I’m backing the campaign for alternative data solutions for our NHS in Scotland and to prevent the UK Government from renewing US spy tech firm, Palantir’s, contract to access to patients’ health data in NHS England.
At a Parliamentary event, medical organisations came together to meet with MPs and push for an alternative NHS data solution that is effective, trustworthy and transparent and outwith the control of American tech giants.
As SNP Spokesperson for Health and Social Care, I’m keen to emphasise that this is already the case in Scotland where the Scottish Government has declined access to NHS Scotland health data to American tech firms like Palantir. Instead, this April, a new NHS Scotland app will be rolled out across the nation without interference from such controversial companies.
However, in England and Wales this is not the case. The UK Government has already awarded Palantir a contract worth £330million for its Foundry software to support their NHS Federated Data Platform. Now organisations including the British Medical Association, the Doctors Association, the National Pensioners Convention and campaign groups Foxglove and Just Treatment are calling on the UK Government to cancel renewal of the Federation Data Platform contract deal with Palantir which will end on Feb 15th 2027.
Controversy surrounds Palantir due to its data management and the lack of clarity on how sensitive patient data is processed. The tech firm led by MAGA supporting Peter Theil also has links to the Israeli military and to the contentious immigration agency ICE in the US where citizens health data has been used to track, detain and deport so called illegal immigrants. It is this level of state surveillance as well as the efficiency and stability of Palantir’s platforms that have led to a refusal by several NHS Trusts in England to allow the firm access to sensitive patient data as well as issues with public trust.
This is a story of two National Health Services – one in Scotland where the SNP led Scottish Government will never allow our vital NHS to fall into the hands of private American tech giants, and one in England and Wales, which is facing huge opposition from health organisations such as the Doctors Association and the British Medical Association who have described Palantir as ‘an unacceptable choice of partner’ for the NHS.
Their concerns are very clear and are echoed by many other groups, not least the large number of NHS Trusts in England which have opted out of Palantir’s platform as they prefer their own more efficient existing in-house systems.
The BMJ has reported on US immigration agents in ICE using a Palantir developed app to access health records in order to find and manage deportations. Given these concerns from highly credible sources within our health services, its extraordinary that the UK Government entered into this £330million contract in the first place, let alone would consider renewing it again come 2027. Add to mix the question mark over how much the Prime Minister knew about Palantir’s links to disgraced Labour grandee, Peter Mandelson’s lobbying firm before he met with the then US Ambassador and this tech firm in Washington last year and the whole deal looks murkier and murkier. It’s not surprising then that the issue of trust is at the heart of concerns with handing over citizen’s sensitive health data to this company.
Wes Streeting likes to boast of his government’s ‘digital’ credentials as he seeks to overhaul the NHS down South, but why the desperation to open up the NHS to foreign private tech when we could be developing our own home-grown systems as we are doing in Scotland?
Many Scottish citizens may think this doesn’t concern us as it is only happening in England and Wales. But people must be under no illusions; if Labour were in Government in Scotland, Palantir would gain control of our health data and Scottish patients would become beholden to their services as they further entrench their monopoly on NHS data management. Scottish voters must ask themselves who they trust to protect our NHS and who they trust to protect their valuable health data from private interference.
