David Seymour floats banning smartphones for under 16s instead of social media ban
Wednesday, 15 July 2026
ACT leader David Seymour is floating the idea of banning phones for teenagers instead of the social media ban proposed by the Government for under 16s.
Seymour suggested banning the purchase, possession and supply of smartphones to minors, or having the Government issue clear guidance on phones deemed suitable for children.
“Maybe protecting kids from the harm of social media doesn’t need to be as complicated as we are making it. Perhaps we just aren’t looking at this from the right direction.”
He made the comments to a crowd at the Graeme Dingle Foundation’s business leaders’ dinner on Wednesday, arguing children didn’t face a problem with social media, but rather smartphones.
Read more:
The ACT party has been outspoken about the ban, with Seymour previously hinting at using an agree to disagree provision to oppose the ban and drawing a line in the sand over banning VPNs.
ACT MP Dr Parmjeet Parmar launched a select committee inquiry earlier this year to understand alternative ways to deal with social media harm.
He argued it was “considerably easier” to regulate the sale or supply a mobile phone than to attempt to police constantly updating technology platforms.
He’s taken the idea from former National Party staffer and political activist Ani O’Brien, who posted about it online, saying “put simply, why don’t we deal with the hardware instead of the software?”
He proposed two options - recommending phones suitable for children or going further and banning phones completely.
With ACT, NZ First and the Green Party raising their own issues with a social media ban, support for it could hinge on Labour MPs, who have previously said they wish to go much further than a simple ban and have been in talks with National more recently.
National are determined to have a proposal for a ban ready before the November election, with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon saying “we’re going to die trying to do something”.
In his speech, Seymour said the ban as it stood had flaws: it would be hard to implement, with certain solutions proposed worse than the problem they are trying to fix, pointing to VPN restrictions.
He argued motivated teenagers would be able to cut through restrictions, while bans could create a barrier between children and adults with young people potentially less likely to seek help if they felt they were breaking rules by using platforms.
“Push them away from the mainstream sites and they could end up in darker and less accountable online spaces.”
He said there had not yet been clear definitions over what counted as a social media app.
“Is YouTube social media? WhatsApp? Discord? Reddit? Gaming platforms with chat functions?”
He raised concerns about the public being required to hand over personal data in order to access social media sites.
“These are not just wrinkles in the policy. They expose a fundamental problem.”