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

[CeriMumsnet]

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.

Its still showing up on a banner ad asking for views

So just a half-arsed effort from everyone involved then? 🙄

There is profit to be made here, and us pesky parents getting in the way isn't part of the plan...

Yep. Clear as day.

Wtf was this supposed.to achieve? Did anyone consider the impact?

Don't forget the impending AI tutors...

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfes-ai-tutoring-plan-prompt-calls-for-more-research/

Hi all - thanks so much for all your comments on this thread.

We know a few of you were keen to hear back following the announcement, so thanks for bearing with us - we’ve now got a message from Olivia Bailey to share below.

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to come back on this thread to say a genuine thank you to everyone who shared their experiences and thoughts over the past few weeks. I’ve spent time reading through your comments, and I know how much honesty and lived experience has gone into them.

What came through really strongly from this thread, and from wider conversations with parents, is that you don’t want rigid rules or judgment, you want practical, realistic support that reflects the realities of daily life. That has absolutely shaped the approach we’ve taken, alongside the recommendations from the early years expert advisory group. The guidance focuses on balance rather than perfection, and recognises that every family is different. It’s designed to support you - not to add pressure or guilt.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your experiences - it really does matter.

Olivia Bailey

Ha! What a pointless statement that in no way reflects the themes expressed in the thread and fails to acknowledge that the timeframes mean that our sought feedback could not have been considered.

Utter whitewashing.

Wow. That statement has irked me even more than just being ignored. It reads like a polished summary of a conversation that simply didn’t happen! Parents and teachers didn't spend their time sharing detailed, evidence-based concerns about safeguarding, data protection, classroom practice and institutional decision-making because they had time on their hands and were a bit bored, we were feeding back ome REALLY important red flags from up and down the country, and I shared specific exmaples from within the Scottish borders that I've experienced first hand... only for it to be reduced to something like "you don't want judgment, you want balance."

Um, that is not what people said or shared here.

What comes across in it is a complete reframing of the discussion into something far more comfortable and manageable and soft. The difficult parts, the repeated concerns about very young children using devices without safeguards, exposure to inappropriate content, lack of transparency around data processing, and the absence of meaningful parental consent,have been quietly set aside. Instead, the focus is on "flexibility" and "real-life parenting"... which all AVOIDS engaging with the systemic issues being raised.

I agree with the poster who said this feels like a whitewash. The thread participants were almost universally NOT asking for reassurance or softer messaging, it was raising serious questions about whether current approaches are safe, evidence-based, and legally compliant. Many contributors explicitly highlighted concerns about schools and local authorities driving screen use in ways parents cannot control and feel undermined by!

That is a fundamentally different issue from supporting parents to manage screen time at home, and it has been completely sidestepped.

Most frustratingly, there is no acknowledgement of the depth or seriousness of what was shared. When parents describe safeguarding failures, lack of risk assessment, or children interacting with powerful digital tools without proper oversight, a response that centres on balance and "not adding guilt" (WTF) feels dismissive in the worst way possible.

It suggests those concerns have not been properly heard, let alone addressed. If this is what "listening" looks like, it's no surprise people feel ignored. I certainly won't be contributing my limited energy and time to something like this again.

If Olivia Bailey or anyone on her team is really reading this (which I really doubt), here's MY summary of what parents and teachers are actually saying here:

• Safeguarding risks are real and already happening, including children accessing inappropriate content on school-issued devices from pre-school ages
• Very young children are using AI tools, browsers and apps without clear age-appropriate safeguards
• there is a lack of transparency and informed parental consent around data collection and third-party platforms (something that needs ICO-levle intervention!)
• Opt out processes are unclear, inconsistent, or effectively unavailable
• Responsibility is being deflected between authorities and schools, with no clear accountability
• High levels of screen use in classrooms are raising concerns about attention, behaviour and learning outcomes, and are a major stressor for parents forced to engage in the same way

-0 Device-heavy teaching may be displacing core skills like handwriting, spelling and sustained focus

• Commercial interests and long-term contracts appear to be shaping educational decisions (in the Scottish Borders, the lock in and focus on the Apple tech ecosystem is a particularly toxic form of that - and our own council has been selling its training services to show other councils what "best in class looks like", while ignoring some very serious on-going safeguarding and data compliance issues occuring regularly across the region)
• Parents feel their concerns are minimised, dismissed, or ignored when raised formally

I've placed htat last one in last place on purpose.

Because what's happened with Olivia Bailey is just ANOTHER example of this happening.

I'm really incredibly disappointed with what happened here.

.. also, another comment, I did start looking at the links provided by the "Early Years Screen Time Advisory Group" and started scanning through its Terms of Reference (see here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6964ca4a99fbdc498faeccc2/Early_years_screen_time_advisory_group_-_terms_of_reference.pdf).

The members are:
"Professor Russell Viner (co-chair) – Professor in Adolescent Health, University College London, and former Chief Scientific Adviser to the Department for Education
Dame Rachel de Souza (co-chair) – Children’s Commissioner for England
Professor Catherine Davies – Professor of Language Development, University of Leeds
Professor Pasco Fearon – Professor of Family Research, University of Cambridge
Professor Rosie Flewitt – Emeritus Professor of Early Childhood Communication, Manchester Metropolitan University
Dr Jeanelle de Gruchy – Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England
Professor Sonia Livingstone – Professor of Social Psychology, London School of Economics and Political Science
Professor Amy Orben – Programme Leader of the Digital Mental Health Research Programme, University of Cambridge
Professor Paul Ramchandani – LEGO Professor of Play in Education, Development and Learning, University of Cambridge
Professor Kathy Sylva – Honorary Research Fellow and Professor of Educational Psychology, University of Oxford"

It seems to be almost exclusively made up almost entirely of academics and officials whose frameworks focus on managing children's behaviour, not scrutinising the systems imposing that behaviour in the first place? My view is that a group like this is structurally incapable of addressing the real issues we've been raising here?

It's all very focused on behavioural framing (children and their parents) but lacking expertise in: data protection, procurement law, safeguarding implementation/a legal slant/lesislation, or front-line operaional classroom realities.

This group could never have tackled the themes we've been raising here, so maybe that explains why the issues have just been ignored.

Happy to stand corrected but that's my opinion, when I've been wondering why there's such a whitewash going on here.

I can't say I'm at all surprised by OB's response here. She's shown a monumental lack of good judgement in her dealings to date (as per my previous post) and demonstrated her complete disregard for the views of women and children. It just highlights how she views this issue - she'll absolutely listen to men who tell women to reframe their rape trauma, but couldn't care less about the safety of children online.

….Thanks “Olivia” for your cut-and-paste response 😩🤦‍♀️

Another box checked for you I assume. Unfortunately it hasn’t really helped anyone and has therefore been a waste of money.

What an absolute waste of time. The new guidelines are essentially what most sensible and able parents would already be doing. Parents whose children are spending hours and hours on devices are doing so because the parents are struggling — balancing childcare, mental health, lack of support or resources, etc. No one thinks it’s great and chooses for their children to spend hours a day on an iPad!

Please address the actual issues - tech in schools (as highlighted by the vast majority of parents involved in this discussion thread) and the struggles parents face that prevent them from being able to limit screen time effectively.

'If Olivia Bailey or anyone on her team is really reading this'

They aren't, but voters are.

Its instructive.

I assume that OB’s team commissioned a PR company to gain some traction on their policy announcement. A junior at that company thought, ‘ah kids, I’ll start a discussion on Mumsnet, that will help push this message’.

What is the current trend in politics.

It is for an increasing divide between politicians and public, resulting in a growing lack of trust. Much of this is based on the concept of an elite who make decisions which are out of touch with the lived experience of the majority and ignore the concerns and criticisms of the majority. There is a sense of a lack of accountability to the public and a lack of real engagement which has instead been replaced by vested interest groups within political circles protecting their own interests, lobbying groups with a narrow focus and lots of influence and commercial considerations and interests coupled with a desire to cost cut where ever possible (noting this is short term cost cutting without thought to long term investment which might be cheaper over a period of time because an election cycle is 5 years so unless you see significant results within 2 -3 years it's worthless to the incumbent political party). And to cap it off it's all shrugged and brushed off by a slick PR move which apparently is effective in winning over the public and making good headlines which stop the journalists doing any investigation into where what's actually happening. Noting of course journalism is in such a state that no one does any investigation anymore, it's just rent a quote from a talking head with a suitable title rather than actually engaging with the subject matter...

This thread manages to demonstrate the whole shebang in a nice neat case study for anyone actually thinking in any kind of critical manner. It's not nutjob conspiracy land. This is frustrated parents who feel the double standards and hypocrisy from government is off the scale and they feel completely gaslit and unsupported in trying to navigate this massive issue.

Tbh on a personal level I've been banging on about the lack of understanding and expertise on technology case within government circles for well over a decade now on MN. Unfortunately the private sector pays better and doesn't have the same level of bullshit which limit parameters and participation from the word go.

Honestly, it's a complete an utter shit show. We have slept walk and continue to sleep walking into an era that government doesn't understand and appreciate and thinks it can just brush all the difficult and inconvenient stuff under the carpet because god forbid they actually have to tackle an actual problem properly. I mean it might upset business or voters and that wouldn't be good for them.

At no point are children actually centred.

That's your bottom line.

Farce. And we wonder why we are in the mess we are in.

Amen to that. I'm glad I'm not the only one who's thinking, do they think we're fucking idiots, in response to what happened here. Slightly less eloquent but.. there you go!

Just come back to this thread and wow. Weapons grade gaslighting and lying there Olivia, well done 🙄

Typical politician. Typical of this government. You'd think they bloody want Reform or the Greens in power with this utter tripe.

Apart from anything else was Olivia allowed unlimited screen time to the extent she didn't learn basic manners? It's RUDE to invite voters to comment about their 'lived experience' and then completely and utterly ignore the very, very good and oft-repeated points they make.

This response is also extremely insulting not only to parents but teachers and TAs desperately trying to do their best for children in schools with EdTech shit constantly being pushed upon them and not enough money to do things like buy books.

Also agree with Borders that having academics who have no 'lived experience' of the actual classroom environment, plus no knowledge of the law around data protection or safeguarding was obviously going to fail. Academics are not the right people to do this - this fact being entirely obvious to anyone aged about 12+ - and public money should not be used for this.