UK seems like it's getting a bit ahead of itself acting like their citizens have already agreed to hand over all regulations and oversight.
These people submitted a Freedom of Information request regarding the NHS Palantir contract and it keeps getting delayed (sounds familiar). However, might be worth noting that as of yesterday, a health trust in Britain turned down a Palantir contract, at least until they have more information about the risk vs benefit of the platform.
Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board (ICB) has decided not to adopt a national data platform – prescribed by the UK government and run by Palantir – until it has more evidence of the benefits and risks.
The regional health leadership team heard that its existing data platform, which it had built over six years, exceeds the capabilities of the national Federated Data Platform (FDP), created by the US spy-tech firm under a much-criticized £330 million ($445 million) seven-year contract awarded in November 2023. Soon-to-be-defunct quango NHS England signed the Palantir contract after a series of non-competitive deals with the vendor totaling £60 million ($81 million) that established several use cases present in the FDP.
Seems like maybe people refusing to just give up and let things go can still make a difference, at least some places. So once again, I'm begging anyone in the U.S. to urge your Senators not to allow the ban on AI regulation to move forward.
UK government withholding details of Palantir contract:
Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board (ICB) has decided not to adopt a national data platform – prescribed by the UK government and run by Palantir – until it has more evidence of the benefits and risks.The regional health leadership team heard that its existing data platform, which it had built over six years, exceeds the capabilities of the national Federated Data Platform (FDP), created by the US spy-tech firm under a much-criticized £330 million ($445 million) seven-year contract awarded in November 2023. Soon-to-be-defunct quango NHS England signed the Palantir contract after a series of non-competitive deals with the vendor totaling £60 million ($81 million) that established several use cases present in the FDP.
It’s been a good week for Palantir. The controversial spy-tech company, co-founded by Trump donor Peter Thiel, looks set to secure even more UK government work after the defence secretary pledged to expand the role of AI in the military.
Palantir already holds a £330 million NHS data contract. But as Democracy for Sale revealed last week, most hospitals in England are not using the software, with many complaining that it simply isn’t up to scratch.
To encourage hospitals to take it up, the government signed an £8 million deal with consultancy giant KPMG to "promote the adoption" of Palantir’s tech in the NHS.
We wanted to know more about how this money is being spent. How exactly has KPMG been promoting Palantir’s software to hospitals? And has it worked?
So, we submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), asking for reports produced by KPMG under its contract, as well as briefings prepared for Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who publicly supported the deal.
The government’s response? Silence. They’re refusing to release the information—so now we’re fighting for transparency.
Sue Hawley, executive director of Spotlight on Corruption, told us the government’s “impulse to secrecy around public money and public contracts” is “deeply concerning.”
"KPMG’s contract raises a real question: if [Palantir’s] software is so good, why does the government need to give £8 million of taxpayers’ money to a management consultancy to encourage NHS hospitals to use it?,” she added.
Labour MP Rachael Maskell, who previously sat on the health select committee, called on the government to “overhaul its procurement processes before another disastrous contract is signed with Palantir.”
We filed our FOI request in March. Under the law, public bodies must respond within 20 working days. But on the day the response was due, DHSC said it needed an extra month to “assess the public interest.”
Officials claimed that releasing details of KPMG’s work could damage the “formulation of government policy.”
A month later, the department delayed its response again—citing the same reasoning. Now it’s saying we can expect a response by mid-June.
While FOI law allows deadline extensions when public interest is involved, Democracy for Sale has seen this provision repeatedly abused to delay legitimate disclosures.
Just last year, DHSC withheld details of meetings with Tory mega-donor Frank Hester for four months—blaming “an administrative system error.”
Our case matters. Palantir’s £330 million NHS contract has been deeply controversial. Privacy campaigners warn that a company that is helping Trump’s migrant deportations should not have access to sensitive UK health data.
Yet Palantir continues to deepen its ties in the UK. The recent Strategic Defence Review—which relied on Palantir’s technology to “sift through submissions”—is expected to spark a wave of new AI investment, much of which will benefit firms like Palantir.
The company also enjoys top-tier political access in Westminster. Peter Mandelson’s lobbying firm Global Counsel has advised Palantir, and the company has hired several former politicians, including ex-Tory Defence Minister Leo Docherty.
I have to disagree. I have seen a lot of helpful question/answer Style content there which was only there.