NHS England challenged over redacted Palantir contract

NHS must respond this month

NHS England challenged over redacted Palantir contract

Last year Palantir secured a seven-year NHS contract worth £330 million, to lead the development of the new Federated Data Platform (FDP).

However, the contract - which the government made public in December - has drawn criticism due to extensive redactions throughout.

The GLP says 417 out of 586 pages have been "completely blanked out," which is against the principles of transparency, a cornerstone of accountable governance.

"We think this is not just completely unacceptable, but unlawful. Government policy requires public bodies to give reasons when contracts are redacted, but despite the massive scale of the redactions in Palantir's contract no reasons have been given," GLP said.

"We have now launched legal proceedings against NHS England to uncover what these redactions conceal."

The organisation has demanded the contract be republished without redactions or, at the very least, with justifiable redactions clearly labelled in accordance with Freedom of Information Act policies.

The group has set a deadline of 14 days for NHS England to respond to the pre-action protocol letter, which it sent on 12th February.

An NHS spokesperson merely confirmed the body had received the letter and said, "NHS England...will be responding formally in due course."

More controversy

The legal challenge adds to the ongoing dispute around Palantir's involvement in the FDP project.

NHS England began its work with Palantir during the pandemic, through a nominal £1 contract, which the US firm has since leveraged to win more tenders with the NHS - where it is now favoured as an incumbent supplier.

The NHS defends the FDP as a tool to link trusts and regional systems, facilitating clinicians' access to patient data to improve healthcare delivery.

Designed to alleviate the 7.8 million-patient backlog, the FDP has faced discrepancies on its projected duration and expenses. While the contract stipulates a £182.2 million programme spanning four years, the NHS suggests it might extend to seven years at a total cost of £330 million.

Concerns over privacy and data security have also been amplified by Palantir's background, prompting calls for greater clarity and accountability from NHS England.

In November, former Cabinet minister David Davis criticised Palantir as an inappropriate choice to lead the FDP.

Davis said that, even if Palantir acted impeccably, it would lack public trust.

Late last year, four campaign groups collectively launched legal action against NHS England concerning the FDP.

Spearheaded by Foxglove, the legal challenge contends that the government failed to adequately address the legal complexities surrounding the FDP.

The groups said that only a limited number of trusts, currently running a pilot version of the software, have reported benefits.

Rosa Curling, director of Foxglove, stressed the need for parliamentary authorisation and clear regulations to guarantee the lawful management of NHS data.

Hope Worsdale, representing Just Treatment, claimed that ministers neglected crucial steps to establish a strong legal foundation for the FDP.

Fighting secrecy

The Good Law Project also objects to redactions in an NHS contract with biotech firm IQVIA, particularly around the development of a 'privacy enhancing technology' intended for use alongside the FDP.

With approximately three-quarters of the FDP contract shrouded in secrecy, questions remain around transparency and oversight.

The GLP says it is also gearing up to initiate a separate legal action, to ensure every patient can effectively safeguard their privacy through an NHS data opt-out that adheres to data rules.