Please or to access all these features

Sponsored threads

This topic is for sponsored discussions. If you'd like to run one with us, please email [email protected].

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Minister for Children and Families, Olivia Bailey wants to hear from you

93 replies

CeriMumsnet · 13/03/2026 11:30

The government is currently developing new guidance on screen time for children aged 0–5 - and I want it to be genuinely useful for families, not a list of rules that feel out of touch with everyday life and the juggle that is being a parent!

So if you're the parent of a child aged 0–5, or you've recently been through those early years, we'd love to know: what would actually help you? Maybe you've found ways to make screen time work positively in your family, or you've had moments of doubt about whether you're getting the balance right. Perhaps there's something you wish someone had told you earlier - or advice you've been given that felt more judgmental than helpful.

Whatever your experience, I want parents to help shape this guidance so it reflects how families really live - and gives you something practical you can actually use.

The guidance, once published, will be available on the government's Best Start in Life website, which brings together trusted support for parents at every stage of the early years.

Minister for Children and Families, Olivia Bailey wants to hear from you
OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
womendeserveequalhumanrights · 24/03/2026 09:11

SparksNo · 24/03/2026 08:01

All of this. Children (and parents) are essentially expected to be tech/device literate (and to have access to devices) in order to access the curriculum. Then are bashed over the head with messages that they are failing and bad parents when they use the devices/screens. Inculcating a gnawing sense of perennial failure and adding to stress.

Children (and parents) are essentially expected to be tech/device literate (and to have access to devices) in order to access the curriculum. Then are bashed over the head with messages that they are failing and bad parents when they use the devices/screens. Inculcating a gnawing sense of perennial failure and adding to stress.

This is so well put.

The foundation of child wellbeing is their parents, their family. And yet, zero consideration of parental wellbeing. If parents are stressed, forced to spend hours on screens they don't want to (this is me absolutely) and then made to feel guilty over a situation they have little control over, that does not benefit their children.

I can't tell you how much fruitless time I've spent trying to get rubbish school apps to work which is literally soul destroying and has taken time away from spending time with my child and also depleted my mental resilience. It's SO SO SO MUCH better and quicker now the school doesn't use them and results in better communication between parents and school.

I would also question the inclusion of so many academics producing this guidance. It might be better to have teachers involved. I note no mention of actually looking at what is happening in schools in the real world or talking to teachers, parents, students and governors. Are the people producing this guidance actually going to set foot in any school?

We don't need academic 'evidence' alone we need real world experience - some of the realities discussed on this thread. Academic 'evidence' is very linked to researcher interests and what is funded and can very easily bear absolutely no resemblance to the real world. There is real-world evidence out there that they need to look at e.g. the over use of EdTech in schools. Profiteering around this. Inappropriate use of government funding to push tech in schools with no adequate oversight of whether it delivers what it promises and no consideration of the harms of this to parents or children.

I wonder how much producing this 'guidance' will cost and whether that might be better spent by giving it to a few schools to actually try and develop a better understanding of their pupils screen time usage both in and outside of school and the flaws in the current system. Maybe even just using that money so a few schools can actually buy sufficient books rather than relying on screens?

I'm also going to say that when deciding on important parental issues, I'd take the advice and range of thinking and critical opinion (almost always backed up with evidence) on mumsnet over anything DfE produces. There are quite a few teachers on here too with very interesting experiences. I find most government guidance these days patronising and hypocritical. DfE has failed in so many ways in schools in recent years - we the parents with children actually in these schools have seen this, so why trust their advice?

(edited to add: ironically tech failure - I clicked on the 'delete quote' button so I could bold the text instead, and yet it's included it!)

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 24/03/2026 09:18

What Red says about safeguarding and data protection failures of tech in schools is also very important.

I've seen at least 4 or 5 threads on MN about safeguarding failures around tech in schools (either children / parents being sent to inappropriate websites or data protection failures that could have real world safeguarding consequences or outright stealing of children's data without parental consent). The money put towards the eminent list of academics for this 'guidance' might be better spent actually doing something about safeguarding failures via tech. I see no evidence anyone has got a handle on this, nor that there are any consequences for the many safeguarding failures already happening.

SparksNo · 24/03/2026 10:03

Linking this back specifically to under-5s: as well as the downwards pressure to be tech-ready for school, for those preschoolers with older siblings, there is a modelling of the necessity of screen-use through their school day/work (even if the babies/preschoolers do not directly engage themselves at this point).

SparksNo · 24/03/2026 11:18

I have just realised that at the top of this page it says 'Created with Best Start in Life.'

I would like to ask the Minister what thought has been given to the fact that the new iteration of (Best Start) Family Hubs developed by government has a strong digital component! 'Best Start digital service.' educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2025/07/best-start-family-hubs-what-parents-need-to-know/

What thought internally is being given and what guidance developed to inform the extent to which state-provided early years services should be tech/screen-dependent? These are the structural conditions within which families with under-5s are living!

Gagamama2 · 24/03/2026 11:58

SparksNo · 24/03/2026 10:03

Linking this back specifically to under-5s: as well as the downwards pressure to be tech-ready for school, for those preschoolers with older siblings, there is a modelling of the necessity of screen-use through their school day/work (even if the babies/preschoolers do not directly engage themselves at this point).

This, 100%. As soon as my older two (8 and 10) start doing their homework on the iPad then the 6 year old starts kicking off about wanting screens. If I tell him they are doing homework he counters with he wants to do Duolingo or other vaguely educational app games. It’s just another argument I don’t need to have every day when trying to function and tick off the basics.

IMO, asking parents “what guidance they need” is patronising. Most parents are intelligent and trying to do their best; they know that too much screen time is bad for their child’s development. What would be better is an on-the-ground study into how to help parents reduce their kids screen time. And funded methods to help this, whether it be more funding for schools so they don’t need to be so reliant on tech, or funding free baby, toddler and child activities / sports. Funding youth clubs for older kids. Investing in more playgrounds, in particular indoor playgrounds that can be used year round. Starting up Sure Start centres again. Etc etc.

napody · 24/03/2026 12:15

As a teacher, I know that for the last 15+ years ofsted have been judging schools on the extent to which they have embedded tech in classrooms, including early years. Its hard to push back against that and say 'actually this tech is pretty intuitive and they'll have no issue picking it up when they're a bit older- play and communication and concrete activities are much more important at this stage'.

Schools should be low tech. You have no say over that in your role though- bring back the Dept for Children, Schools and Families that realised that you couldn't separate these things.

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 24/03/2026 20:58

napody · 24/03/2026 12:15

As a teacher, I know that for the last 15+ years ofsted have been judging schools on the extent to which they have embedded tech in classrooms, including early years. Its hard to push back against that and say 'actually this tech is pretty intuitive and they'll have no issue picking it up when they're a bit older- play and communication and concrete activities are much more important at this stage'.

Schools should be low tech. You have no say over that in your role though- bring back the Dept for Children, Schools and Families that realised that you couldn't separate these things.

As a parent I couldn't agree more with this and particularly this bit Schools should be low tech.

Children would be a hell of a lot better off if mumsnetters made government policy, based on this thread (maybe with special roles for those mumsnetters who are actual frontline teachers).

And I think it's clear we don't need patronising 'guidance' what we need is EdTech out of schools to improve the wellbeing of both children and parents.

WishIWasHibernating · 26/03/2026 22:49

@SparksNo looks like consultation was pointless. Surely that’s a story in itself

ArabellaScott · 27/03/2026 07:31

I had composed this before when posters were wondering why no response from the OP was forthcoming;

The government wanted to tick a box to say theyve 'consulted parents'. Hence this exercise.

Sorry, I've got more and more cynical over the past few years. Maybe Olivia will prove me wrong.

Eh-oh.

AlsJ · 27/03/2026 07:57

Famtastic news this morning! Clear guidelines. It’s been delivered with compassion and not judgement or blame for parents or nursery staff but recognising the science and acting to protect children:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-screen-time-guidance-for-parents-of-under-5s

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1d936n7445o

The UK government has formalised the Health Professionals for Safer Screens guidance: no screen time for under 2s and max an hour a day for 2-5 year olds.

Romi, who has blond curly hair and is wearning a white t-shirt, is passing a book to his mum, Alexis who has short brown hair and is wearning a grey hoodie. She is passing a digital device with a colourful cover back to him and both are smiling.

Screen time for under-fives should be limited to one hour a day, parents told

New guidance suggests avoiding fast-paced children's content and sharing screen time where possible for under-twos.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1d936n7445o

BordersBasedBobbie · 27/03/2026 07:58

What a pointless exercise. Just another example of parents not being heard again. I heard the story about recommendations for no, or a max 1hr screen time, for 0-5 on the radio this morning. How does that work in Scottish Borders nurseries where they are shown a YouTube video to do exercise? And world book day is a video on the whiteboard screen? And even a music lesson in P1 has reportedly been a "choose which instrument" game on an iPad?

The government needs to intervene on what they've allowed to happen in our classrooms.

That's the real story the press needs to hook into here.

We have ample growing concerns and specific incidents of harm and safeguarding risks ignored, if any press wants to cover it. It's clear our government and our local council "leadership" are not protecting our most vulnerable citizens, and have no interest in course correcting on this.

It'll have to be exposed by frontline staff and parents. It's only time before it does, and I'd hope whoever signed up to those EdTech commercial agreements (including signing away sharing our kids' data without parental consent or us being informed) are held to account for the negligence. This will become a legal issue, eventually.

CallingOnTheMegaphone · 27/03/2026 08:06

There are three governments in the UK plus the Northern Ireland Executive. Yet nowhere in the thread title or opening post do I see it specified that this is a UK government minister and UK government policy, or what countries of the UK this policy would even apply in.

RedToothBrush · 27/03/2026 08:34

BordersBasedBobbie · 27/03/2026 07:58

What a pointless exercise. Just another example of parents not being heard again. I heard the story about recommendations for no, or a max 1hr screen time, for 0-5 on the radio this morning. How does that work in Scottish Borders nurseries where they are shown a YouTube video to do exercise? And world book day is a video on the whiteboard screen? And even a music lesson in P1 has reportedly been a "choose which instrument" game on an iPad?

The government needs to intervene on what they've allowed to happen in our classrooms.

That's the real story the press needs to hook into here.

We have ample growing concerns and specific incidents of harm and safeguarding risks ignored, if any press wants to cover it. It's clear our government and our local council "leadership" are not protecting our most vulnerable citizens, and have no interest in course correcting on this.

It'll have to be exposed by frontline staff and parents. It's only time before it does, and I'd hope whoever signed up to those EdTech commercial agreements (including signing away sharing our kids' data without parental consent or us being informed) are held to account for the negligence. This will become a legal issue, eventually.

Edited

I was just about to say that during Covid DS was in reception. Many of his classmates were still 4.

They were expected to do everything on screens.

But this isn't just restricted to Covid. I've since helped in reception.

They do a wake up exercise session with a screen. At the end of the day they often have wind down time.

Its totally in consistant to be messaging this and then having 4 and 5 year olds in the class room doing at least half of their daily allowance!

Nursery was better but that was to do with our choice of nursery too and having one which specialised in outdoor play.

Its absoluetely nuts if state run schools are doing this. It undermines the messaging!

Yes 'consulting' seems to be a stretch 'we posted on MN and then didn't engage having already made a decision' is not consulting.

WishIWasHibernating · 27/03/2026 08:56

Is @AlsJ a government spokesman perhaps?

Ed Tech is glaringly missing from that guidance. Yet again the government does not listen. Pathetic.

MillicentFaucet · 27/03/2026 09:38

WishIWasHibernating · 27/03/2026 08:56

Is @AlsJ a government spokesman perhaps?

Ed Tech is glaringly missing from that guidance. Yet again the government does not listen. Pathetic.

There's a new thread in AIBU about the guidance, looks like it will turn into the usual bunfight. Would it be very cynical of me to suspect the OP has 'engage stakeholders and raise awareness' on their job description?
No way did Olivia Bailey or her team use any of this excellent feedback to "help shape this guidance so it reflects how families really live" in the 2 weeks between starting this thread and releasing the guidance.
What an absolute waste of everyone's time

WishIWasHibernating · 27/03/2026 11:33

@MillicentFaucet (love your username!) thanks for the heads up - just reading through the new thread. I'm as cynical as you.

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 27/03/2026 15:44

To follow this guidance literally every parent would have to home educate.

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 27/03/2026 15:45

This whole thing has confirmed to me that listening to government guidance on anything is a waste of time.

Mumsnet on the other hand... often very excellent advice on here.

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 27/03/2026 15:46

I'd like to know how much taxpayers money the list of academics who produced the guidance were paid and why this isn't being used to pay for books in schools.

MillicentFaucet · 27/03/2026 16:44

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 27/03/2026 15:46

I'd like to know how much taxpayers money the list of academics who produced the guidance were paid and why this isn't being used to pay for books in schools.

You can't even find out who the panel is without a gov.uk publisher sign-in account. What an amateur shitshow, they'd have been better off taking their time instead of going off half cocked & getting interns to create MN accounts

MillicentFaucet · 27/03/2026 16:47

Look at what happens when you click on that link to the panel info

Minister for Children and Families, Olivia Bailey wants to hear from you
Minister for Children and Families, Olivia Bailey wants to hear from you
BordersBasedBobbie · 30/03/2026 08:18

I've been watching over the last few days to see if there's ever been any official engagement on what was being fed back here, either from the "consultation" team, its obvious and not so subtle cheerleaders (PR agency?) or MN HQ. NADA. Zilch. Nothing at all about the EdTech push into classrooms undermining parents and teachers who are concerned about what's been sold and pushed by large IT commercial contracts.

Yet another sham consultation, just like what we've seen locally in the borders where Scottish Borders Council do some PR broadcast to parents and frontline teachers then tick off the "consulted with stakeholders" tickbox and boast about it in social media and PR campaigns afterwards.

Well, we see the hypocrisy, folks. We're not that stupid.

I expect this now from our council's education"leadership" team. And even some of the more awful elected councillors we've been lumped with in the Borders.

But I didn't expect this of something MN had backed. I've been on this site for 20 years on various accounts (had about 2-3 logins as I lost access over the years) but MN will be able to check my membership goes back years even on this one. I'm really disappointed. I won't be engaging on any threads like this again if there's no point.

BordersBasedBobbie · 30/03/2026 08:24

I've reported this thread to MN moderators under the "misinformation" category now. There never was any engagement or consultation here.