Connect with us

Published

on

Plans to ban smartphones in schools have been dropped after the government refused to support a change in the law, Sky News understands.

Josh MacAlister, the Labour MP for Whitehaven and Workington, put forward the proposal earlier this month to stop children “doom-scrolling” – the act of spending excessive amounts of time online consuming negative news or social media content.

However, upon revealing the details of his Safer Phones Bill, Number 10 immediately indicated it could not support the measure on the grounds that headteachers already have the power to ban phones – although it is not upheld in law.

It is understood Mr MacAlister has now dropped this element of his bill in the hope the government will support its other aspects.

Budget latest: Labour playing ‘silly games’, says IFS

Mr MacAlister’s bill, which received broad support from cross-party MPs, education unions and charities, also calls for the age of “internet adulthood” – the minimum age to create social media profiles and email accounts – to be raised from 13 to 16.

It also wants to strengthen the powers of the regulator Ofcom to protect children from apps that are designed to be addictive and to commit the government to review further regulation if needed of the design, supply, marketing and use of mobile phones by children under 16.

More on Education

Although the government indicated it could not back the phones ban, there has been some confusion on its overall position on the bill after some cabinet ministers, including Health Secretary Wes Streeting, signalled their support.

“Given the impact of smartphone use and addiction on the mental health of children and young people and the concerns from parents, this is a really timely debate,” he posted on X.

Speaking to Sky News earlier this month, Mr MacAlister, who chaired an independent review of children’s social care for the former government, said there was a “huge public health problem” with children around the world having increasing levels of mental health problems, issues with sleep and being impacted by phones in school.

“I’m only interested in one thing, which is making sure we can change the law to protect children and reduce screen time and get them back to having a healthier childhood,” he said.

“Parents are saying they’re facing an impossible choice between either keeping their kids off smartphones and ostracising them, or letting children get on these phones and seeing all the harmful effects that it can cause.

Labour MP Josh MacAlister is calling for a ban on smartphones in schools
Image:
Labour MP Josh MacAlister

“And we need to shape some collective rules that help parents and teachers make better choices for children.

“Children themselves are recognising the harm that comes with all of the doom-scrolling.”

Current guidance to schools in England intended to stop the use of mobile phones during the school day is non-statutory, and was introduced earlier this year by the previous Tory government.

Read more from Sky News:
Schools which ban mobile phones ‘get better GCSE grades’
Number of ‘severely absent’ school children 160% higher than pre-pandemic

Sky News has approached the government for comment. Earlier this month, a government spokesperson said: “We all want to find the best way of ensuring children are kept safe while also benefiting from the latest digital technology.

“The Online Safety Act will introduce strong safeguards for children, preventing them from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content. This will include requiring companies to check the age of children so that parents can have peace of mind about the safety of their children online.

“The vast majority of schools already handle the use of mobile phones effectively, including with bans. Legislating for an outright ban would simply remove the autonomy from school leaders who know their pupils and their communities best.”

Mr MacAlister’s bill is due to have its second reading – the first opportunity MPs have to debate the contents of a bill – in March.

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto industry, trade unions clash over multi-trillion dollar retirement funds

Published

on

By

Crypto industry, trade unions clash over multi-trillion dollar retirement funds

A growing rift has emerged in Washington, D.C., between the cryptocurrency industry and labor unions as lawmakers debate whether to ease rules allowing cryptocurrencies in 401(k) retirement accounts.

The dispute centers on proposed market structure legislation that would allow retirement accounts to gain exposure to crypto, a move labor groups say could expose workers to speculative risk. In a letter sent on Wednesday to the US Senate Banking Committee, the American Federation of Teachers argued that cryptocurrencies are too volatile for pension and retirement savings, warning that workers could face significant losses.

The letter drew immediate pushback from crypto investors and industry figures. “The American Federation of Teachers has somehow developed the most logically incoherent, least educated take one could possibly author on the matter of crypto market structure regulation,” a crypto investor said on X. 

Retirement, Pensions
The AFT letter to Congress opposes regulatory changes that would allow 401(k) retirement accounts to hold alternative assets, including cryptocurrency. Source: CNBC

In response to the letter, Castle Island Ventures partner Sean Judge said the bill would improve oversight and reduce systemic risk, while enabling pension funds to access an asset class that has delivered strong long-term returns.

Consensys attorney Bill Hughes said the AFT’s opposition to the crypto market structure bill was politically motivated, accusing the group of acting as an extension of Democratic lawmakers.

Retirement, Pensions
Funds held in US retirement accounts by type of account plan. Source: ICI

Related: Atkins says SEC has ‘enough authority’ to drive crypto rules forward in 2026

Opposition to crypto in retirement and pension funds mounts

Proponents of allowing crypto in retirement portfolios, on the other hand, argue that it democratizes finance, while trade unions have voiced strong opposition to relaxing current regulations, claiming that crypto is too risky for traditional retirement plans.

“Unregulated, risky currencies and investments are not where we should put pensions and retirement savings. The wild, wild west is not what we need, whether it’s crypto, AI, or social media,” AFT president Randi Weingarten said on Thursday. 

The AFT represents 1.8 million teachers and educational professionals in the US and is one of the largest teachers’ unions in the country.

According to Better Markets, a nonprofit and nonpartisan advocacy organization, cryptocurrencies are too volatile for traditional retirement portfolios, and their high volatility can create time-horizon mismatches for pension investors seeking a predictable, low-volatility retirement plan.

Retirement, Pensions
Bitcoin and Ether volatility compared to other asset classes and stock indexes. Source: US Federal Reserve

In October, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) also wrote to Congress opposing provisions within the crypto market structure regulatory bill.

The AFL-CIO, the largest federation of trade unions in the US, wrote that cryptocurrencies are volatile and pose a systemic risk to pension funds and the broader financial system.

Magazine: 13 Christmas gifts that Bitcoin and crypto degens will love