MPs debate government contracts with ‘evil’ Palantir

In a Parliamentary debate on Thursday 16 April, MPs across party lines demanded the government end its £330 million NHS contract with spyware tech giant Palantir. But there was one glaring absence – where was Wes Streeting, our secretary of state for health and social care? 

‘Evil’ company

Every one of the 13 MPs who spoke in the debate, led by Lib Dem MP Martin Wrigley, raised the alarm over Palantir. The company has deep involvement with the US military, powers Israeli war crimes in Gaza and Lebanon, supports British intelligence and surveillance, and provides data analysis for violent US deportations. 

The call was clear: contract details – which the Good Law Project revealed had been heavily redacted – need scrutiny and transparency; the government needs to come clean on how the contract was awarded; and it must explore exiting through its break clause. 

The distrust over Palantir’s role to provide the NHS’s centralised data system – called the federated data platform (FDP) – was unanimous. Founded by tech-billionaire, Epstein-pal and Trump-funder Peter Thiel, its CEO boasts how they like to “scare” enemies and “on occasion kill them.” 

MPs called the NHS relationship “shameful.” From Labour, Lib Dem, Independents, Conservatives and even the DUP, there was wide condemnation.

Iqbal Mohamed of Dewsbury and Batley didn’t hold back: 

If it looks evil, if it smells evil and if it behaves evil, then it is evil.

Cancelled Contracts

MPs pointed to Switzerland that recently kicked out Palantir contracts due to national security concerns (hushed news leaked by a small publication that Palantir then tried to sue). Hospitals in New York have also rejected Palantir arrangements. 

But here in the UK in 2023, Palantir walked away with a seven-year NHS contract without competition (the same kind of mates’ rates for the £240 million Ministry of Defence deal). Data handling, trust and transparency are the major concerns.

“Palantir should be nowhere near our NHS data and patient data,” Labour’s Ian Byrne declared, because the issue of trust was central.  

Labour/Co-op MP Rachael Maskell said: 

As a former clinician in the NHS, I know that trust is key. If a clinician does not have the confidence and trust of their patients, that will result in worse health outcomes.

She added: 

I urge the Government to end this contract.

Human rights abuses

Ethics and values “should be our starting point”, said Dawn Butler MP for Brent East, but we’re far from that. It is not only a concern that the future of NHS data is in the hands of a company that’s been hostile towards the NHS. Back in 2020, Amnesty International raised the alarm about Palantir technology facilitating human rights violations in the US.

Palantir technology has been used by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for years. The recent violence and murders at the hands of ICE have led the British Medical Association (BMA) to urge doctors to limit their use of the tech system. The BMA has also called on the government to “remove the NHS from Palantir’s technical architecture at pace.”

No Palantir in the NHS

Health justice organisation Medact has been a key part of the No Palantir in the NHS campaign. They have been joined by organisations like Health Workers for a Free Palestine, Just Treatment, Good Law Project, and others.

The campaign outlines Palantir’s complicity in war crimes and urges local health bodies to reject the FDP through a detailed briefing. The campaign also calls on the public and whistleblowers to join the campaign.

Behind the scenes though, Jeremy Corbyn, Independent MP for Islington North, claimed Palantir is “pressurising every local hospital and NHS trust to join” the FDP, while workers who have tried to criticise its rollout have been silenced.    

Dr Danny Chambers, Lib Dem MP for Winchester, said:

Why are we asking them [doctors] to use a system they do not trust and stake their professional reputations on it?

Palantir and the government push back

Tory MP Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst said:

People are not just asking whether the system is safe today. Could future Governments choose to use the capability in different ways? Those are not unreasonable questions.

And the government’s response? Parliamentary under-secretary of state for health and social care, Dr Zubir Ahmed, gave a filibustering ramble. He claimed the FDP was “exceeding its targets”, contrary to Wrigley citing that trial results were “exaggerated and untrue.” 

Palantir UK’s executive vice-president Louis Mosley continues to fight back. A multi-pronged PR campaign now props up Palantir, led by Boris Johnson’s political strategist Isaac Levido’s lobbying firm Fleetwood Strategies. An £8.5 million contract was also awarded to consultancy firm KPMG to “promote the adoption” of the FDP among the 200-odd NHS trusts, of which only about half are currently using.  

There’s no disagreement that we need big tech to advance services, cut waiting times, boost screenings and improve surgery admissions. The scandal is how this insidious company – named after Tolkien’s seeing-stones – came to handle our most valuable data. The question is why they should continue to do so.

By Yanar Alkayat

Source link