Could Britain\u2019s online censorship push be drifting toward a point where using a VPN could be seen as an act of resistance?<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
By Dan Frieth<\/p>\n\n\n\n It began as a plan to \u201ckeep children safe online.\u201d It has become a national realization about how far the government can reach into the digital lives of its citizens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The UK\u2019s Online Safety Act<\/a> has turned into a case study in how a law written for protection can give no protection and end up with mass surveillance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When peers in the House of Lords met this week to examine its effects, they sounded little like guardians of youth safety, and it was easy to tell they don\u2019t have enough self-awareness to realize they\u2019ve helped unleash a monster.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lord Clement-Jones, the Liberal Democrat technology spokesperson, noted that young people are already avoiding the law\u2019s controls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n VPNs, he said, are now used on a \u201cwidespread\u201d scale, which \u201crisks rendering age-assurance measures ineffective.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The statement revealed a central problem: the people being protected are already finding their way around the digital ID rules. They always will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales expressed the issue plainly. Calling the Act \u201cvery poorly thought-out legislation,\u201d he told The House<\/a> magazine: \u201cWe will not be age-gating Wikipedia under any circumstances, so, if it comes to that, it\u2019s going to be an interesting showdown, because we\u2019re going to just refuse to do it. Politically, what are they going to do? They could block Wikipedia. Good luck with that.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Wales\u2019s refusal is part of a natural broader discomfort with the idea of regulating access to information through identification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under the new law, platforms must verify users\u2019 ages through ID checks or similar systems. Millions of users will have to prove their identity before they can post or browse. Privacy groups describe this as a national identity program introduced without open debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With data breaches still frequent across both government and corporate systems, the setup creates an environment where every login carries potential exposure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n VPN use has increased in response. These tools, once associated with cybersecurity professionals, now serve anyone who prefers to maintain privacy online. They allow people to move through the internet without revealing personal data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Baroness Liz Lloyd, speaking for the government, said there was \u201climited evidence on children\u2019s use of VPNs,\u201d while assuring the Lords that the issue was being monitored. \u201cThere are no current plans to ban the use of VPNs, as there are legitimate reasons for using VPNs,\u201d she said. She also added, \u201cThe Government has made it clear that nothing is off the table when it comes to keeping children safe.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Her statement aimed to settle the discussion but left open the possibility of future restrictions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While lawmakers debated, Ofcom, the communications regulator, began broadening its authority into artificial intelligence and algorithmic oversight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Stylized](\"https:\/\/reclaimthenet.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/SUZRuKOD0z8y-scaled.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n