I generally ignore the goings-on in other countries similar to Australia simply because their problems are their business, and we have more than enough of our own that we don't seem to be able to fix. But, this story mentions Australia and our ridiculous under-16 internet censorship.

The House of Lords has failed for the third time to add a ban on 16 year olds using social media to the UK government's Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.

John Power, ‘Does banning social media for under 16s work?’ reckons that the government wants to push the Bill through sans ban until they get more information on harms to kids. If the government waits any longer, Power thinks, they will miss their chance, and the “evidence coming out of Australia (shows) that these bans do not work”.

So much for another of Albanese's ‘world firsts’ lighting the way internationally in child protection! Another joke from down under.

The Poms have found out that 61% of 12-15 year olds have continued to use the banned sites in Australia.

63 year old Albanese doesn't realise that kids who've had technology for ever know more about it than he and Mother Inman Grant do.

Understandably, the Australian censors and politicians don't like to talk about, but the article has a graph showing that of 66% of kids who had a YouTube account, 35% still have one; Ticktock 55-29; Instagram 49-25; Snapchat 49-23; X 18 -7; Reddit 13-6.

Various reasons for the non-compliance are given in the article; but the conclusion is that the ban is a flop, if kids and parents are OK with not complying. And, seriously, are the Big Techs going to be frightened by Mother Grant and little old Australia already with a $1 trillion debt? They are rich enough to answer in court a country silly enough to take them on. Big talk and big threats being made by a little woman and a deluded PM in Australia require big money.