UK Government Reviews $440m Palantir NHS Contract Amidst Protests and Parliamentary Warnings
A parliamentary report has flagged the UK’s growing dependence on the American firm as a national security risk, while protesters demand the contract be terminated before its February break clause expires.
Approximately 80 demonstrators, including NHS staff and representatives from Amnesty International and Unison, gathered outside the NHS ConfedExpo in Manchester on Thursday to oppose a contract between the National Health Service and American software firm Palantir. The protesters, organised by the activist group Pull the Plug, cited concerns regarding data privacy, national security, and Palantir’s political affiliations, particularly its work with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Israeli military. The contract, valued at up to $440 million and running until 2031, includes a break clause allowing the government to withdraw the agreement in February. The protests coincide with a parliamentary report warning of the UK’s growing dependence on Palantir and a subsequent government review of the deal.
UK Technology Secretary Liz Kendall stated that the government is conducting a review of “every single aspect” of the NHS contract with Palantir before deciding whether to carry the deal forward. This announcement follows a report published in early June by members of Parliament, which warned that the UK’s growing dependence on the firm represents “an unacceptable point of weakness.” The parliamentary committee argued that Palantir is on track to become highly entangled in the public sector, giving it immense leverage over the British state and creating a “clear mismatch with UK values.”
Palantir’s European business head, Louis Mosley, accused MPs of “putting politics above patients” and fearmongering, asserting that each NHS trust controls its own data and that Palantir cannot use, sell, or move it. In an op-ed published by The Telegraph, Mosley defended the firm’s position, denying that it is guided by any particular political ideology. “Palantir is not politically monolithic. We don’t represent party politics,” Mosley said, adding that the company has the full spectrum of political views within its workforce.
Despite the government’s review, questions over the efficacy of Palantir’s NHS data platform persist. The Greater Manchester division of the NHS has declined to take up Palantir’s platform, claiming its in-house software achieves significantly better results. Laura Gilbert, senior director of AI at the Tony Blair Institute, told WIRED that the UK should be learning from its own data rather than allowing an offshore company to build products it can sell elsewhere. Meanwhile, Ayub Bhayat, the director of data and analytics at the NHS, maintained that the federated data platform is helping patients while saving money for NHS teams and taxpayers.
The protests highlight broader anxieties about the societal impact of AI and data aggregation. Frieda Lurken, cofounder of Pull the Plug, led chants emphasising the desire for ordinary people to have a say in how AI is used in their lives. Another protester, an NHS practitioner named JJ, expressed concern that Palantir’s notoriety could cause patients to withhold information from healthcare providers, potentially impacting care. “We’re going to get less information, less history to be able to help people,” JJ said, noting that public distrust could lead to patients clamming up.
Palantir has demonstrated a willingness to resist attempts to oust it from the UK public sector. According to The Times, the company is reportedly gearing up to sue London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who blocked a $65 million deal with the Metropolitan Police, citing concerns about the procurement process and “values.” As the government reviews the NHS contract, activists remain optimistic that the upcoming break clause offers a significant opportunity to terminate the agreement.
