Key facts
- Tom Watson, former Labour deputy leader and now senior vice-president at Palantir, warned against 'mob rule' in public contract awards.
- Watson stated that Palantir is targeted by those who target Israeli companies due to its work in Israel.
- Watson urged adherence to the rule of law in procurement practices.
- Palantir has faced backlash over its involvement in UK public services, including a £330m NHS software deal and a £50m contract with the Metropolitan police.
- Watson previously served as a defence minister and minister for digital engagement in Gordon Brown's government.
Tom Watson, a former Labour deputy leader who recently joined Palantir as a senior vice-president, has cautioned his former colleagues against allowing "mob rule" to dictate the awarding of public contracts. He stated that the company is "very targeted by the people that are targeting Israeli companies" due to its work in Israel, despite not being an Israeli firm itself.
Watson urged ministers to let the rule of law guide procurement practices, warning that choosing "mob rule" could lead to "a lot of trouble." His comments come amid significant pressure on Prime Minister Andy Burnham from Labour MPs and unions to terminate Palantir's contracts, including a £330 million software deal with the NHS and a £50 million contract for AI use in Metropolitan police investigations, which the company is contesting in court.
Palantir, co-founded by Peter Thiel, has faced public and political backlash for its work with the Israeli military and the White House's ICE immigration agency, and is seeking to expand its public sector work in the UK, where it already has an annual turnover of £427 million. Watson, who previously served as a defence minister and minister for digital engagement, described Palantir as "the most interesting company on the planet" and stated his role would involve deepening the social and economic value its work creates.
Labour MP Chi Onwurah, chair of the science, innovation and technology committee, expressed concern about over-reliance on a single US company, highlighting potential issues with US legislation regarding access to UK data.