PM Announces Plans to Block Nude Images on Children's Devices
techUK Analysis | The Prime Minister has announced new plans to make it impossible for children to take, share or view nude images on their devices, below we outline what it means and our position.
Today 8th June 2026, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced, in a speech at London Tech Week, plans to make Britain the first country where it is impossible for children to take, share or view nude images on their devices. The announcement was made alongside the Home Secretary and Technology Secretary, with backing from the NSPCC, and represents a significant escalation of the government's online safety agenda beyond the existing Online Safety Act framework.
Technology companies have been given three months to act voluntarily. If they do not, the government has signalled it will legislate, with fines for non-compliance and, as a last resort, criminal liability for executives.
What is being Proposed?
The plans would require technology companies to activate built-in features or implement technical solutions on smartphones and tablets to detect and block nude images for users identified as children — by default, across the whole device. Key elements include:
On-device blocking of nude images across all apps, camera functions, messaging services and search — not just within individual platforms
Default protections applied to existing and newly sold devices across the UK
Adults to retain access following an age verification process
Measures to apply without threatening privacy or requiring data collection from users
Potential extension to operating system providers and others in the supply chain, including retailers
Note: The government has pointed to Apple's recent introduction of age checks and default safety features as a step in the right direction — but makes clear it wants companies to go further. Current detection does not extend to the camera, broader apps, third-party messaging or search.
The changes would apply to UK devices, covering both existing and newly sold smartphones and tablets, and could extend to operating system providers and others in the supply chain, such as retailers. They would not affect devices owned and used by adults who verify their age.
techUK's Position
1. Child Safety Is a Shared Priority
The UK tech industry shares the government's determination to protect children online. This is not a regulatory obligation — it is a moral one. techUK welcomes the government's focus on this issue and is committed to engaging urgently and constructively with the three-month process.
2. The Technical Reality Must Be Acknowledged
techUK urges the government and media to be clear about what is actually being asked. On-device scanning at scale is not a settings change or a policy update — it is a fundamental overhaul of how devices handle data. This involves scanning content at the operating system level, before it moves anywhere, across hundreds of millions of devices. That is a complex technical undertaking with significant implications that deserve serious discussion, not just a headline.
Specifically, the industry will need to work through:
How content is defined and flagged — and how false positives are avoided
Implications for end-to-end encryption, which protects millions of users including domestic abuse survivors and journalists
How privacy is maintained without data collection, as the government has stipulated
Coordination across operating system providers, device manufacturers and retailers
The definition of “blocking” and how that would manifest in reality.
On-device scanning at scale is a complex, fundamental change to how devices work. It raises questions about encryption, about accuracy, about who decides what gets flagged. Those questions matter - because a solution that is rushed is a solution that fails. Children deserve better than a good headline. They deserve something that actually works.
3. The Online Safety Act: What is already in place?
Today's announcement goes beyond — the existing Online Safety Act framework, which already requires platforms to remove illegal content swiftly, criminalises cyber-flashing, prohibits deepfake pornography, and gives Ofcom real enforcement powers.
The Online Safety Act already equips Ofcom with substantial powers to hold platforms to account — including fines of up to 10% of global turnover and, in serious cases, business disruption orders. These are significant penalties, more than capable of incentivising compliance and driving meaningful accountability, and many of these powers have not yet been fully employed in practice. Before layering criminal personal liability on top, we urge the government to exhaust and strengthen those tools before reaching for criminal sanctions.
4. On Criminal Liability: Proportionality Is a Serious Principle
Our specific concerns about criminal liability for executives are:
Legal uncertainty: Uncertainty in the standard
Criminal liability for failure to comply with a technical standard that is, in many cases, still being defined sets a deeply uncertain legal threshold. Uncertainty in criminal law is not a technicality — it is a fundamental problem.
A meaningful distinction must be drawn: Good faith vs. bad faith failure
There is a real difference between a company that wilfully refuses to engage and one that is working in good faith on genuinely difficult technical challenges. Criminal law should be reserved for the former.
Our Associate Director for Public Affairs, Doniya Soni-Clark, represented techUK on Times Radio followed by an appearance on BBC Politics Live where she discussed the Prime Minister’s announcements and member views on the issue.
