequences

“The GRA has now been rendered practically meaningless, and the UK government could respond by saying ‘yep, fair enough, let’s get them updated so that we can make sure that trans people are respected and protected in society for who they are’, but instead, they’ve pounced on us – with government ministers even suggesting that trans women can’t use women’s spaces like toilets.

“I mean, where am I supposed to go?

“It’s clearly not safe for so many trans women like me to use the men’s toilets, not to mention completely dehumanising.

“It’s not appropriate for a male police officer to get to pat down my chest, and it’s also clearly completely unworkable.”

She added: “This whole thing is being done under the guise of making some women feel safer, while actually making so many of us, whether trans or not, materially less safe, and I don’t even think we’d be having this conversation if the media and some politicians hadn’t spent the past five years demonising us.

“It just feels so, so cowardly and cruel.”