The House of Lords has voted in favour of an amendment to ban social media use for children under 16, intensifying the UK political debate over online harms and digital child safety. The cross-party vote on Wednesday 21 saw 261 peers support the measure against 150 opposing it, applying pressure on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s government to act on rising public concerns about social media’s impact on young people.

The amendment, proposed by Conservative peer Lord John Nash and supported by politicians from multiple parties, was added to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. It mirrors a similar law recently implemented in Australia that prohibits social media use by under-16s, a policy already prompting platforms to deactivate millions of youth accounts.

Government consultation and next steps

Although peers backed the amendment, the UK government has not formally adopted a ban yet. Ministers have launched a three-month public consultation to explore the potential ban and other options – such as raising the digital age of consent and introducing time-based curfews on app usage – with results expected by the summer.

Downing Street has stated it will consider all options, with Prime Minister Starmer indicating that “no option is off the table” while assessing evidence, including outcomes of Australia’s policy. Over 60 Labour MPs have also urged the government to support stricter age limits for social media access.

If the amended bill reaches the House of Commons, MPs could affirm, modify or overturn the Lords’ decision before it becomes law. Proponents argue the measure is vital to protect mental health, reduce exposure to harmful content and give parents more support. Opponents caution that enforcement and age verification present practical challenges, and some urge a broader regulatory approach focused on platform design and algorithm transparency.

Why the issue matters

Campaigners and parents have rallied behind the proposal, claiming that social media’s addictive design and exposure to harmful material contribute to rising anxiety, cyber-bullying and mental health issues among children. Figures such as actor Hugh Grant and bereaved families have publicly called for stronger protections, reflecting growing public concern.

As the UK navigates its approach, it joins a small group of countries testing age-specific restrictions on digital platforms. The outcome of this consultation and parliamentary debate could reshape how social media is regulated for minors across the UK.

On a cold morning, it’s a scene most drivers know well. You’re running late, the car’s been outside all night, and the windscreen is still covered in ice. You scrape a small patch, hop in and hope for the best.

In Spain, that quick decision could now cost you up to €200.

The country’s traffic authority, the DGT, has instructed the Guardia Civil to step up roadside checks during cold weather, focusing on one thing above all else: visibility. If officers believe your view of the road isn’t clear enough, they can fine you on the spot – even if you haven’t caused an accident.

And yes, that includes driving with frozen or misted windows.

Why police are stopping drivers over frozen glass

According to traffic sources, the crackdown has intensified during recent cold spells, especially in areas where cars are often left outside overnight. The reasoning is simple: a driver who cannot see properly is considered a risk, regardless of how slowly they are driving.

Spanish traffic law requires motorists to maintain clear and sufficient visibility at all times. That doesn’t just apply to the windscreen, but to all glass surfaces that affect the driver’s field of vision. If ice, condensation, dirt or even damage gets in the way, officers are allowed to intervene.

Importantly, a fine can be issued without any incident taking place. It’s enough for an officer to judge that the driver’s visibility is compromised.

For many motorists, especially in colder inland regions, this has come as an unwelcome surprise.

Everyday habits that can land you a fine

What’s catching drivers out is that many of the situations being penalised are things people don’t always think of as offences. Setting off with frost still clinging to the windscreen, relying on wipers to clear ice, or driving while the glass is still fogged can all be seen as violations.

Cracks or stone chips in the driver’s line of sight can also be an issue, as can stickers, suction mounts or other objects stuck to the windscreen. Even if these have been there for months, they may suddenly become a problem during a routine stop.

While these fines don’t carry penalty points, the €200 sanction is enough to make most drivers think twice – especially when it’s imposed during a routine commute.

Are these fines always justified? Not necessarily

Legal experts say that, while the rules on visibility are clear, the way fines are issued can vary. Pyramid Consulting, a firm specialising in traffic law, notes that some sanctions are based on vague descriptions and lack concrete evidence that visibility was genuinely impaired.

In those cases, a fine may be open to appeal. Common grounds include insufficient proof, incorrect classification of the offence or procedural errors. Each situation depends on what the officer recorded at the time and how the sanction was documented.

Still, lawyers stress that contesting a fine doesn’t change the basic responsibility placed on drivers. If visibility is questionable, the safest option is to wait until the glass is fully clear.

The message from the DGT is blunt

The authorities aren’t asking for perfection – but they are demanding common sense. If you can’t see properly, you shouldn’t be driving. With winter weather continuing across many parts of Spain, enforcement is unlikely to ease anytime soon.

So next time you’re tempted to scrape just enough ice to “get by”, remember this: a few extra minutes in the cold is a lot cheaper than a €200 fine.

Stay tuned with Euro Weekly News for more news about Motoring

Spain’s prime minister Pedro Sánchez has been invited by United States president Donald Trump to take part in a proposed international “peace board” intended to oversee the reconstruction of Gaza following the war. The invitation, first reported by Spanish media and confirmed by government sources, is currently under review by Spain’s executive, with no decision yet taken.

According to sources at La Moncloa, Sánchez has received a formal approach linked to Trump’s foreign policy proposals, which include the creation of a body tentatively described as a “peace plan” or governing council for Gaza. The initiative would aim to manage reconstruction efforts and post-war stability, although no formal structure, mandate or international framework has been announced.

Uncertainty over role and international legitimacy

Moncloa offers no commitment

Spanish government sources have stressed that the invitation does not constitute an agreement and that Spain has not accepted participation. Officials say the proposal is being analysed diplomatically, particularly in relation to its compatibility with international law, the United Nations framework and Spain’s existing positions on the Middle East conflict.

The government has reiterated its long-standing support for a two-state solution and for multilateral mechanisms led by the United Nations. Any involvement in post-war Gaza, officials note, would need to align with those principles and with European Union policy.

No details have been provided regarding how the proposed peace board would function, who else might be invited to participate or whether international organisations would be involved.

Political reaction within Spain

Coalition partners express opposition

The invitation has already generated political tension within Spain’s governing coalition. Several parties allied to Sánchez have publicly rejected the idea of Spain joining a body linked to Trump’s initiative, warning that it could undermine international norms and sideline existing multilateral institutions.

Representatives from left-wing parties within the coalition have criticised the proposal as incompatible with the United Nations system and Spain’s foreign policy commitments. They argue that reconstruction and governance in Gaza should be led through recognised international frameworks rather than ad hoc political initiatives.

Opposition figures, meanwhile, have questioned the lack of clarity surrounding the proposal and have called on the government to provide transparency regarding any diplomatic contacts related to the initiative.

Trump’s proposal and broader context

Part of wider foreign policy positioning

Donald Trump has made the reconstruction and future governance of Gaza part of his broader foreign policy messaging, framing the proposed peace board as a mechanism to stabilise the territory after the conflict. However, no official documentation or international backing for such a body has been announced.

Trump,  has not outlined how the board would interact with existing international actors, including the Palestinian Authority, Israel, the United Nations or regional powers.

Analysts note that the proposal appears political rather than institutional at this stage, with significant legal and diplomatic hurdles remaining before any such body could be established.

Spain’s position on Gaza

Commitment to humanitarian aid and multilateral solutions

Spain has been among the European countries most vocal in calling for a ceasefire and increased humanitarian access to Gaza. The Sánchez government has consistently argued that any reconstruction effort must be accompanied by political progress toward a two-state solution.

Madrid has also supported international conferences and diplomatic initiatives led by recognised institutions, including the UN and the EU, and has contributed humanitarian assistance through established international channels.

Government sources stress that Spain’s engagement in Gaza-related initiatives remains guided by international law and multilateral cooperation.

Diplomatic caution going forward

No decision taken

At this stage, the Spanish government insists that no commitment has been made and that the invitation remains under consideration. Officials underline that any potential participation would require broad international legitimacy and internal political consensus.

The issue is expected to remain a point of debate both within Spain and across Europe as discussions continue over Gaza’s post-war future. For now, Madrid maintains that its priority is humanitarian relief, international coordination and a political solution grounded in existing global frameworks.

Key points

• Pedro Sánchez has been invited by Donald Trump to join a proposed Gaza peace board
• The Spanish government has not accepted and says the invitation is under review
• Coalition partners have publicly opposed participation
• No formal structure or international mandate has been announced
• Spain reiterates support for UN-led, multilateral solutions

Spain’s response reflects broader uncertainty among European governments over how post-war Gaza should be governed and reconstructed. While international interest in stabilisation efforts is growing, most states continue to emphasise the need for legally recognised mechanisms.

As diplomatic discussions evolve, the Sánchez government faces the challenge of balancing international engagement with domestic political pressure and its stated commitment to multilateralism, leaving the invitation unresolved for now.