You’re wrong, Mr Trump, Nato DID stand by America in its hour of need – on 9/11

Of all the false claims made by Donald Trump in his speech at Davos one stands alone as the most ignorant and shocking.

In his latest broadside against Nato and its key European members including Britain, France and Germany, he complained it was a “one way street”. The US paid all the bills but had “never gotten anything back,” he said; American soldiers were always ready to take up arms in defence of any Nato country faced with attack, but Nato would never make the same sacrifice for the US in return.

President Trump said: “The problem for Nato is that we would be there for them 100 per cent, but I’m not sure they would be there for us if we gave them the call ‘gentlemen, we are being attacked by such and such a nation.’”

He continued: “With all the money we spend, all the blood sweat and tears, I don’t know that they’d be there for us. They’re not there for us in Iceland [he meant Greenland] – and Iceland [ditto] has already cost us a lot of money!”

Let’s put to one side his cringeworthy error in confusing Greenland with Iceland: it is dwarfed by his ignorance of Nato’s history. As most people know, it is underpinned by a simple core principle: an attack on one member country is an attack on all.

In such circumstances, under Nato Article 5 all members are required to take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore security.”

Remarkable though it may seem given the many global conflicts that have taken place since Nato was set up in 1949, Article 5 has only been triggered once in its 77 year history. And on that occasion the country that its members shed “blood sweat and tears” to defend was none other than America itself.

When it came under fire in the appalling terror attack on New York’s World Trade Centre on September 11 2001, Nato was quick to respond and rally round America. On September 12, Nato took the historic step of triggering Article 5 to show the US that its allies around the world were ready to stand shoulder to shoulder with them in responding.

When evidence was found that the 9/11 attack stemmed from Afghanistan, Nato members showed the depth of their commitment to the US. Some 130,000 servicemen and women from no fewer than 25 of Nato’s 32 member states took part in the Afghanistan war over two long hard fought decades. And a total of 1,061 of them died in the conflict – in addition to 2,461 from the US and a small number from non-Nato countries. By far the highest number of non-US casualties came from Britain, with 457 deaths.

No one can fault Denmark either, at the centre of the dispute over Mr Trump’s attempt to seize Greenland, under Danish sovereignty, for its efforts in Afghanistan. Although the 43 Danes killed in Afghanistan was fewer than in many bigger nations, it was the second highest as a proportion of its population.

For the benefit of those, who, like Mr Trump, are unaware of the cruel price in human life paid by Nato members who rallied to the US led campaign in Afghanistan, here is the roll call of those from non-Nato countries who died, including their home nation: UK 457, Canada 159, France 90, Germany 62, Italy 63, Poland 44, Denmark 43, Spain 35, Romania 27, Netherlands 25, Turkey 15, Czech Republic 14, Norway 10, Estonia 9, Hungary 7, Sweden (which joined Nato in 2024) 5, Latvia 4, Slovakia 3, Finland 3, Portugal 2, Albania 2, Belgium 1, Croatia 2, Lithuania 1, Montenegro 1.

The next time Donald Trump questions whether Britain and other Nato countries would shed “blood sweat and tears” for the US, perhaps he should be sent a list of the names of all the brave individuals listed above. Armed forces members from many Nato countries were also killed in the Iraq War which, like Afghanistan, was a conflict fought largely at the behest of the US.

However, unlike Afghanistan, there was no specific Nato operation in Iraq: several member states such as France refused to take part because of controversy over the case for going to war.

But as with relatives of Nato troops who died in Afghanistan, try telling the loved ones of the 179 British service personnel who died in Iraq that the UK “wasn’t there for them” when the US called to say “gentlemen we are under attack”.

Prue Leith quits Great British Bake Off

Dame Prue Leith has announced her decision to quit Great British Bake Off, saying it “feels like the right time to step back” from the Channel 4 show.

In a statement released on Wednesday (21 January), Leith said: “Bake Off has been a fabulous part of my life for the last nine years, I have genuinely loved it and I’m sure I’ll miss working with my fellow judge Paul [Hollywood], Alison [Hammond] and Noel [Fielding] and the teams at Love Productions and Channel 4.

“But now feels like the right time to step back (I’m 86 for goodness sake!), there’s so much I’d like to do, not least spend summers enjoying my garden.”

“Whoever joins the team, I’m sure they’ll love it as much as I have,” she added. “I feel very lucky to have been part of it.”

Channel 4 has said a new judge will be announced in due course.

Leith joined the programme after it moved from the BBC to Channel 4 in 2017, and faced the daunting task of replacing Paul Hollywood’s original judging partner, Dame Mary Berry.

Fortunately, the new judge soon found her groove in the famous Bake Off tent, winning over fans and critics with her kind-hearted critiques and statement looks. There was one blip, though: in her first year on the show, Leith hit headlines after accidentally revealing the winner hours before the finale aired.

A number of former Bake Off contestants have shared their sadness at her exit from the programme.

Commenting underneath an Instagram post on the show’s official account, 2025 winner Jasmine Mitchell wrote: “We will really miss you so much. You are just wonderful and incredible.”

Dr Rahul Mandal, who triumphed in 2018, added: “We adored you, you are kind, passionate and above all inspiring. You challenged yourself in every step of your life, which inspired us. I always [tell] my daughter to be as bold and brave like you.”

Alison Hammond and Noel Fielding are the current Bake Off presenters, but Leith has also worked with Sandi Toksvig and Matt Lucas.

In 2024, Leith revealed that she previously tried to quit the show after becoming fed up with “hardly seeing” her family and “never” having a summer holiday due to filming demands. The judge agreed to stay after the show’s production company changed the schedule so she could have more time off.

Channel 4 chief content officer Ian Katz said: “Prue Leith has been a joyous presence in the tent, pairing absolute culinary authority with great generosity and empathy for the bakers.

“We are grateful for her passion, her wit, her ineffable style, and all the summers she spent in the tent. She leaves an indelible mark on the show and all its bakers.

“We will miss her wry, gentle judgment but look forward to working with her on new projects.”

Olivia Dean, Lola Young and Lily Allen lead nominations for 2026 Brit Awards

Women in pop dominate the nominations for the 2026 Brit Awards, with Lily Allen, Olivia Dean, Lola Young and JADE all named in major categories.

The ceremony is being held outside London for the first time in the award show’s history, taking place instead next month on 28 February at the Co-Op Live arena in Manchester.

Olivia Dean and Lola Young lead the charge in this year’s nominations with five nods each, including a spot for both in the Artist of the Year category.

Dean, 26, enjoyed a huge year in 2025 thanks to the success of her second album, The Art of Loving, and singles such as “Man I Need” and “Nice to Each Other”.

The soul-pop singer is up for Song of the Year twice, for “Man I Need” and also for her collaboration with singer-songwriter Sam Fender, “Rein Me In”. Fender is another Artist of the Year contender and will be vying for Album of the Year with his third record, People Watching.

Dean’s The Art of Loving is shortlisted in the same category, regarded as the biggest prize of the night.

“It feels crazy to have five Brit Award nominations, it’s very surreal and I’m still processing it,” Dean said in a statement.

“I remember watching the Brits on TV when I was younger, and having gone to Brit School and now having this full-circle moment 10 years later, attending the awards is going to feel very emotional.”

Women and non-binary artists enjoyed the highest representation in Brits history, accounting for almost 70 per cent of nominees.

Lily Allen’s renaissance continues with her comeback album, West End Girl, a brutally honest account of the breakdown of a marriage, also up for Album of the Year, while Allen is nominated for Artist of the Year and Best Pop. Meanwhile, Britpop heroes Pulp make a triumphant return to the awards show with their first Brit nod in 30 years, for Best Group.

This year’s Brit nominations also seemed to better reflect the sheer breadth and diversity in popular music. Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny is nominated for International Solo Artist alongside pop artist Chappell Roan, Irish singer CMAT, pioneering Spanish musician Rosalia, and Florida rapper Doechii, as well as pop giants Taylor Swift, Sabrina Carpenter and Lady Gaga.

Meanwhile, buzzy New York band Geese are up for International Group together with LA pop trio Haim and Hunter X, the band behind the songs from the hit Netflix film K Pop Demon Hunters.

Here are the nominations in full:

Dave

Fred Again

JADE

Lily Allen

Little Simz

Lola Young

Olivia Dean

PinkPantheress

Sam Fender

Self Esteem

The Last Dinner Party

Pulp

Sleep Token

Wet Leg

Wolf Alice

Dave – The Boy Who Played the Harp

Lily Allen – West End Girl

Olivia Dean – The Art of Loving

Sam Fender – People Watching

Wolf Alice – The Clearing

Barry Can’t Swim

EsDeeKid

Jim Legxacy

Lola Young

Sky Newman

Bad Bunny

Chappell Roan

CMAT

Doechii

Lady Gaga

Rosalia

Sabrina Carpenter

Sombr

Taylor Swift

Tyler, the Creator

Geese

Haim

Hunter X

Tame Impala

Turnstile

Calvin Harris and Clementine Douglas – “Blessings”

Chrystal and Notion – “The Days (Notion Remix)”

Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande – “Defying Gravity”

Ed Sheeran – “Azizam”

Fred Again, Skepta and PlaqueBoyMax – “Victory Lap”

Lewis Capaldi – “Survive”

Lola Young – “Messy”

Myles Smith – “Nice to Meet You”

Olivia Dean – “Man I Need”

RAYE – “Where is My Husband?”

Sam Fender and Olivia Dean – “Rein Me In”

Skye Newman – “Family Matters”

Alex Warren – “Ordinary”

Chappell Roan – “Pink Pony Club”

Disco Lines x Tinashe – “No Broke Boys”

GG Perez – “Sailor Song”

Gracie Abrams – “That’s So True”

Hunter X – “Golden”

Lady Gaga and Bruno Mars – “Die With a Smile”

Raven Lenni – “Love Me Not”

Rose x Bruno Mars – “APT”

Sabrina Carpenter – “Manchild”

Sombr – “Undressed”

Taylor Swift – “The Fate of Ophelia”

Blood Orange

Lola Young

Sam Fender

Wet Leg

Wolf Alice

JADE

Lily Allen

Lola Young

Olivia Dean

RAYE

Central Cee

Dave

Jim Legxacy

Little Simz

Loyle Carner

Jim Legxacy

KWN

Mabel

Sasha Keeble

Sault

Calvin Harris and Clementine Douglas

FKA twigs

Fred Again, Skepta and PlaqueBoyMax

PinkPantheress

Sammy Virgi

Jacob Alon

The 2026 Brit Awards take place at the Co-Op Live Arena in Manchester on 28 February and will be hosted by Jack Whitehall.

‘Remarkable’ prehistoric elephant bone tool is oldest in Europe

Archaeologists have unlocked the secrets of a “remarkable” 500,000-year-old elephant bone hammer which they say is the oldest of its kind in Europe.

The 11-centimetre-long fragment was first uncovered at a dig in Boxgrove, near Chichester in West Sussex, in the 1990s, but its significance was not recognised until much more recently.

Researchers from University College London (UCL) and the Natural History Museum now say the piece of bone bears marks that indicate it was “intentionally shaped” for use as a tool – making it the oldest implement made of elephant bone in the continent.

Lead author Simon Parfitt said that elephants and mammoths were “uncommon” in prehistoric England, suggesting the fragment was a “tool of considerable value”.

He added the “remarkable” discovery showcases the “ingenuity and resourcefulness” of the prehistoric community that fashioned it.

“They possessed, not only a deep knowledge of the local materials around them, but also a sophisticated understanding of how to craft highly refined stone tools,” he continued. “Elephant bone would have been a rare but highly useful resource, and it’s likely this was a tool of considerable value.”

The team used 3D scanning methods and electron microscopes to analyse the surface of the bone fragment, revealing distinctive notches and marks. Researchers said he tool was used as a kind of hammer by its ancient owner, who likely would have been aware that elephant bone is a particularly strong material.

They believe the bone tool served as a “retoucher,” used to strike the edges of dulled stone tools to detach flakes to restore their shape and sharpness, a process known as “knapping.”

Co-author Dr Silvia Bello, Merit Researcher at the Natural History Museum, said: “Our ancient ancestors were sophisticated in their use of tools. Collecting and shaping an elephant bone fragment and then using it on multiple occasions to shape and sharpen stone tools shows an advanced level of complex thinking and abstract thought.

“They were resourceful gatherers of available materials, and savvy about how best to use them.”

It comes after researchers unearthed what could be the earliest known use of poison-laced weapons by human hunters in South Africa.

Scientists identified traces of poison from the South African plant gifbol on arrowheads dating to about 60,000 years ago, making it the oldest known arrow poison in the world to date.

The findings reveal that prehistoric people in southern Africa had already developed advanced knowledge of toxic substances and how they could be used for hunting.

Salah return overshadowed as Liverpool make Champions League statement

Mohamed Salah’s Liverpool return was less impactful than he would have hoped as he was overshadowed by Dominik Szoboszlai in a 3-0 victory in Marseille which made a Champions League top-eight finish all the more likely.

While all eyes were on the Egypt international it was his close friend – and the team’s most consistent performer – who surprised the hosts with a clever free-kick under the wall in first-half added time.

The set-piece probably favoured Salah’s left foot but Szoboszlai took charge with a low shot which crept under the jump of Leonardo Balerdi and inside the post.

Jeremie Frimpong’s second-half cross deflected in off goalkeeper Geronimo Rulli just as pressure was starting to build, before Cody Gakpo’s added-time strike secured only Liverpool’s second win by three goals against a top-tier side this season.

Salah was making his first start since 26 November, when Liverpool were humiliated 4-1 at home to PSV Eindhoven, their final defeat of nine in 12 matches prior to the current 12-game unbeaten stretch.

His subsequent omission from the team led to those explosive comments about being “thrown under the bus”, suggesting his relationship with boss Arne Slot had broken down and his own immediate future was in doubt but the Africa Cup of Nations provided a natural break.

He was deployed up front with Hugo Ekitike in a 4-2-2-2 formation, with Florian Wirtz and Szoboszlai as twin number 10s, but the bench was weakened further by injury to Federico Chiesa in the warm-up which left four just senior outfield players.

The role appeared to suit Salah with slightly less responsibility to chase back while getting him closer to the penalty area and although he was not heavily involved he looked tuned into his team-mates’ wavelengths despite a month away.

His one chance of the first half saw him divert Frimpong’s cross onto the roof of the net with his hip while an offside flag spared his embarrassment for putting a second-half header wide – but there was no hiding when he screwed wide with only Rulli to beat.

However, this game showed that his influence is no longer match-defining. Wirtz, Szoboszlai and, to a lesser extent, Ekitike now hold sway.

Results on Tuesday had opened the door for Liverpool to avoid the play-offs and Atletico Madrid’s draw in Galatasaray was another boost.

A Marseille tifo featured The Beatles reading a newspaper with the headline ‘Que l’histoire se repete’ – loosely translated as ‘That history repeats itself’ – in reference to the 2-1 UEFA Cup win against Liverpool here in 2004.

Joe Gomez and Alexis Mac Allister both sent early attempts wide but it was the tenacity of Liverpool’s press which brought the first big chance.

Ryan Gravenberch nicked the ball off Michael Murillo and released Salah, who sent Szoboszlai clear on the right. Although Ekitike converted the low cross he had strayed offside.

However, Szoboszlai made it a goal or assist in each of his last five European games by becoming the first Liverpool player since Trent Alexander-Arnold in 2022-23 to score multiple direct free-kicks in a single season.

Alisson Becker saved from Amine Gouiri and Mason Greenwood either side of half-time and as the game opened up Ekitike struck the post and Wirtz forced Rulli into a sharp near-post save.

Timothy Weah had Marseille’s two best efforts before Frimpong’s driving run along the backline brought the relief of a second goal, then substitute Gakpo added the gloss.

‘We installed a heat pump last year – here’s what I’ve learned’

In April last year, Paul and his wife replaced the 18kW gas system boiler in their four-bedroom house in south Liverpool with an Octopus Cosy 9 heat pump. Living with their three children, the couple was motivated by both environmental concerns and the potential for long-term savings.

Electrifying central heating offered flexibility they hadn’t had before: cheaper electricity rates, and in Paul’s case, the ability to use electricity generated from his own solar panels and stored in a home battery to help power the heating. While many homeowners may not have a solar system, it’s a bonus that shows how heat pumps can work even more efficiently when paired with renewable electricity generation.

“I’m very enthusiastic about phasing out fossil fuels from all areas of life as quickly as possible,” Paul says. “And I also love the extra flexibility that it gives you by electrifying central heating rather than relying on gas. Things like cheaper smart tariff rates, using the electricity I generate from my solar and/battery system and, of course, the occasional free electricity sessions from Octopus all help with our central heating and hot water as well.”

Before making the switch, Paul did his homework. He had no doubts about the system’s ability to heat their home, seeing the fears often voiced about heat pumps as similar to “range anxiety” with electric vehicles – something he had experience with and had long learned was largely unfounded. “I had zero anxiety at all about whether or not we’d be able to warm our house effectively. I guess that’s the heating equivalent of ‘range anxiety’. But both my wife and I have driven EVs for years, so we know that fears about them are a myth. I knew concerns about heat pumps not working in winter or in older houses are a myth too.”

The biggest barrier for many homeowners, including Paul, is the upfront cost. Government support, however, made the decision far easier. “I knew getting a heat pump would unlock far cheaper energy bills going forward, so it was worth doing everything I could to get one. Obviously, the £7,500 government grant was invaluable, and getting it was dead easy. Octopus did all that for me on my behalf.

Paul considered a Daikin system but ultimately chose Octopus’ own Cosy 9 heat pump. The decision was guided by integration and future-proofing: the Cosy’s controls sit within the same app as their electricity account, aligning perfectly with other smart systems in the home, such as EV charging and solar battery storage. “I feel that is where the future innovation and clever automations are more likely to be – in the same way that Octopus can intelligently charge my car when energy is cheapest and greenest, I’m hoping that will become an option one day,” Paul explains.

Installation took just four days and caused minimal disruption. The results have exceeded expectations. “Our house has been lovely and warm all the time this winter,” Paul says. “Don’t get me wrong, our previous gas boiler was capable of heating the house, but reservations about carbon emissions and the extremely high cost of gas central heating in recent years put us off having it on much in previous years.”

Noise has not been an issue. “99% of the time you’re completely unaware of any noise. The heat pump’s gentle whirring happens outside, and when it’s cold, you’re generally inside. During the warm summer months when you’re outside your house in the garden, it’s generally off apart from when it’s doing the hot water cycle – even then, you have to go and stand right next to it if you want to hear it. It’s so quiet.”

Comfort is now a priority rather than a compromise. There’s plenty of hot water for morning showers and the kids’ baths at night, and the family keeps the thermostat at 23–24°C, a significant step up from last year’s 17°C. “This winter is the first time since the energy crisis that we’ve been toasty and warm inside, without having to worry about huge bills. Heating your house using cheap off-peak electricity is a huge benefit which just doesn’t exist with gas,” Paul says.

Ten months on, Paul says there are many things he no longer misses: the gas standing charge, the risk of carbon monoxide, and the anxiety over fluctuating gas prices. He has become a passionate advocate for heat pumps, stressing that the technology works effectively even in homes that are far from “perfect” in terms of insulation or installation conditions.

“Just like with electric cars, don’t listen to the naysayers and the people who have zero actual experience of heat pumps when they trot out the tired old disproved myths about them being too noisy, not working, or costing a fortune. Take it from someone who has one and lives in a house with far from ideal and perfect installation conditions – they work brilliantly.”

For the family, the switch has not only brought tangible financial and environmental benefits but also a sense of reassurance and control over their home energy use. It’s a glimpse into what a greener, smarter and more cost-effective future for home heating could look like.

Explore Octopus heat pumps or verify our claims on the Octopus Energy website.

‘I will not yield’: a cheer for Keir – at last someone’s had the gumption to stand up to Trump

Keir Starmer came to Prime Minister’s Questions better prepared than he has been for some time. It helped that he could see Kemi Badenoch’s line of questioning coming from across the road at No 10.

She was going to ask about the Chagos deal, which Donald Trump has denounced. She knows that the deal is a terrible one, and that the prime minister would struggle to justify paying Mauritius to take over a territory to which it has the feeblest claim.

But Starmer knows something more important, which is that most people in Britain don’t care about Chagos – and that they do care about Trump. They regard the president as a dangerous narcissist whose demand to acquire Greenland is an outrage.

Before Badenoch could ask about Chagos, therefore, the prime minister spoke slowly and deliberately to set out “our principles and values”. The first was that the future of Greenland was a matter for Greenlanders and the Danes. The second was that “threats of tariffs to pressurise allies are completely wrong”.

He announced that “the prime minister of Denmark is coming to the United Kingdom tomorrow for bilateral talks”. Most MPs would be hard pressed to name her – Mette Frederiksen – but her imminent presence in Downing Street inspired an instant reflex of Nato-tinged solidarity.

Which allowed Starmer to deploy some actual rhetoric, instead of his usual technocrat-speak. “I do want to be clear with the House,” he said. “I will not yield – Britain will not yield – on our principles and values about the future of Greenland under threats of tariffs. That is my clear position.”

Badenoch’s attack on the Chagos deal was safely disarmed. She was forced to say: “I am very glad to hear the prime minister say that.” She pointed out that Starmer was not willing to grant the Chagossians the same right of self-determination that he insisted on for Greenlanders, but he had already taken the high moral ground.

He told her that the president’s U-turn on Chagos was “for the purpose of putting pressure on me” over Greenland. He was, therefore, “surprised” that she had “jumped on the bandwagon”.

Starmer is right that Trump is using the Chagos deal to punish him for his insubordination over Greenland. He liked the “I will not yield” phrase so much that he used it several times. Badenoch could not point out that it didn’t mean much. What he was not yielding to was the contradiction of the principle that Greenland is a matter for Greenlanders and the Danes, and that tariffs are wrong.

He wasn’t saying that British troops would fight for every inch of Greenlandic territory and never surrender. He wasn’t even saying that he would retaliate against punitive tariffs. All he was saying was that he will continue to believe in the principles of self-determination and free trade. But it sounded defiant, and it sounded as if he was standing up to the bully-president.

So Badenoch had nowhere to go. The Chagos deal may be indefensible, but if Trump is against it, it is hard for her to be for it. Just as Farage looks as if he is being unpatriotic by going to Davos to try to sidle up to Trump for a photo opportunity, to try to claim credit for persuading the president to scupper the deal.

The Conservative leader had to move on, saying the government should spend more on defence. Starmer replied that it was already doing so, and that the previous government, of which she was a member, had “hollowed out” the armed forces.

And that was that. Badenoch had not expected the “Whose side are you on?” response, because it required Starmer to take up a more hostile stance towards Trump than he has adopted until now. But the prime minister has already been punished by Trump for standing up to him, and has little left to lose.

On the contrary, he has much to gain in strengthening his support among Labour MPs and in putting himself on the right side of public opinion. Badenoch and Farage are going to learn that putting themselves on the same side as Trump will be uncomfortable for them.

“I will not yield” is just a phrase – but today, it was the right one.

Pressure on PM as peers back Australia-style under-16 social media ban

The House of Lords has backed a ban on social media for under-16s, adding to growing pressure on Sir Keir Starmer to introduce an Australia-style crackdown.

The prime minister had tried to head off the vote by launching a consultation on potential restrictions.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall announced a three-month consultation this week, which will consider the advantages and disadvantages of a ban, as well as possible overnight curfews and actions to prevent “doom-scrolling”, reporting back in the summer.

However, former schools minister Lord Nash said the consultation simply represents more delay.

The Tory peer argued the evidence is “overwhelming” for a ban, with support ranging from “medical professionals to our police and national intelligence community, from our teachers to hundreds of thousands of parents”.

But peers backed Tory Lord Nash’s amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill calling for an outright ban by 261 to 150, a majority of 111.

Sir Keir now faces the prospect of a backbench rebellion when it returns to the Commons, after more than 60 Labour MPs publicly called for Britain to follow Australia, which has become the first country to bar young people from social media.

Just hours before the vote the chief inspector of the schools watchdog, Oftsed, said he would have consulted on a potential ban sooner.

Sir Martyn Oliver said that while he welcomed the government’s action it was “a little bit late”.

Lord Nash, a former schools minister, rejected the consultation, arguing it meant more delay when there was alreday “overwhelming” evidence for a ban. “The time for delay and procrastination is over,” he said.

His amendment had cross-party support and was co-sponsored by Labour peer Baroness Berger, Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Benjamin and the independent crossbench peer Baroness Cass.

Supporters of a ban say social media harming children’s health, including their mental health, and is driving radicalisation and crime.

But opponents warn it could drive young people on to the dangerous ‘dark net’ .

At the weekend the NSPCC among others also said blanket bans were “a blunt response that fails to address the successive shortcomings of tech companies and governments to act decisively and sooner”.

But filmmaker and children’s rights campaigner Baroness Kidron said the announcement of a consultation was “an insult” to Parliament, parents and youngsters, and warned it would delay action to keep children safe online.

Earlier Sir Keir Starmer had told MPs the consultation would “look at expert and international evidence to get this right”, including restrictions on age and addictive features as well as screen time use by under-fives.

The prime minister also pledged it would report by the summer.