Speaking to the Guardian, DAUK called for greater transparency and safeguards after TPG bought Optum UK, the firm behind the electronic patient record system used by most GP practices in England.

DAUK said: “Private equity now owns the plumbing of English general practice. The GP records of more than half the country sit on a system controlled by a firm whose business model is returns for investors, not care for patients, and the public found out after the fact.

“We want the government to set out what safeguards exist, what happens to the data if TPG later sells the asset, and why none of this was put to parliament.”

Read the Guardian article in full.

DAUK committee members are all volunteers and campaign on issues facing frontline doctors in their own time. Please support our work by joining DAUK or donating to our GoFundMe.

The cross-party Science, Innovation and Technology Committee warns that the UK’s increasing reliance on Palantir has created an ‘unacceptable point of weakness’.

It highlights concerns around value for money, transparency, public trust, and the long-term strategic risks of entrusting critical public infrastructure to a single overseas technology provider.

NHS Federated Data Platform

The report, titled Rewiring the state: delivering digital government, recommends that the Government ‘should commit to exercising the 2027 break clause in the NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP) contract’.

It goes on to recommend the Government ‘either develops an in-house replacement or seek an alternative developed by UK-owned and UK-based providers that are more compatible with UK values, and do not pursue either technical or contractual dependencies’.

The report called for a fully-costed exit plan for the FDP by the end of this year.

Poor value for money

Dr David Nicholl, DAUK committee member, said: “This is an excellent report and highlights the warnings that DAUK has been making for more than five years, that Palantir’s FDP provides poor value for money from a company with ethical values that are a million miles away from those of the NHS.

“The Government should publish an exit plan, and look at alternative providers that can deliver better outcomes for patients at less cost, safely, securely and ethically.”

DAUK has consistently raised concerns about the award of the £330 million FDP contract to Palantir. These include the risk of NHS dependency on a single supplier, uncertainty about long-term value for money, questions around transparency in procurement, and the impact of Palantir’s wider activities on public trust in NHS data systems.

Ignored warnings

Dr Steve Taylor, DAUK GP co-lead, added: “There is a growing consensus that Palantir should not be anywhere near public services, and in particular patient data in the NHS.

“DAUK and other groups have been saying this for years, yet governments have continued to ignore the warnings.

“Ministers are public servants first, they need to heed the warnings and use the break clause in 2027. Influence is being bought against the best interests of the public.”

Read the Rewiring the state: delivering digital government report in full.

We are a non-profit campaigning and lobbying organisation led by frontline doctors, for frontline doctors. We are volunteers and our collective aim is to give frontline workers a voice to be heard.

Please support our work by contributing to our crowd funder.

Organised by Medact, the fringe event is titled Beyond Palantir – what’s next for the Federated Data Platform?

It takes place from 5pm to 6pm on 10 June at HOME Manchester, a fully accessible venue located a short walk from Manchester Central Convention Complex.

NHS Federated Data Platform

The event comes amid growing parliamentary discussion about the potential for the break clause in the NHS Federated Data Platform contract with Palantir to be triggered in 2027.

DAUK has consistently opposed the involvement of Palantir in the NHS data and has raised concerns regarding transparency, governance, and public confidence.

A panel of data and health equity experts have been invited to speak at the event and there will be the possibility for questions and discussion. 

Speakers include:

• Matt Hennessey, chief data and analytics officer, Greater Manchester ICB
• Marc Farr, chair, NHS Chief Data and Analytical Officer Network, Advisory Board member, APHA National Data Advisory Group
• Emma Runswick, deputy chair of Council, British Medical Association 

Sign up on the Medact website.

DAUK is run by frontline doctors for frontline doctors. Please support our work by donating to our GoFundMe.

Speaking to John Pienaar on Times Radio, DAUK committee member Dr Nicholl said longstanding concerns about Palantir’s record remain.

Dr Nicholl, who works in Birmingham, highlighted worries about reported racial bias linked to Palantir’s work in the United States, warning that such issues could disproportionately affect diverse NHS communities.

He also challenged claims Palantir was essential to the UK’s Covid vaccine rollout, saying that Wales delivered vaccines faster without the company’s platform.

“There has been a lot of overselling,” he said.

Referencing a report in the British Medical Journal, Dr Nicholl said results of a pilot at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust used pandemic-peak baselines to exaggerate performance gains.

Listen to Dr Nicholl’s interview on our Instagram page.

We are a non-profit campaigning and lobbying organisation led by frontline doctors, for frontline doctors. We are volunteers and our collective aim is to give frontline workers a voice to be heard.

Please support our work by contributing to our crowd funder.

The NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP) is a £330m contract awarded to US tech giant Palantir which is up for renewal next year.

The briefing titled Who controls our health data? is co-hosted by DAUK and explores what happens when the contract comes up for renewal.

Cross-party briefing

DAUK will be joining Foxglove Legal, the BMA, Just Treatment, and Viscount Hanworth at the cross-party event on Monday 23 March, which will be hosted by Liberal Democrat MP Martin Wrigley.

DAUK has consistently challenged Palantir’s involvement in the NHSsince it first raised concerns five years ago.

In 2023, NHS England awarded Palantir the FDP contract valued at around £330 million, which was described at the time by DAUK as a ‘terrible deal’.

Dr David Nicholl, DAUK committee member, said: “The contract runs out next March, which means there’s a real window of opportunity to ask if this is really the way we want the health service to run.”

Public confidence

DAUK has also warned consistently that Palantir’s involvement is eroding public confidence in how the NHS handles patient data.

A DAUK-commissioned poll found 48% of adults would opt out of sharing their health data if Palantir manages it, a direct threat to the integrity of NHS datasets that clinicians and researchers depend on.

Despite the £330m price tag, fewer than a quarter of England’s hospital trusts are actively using the platform.

Dr Nicholl said: “Almost a third of those trusts that are using the platform, have got issues in terms of GDPR. That should prompt serious scrutiny.

Write to your MP

“I’ve yet to see any evidence that this is actually good value and a good use of public money.”

Now DAUK is encouraging people to write to their MP to ask them to attend the session so they can better understand the implications for patient data and public spending.

Visit the Our Data, Our NHS campaign page to learn more about the campaign and to contact your MP.

We are a non-profit campaigning and lobbying organisation led by frontline doctors, for frontline doctors. We are volunteers and our collective aim is to give frontline workers a voice to be heard.

Please support our work by contributing to our crowd funder.

Dr David Nicholl, DAUK committee member, said he feared hundreds of millions of pounds have been wasted on the NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP) at a time when frontline services were under unprecedented strain.

It follows a report in the Guardian that NHS officials warned in 2025 that public perception of Palantir would hinder the roll-out of the system.

Public perception

The Guardian reported: “By last summer fewer than half of health authorities in England had started using the technology amid opposition from the public and doctors.”

The report also referenced concerns raised by the BMA on behalf of its members about links between Palantir and the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Meanwhile, The Times reported on comments by investor Michael Burry that ‘Emperor Palantir has no clothes’.

DAUK has consistently challenged Palantir’s involvement in the NHS since it first raised concerns five years ago.

FDP contract

In 2023, NHS England awarded Palantir the FDP contract valued at around £330 million, which was described at the time by DAUK as a ‘terrible deal’.

Dr Nicholl said the size of the contract was ‘galling’.

“We spent hundreds of millions of pounds on this, which could have been used for direct patient care, when NHS England didn’t even complete the pilot study,” he said.

Waste of money

“It has been forced on trusts by NHS England. It feels like a spectacular waste of money.”

Dr Nicholl said DAUK had previously attempted to challenge the procurement process through the courts.

He questioned how the contract was allowed to proceed when, as early as 2019, senior civil servants were meeting Palantir executives.

Dr Nicholl said: “DAUK has been speaking about this for more than five years. Sadly, it feels like a case of we told you so.

Alternatives

“There were alternatives. British tech companies that could have helped solve the same problems yet, instead, we’re investing in a controversial US firm.

“I find it very upsetting when I think what we could have invested that money in,” he added.

We are a non-profit campaigning and lobbying organisation led by frontline doctors, for frontline doctors. We are volunteers and our collective aim is to give frontline workers a voice to be heard.

Please support our work by contributing to our crowd funder.

The Department of Health and Social Care is rolling out a new way to collect patient’s data from their GP records. This is called General Practice Data for Planning and Research or GPDPR data collection. It replaces the current system of data extraction, known as General Practice Extraction Service (GPES), which is mainly used for calculating payments to GP practices. It requires each extract to be manually added to the system.

The proposed new system will run in real time and not require practices to add each search. The roll out date for GPDPR is 1^st September 2021; this has been delayed from 1^st July 2021 due to concerns raised by groups, including DAUK, about the process. More information here https://www.dauk.org/news/2021/06/04/dauks-dr-rosie-shire-on-nhs-data-government-faces-legal-challenge-over-nhs-data-sharing-plan/

When the GPDPR data collection goes live (1^st September), the GP records of all patients in England will be uploaded to a central NHS digital database. GPs are expected to inform all their patients about this data collection. If patients want to prevent their record being uploaded, they MUST opt out before 1^stSeptember 2021. After this date, they can opt out from any future data being collected about them, but they will not be able to remove any data that is already uploaded to NHS digital.

If you would like to read the full statement from NHS Digital, you can do here https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/corporate-information-and-documents/directions-and-data-provision-notices/data-provision-notices-dpns/general-practice-data-for-planning-and-research (please note, it appears that this document has not been fully updated with the new GPDPR roll out date of 1^st September)

How do patients opt out?

To opt out patients need to complete a Type 1 opt out form. Medconfidential website gives clear instructions about how to opt out and the form to complete. They also give a number to call to be sent a form in the post, for those without access to a printer. https://medconfidential.org/how-to-opt-out/

When do patients need to opt out by?

NHS Digital has now said that GP practices must set their own deadlines for when patients can opt out by. https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/technology/nhs-digital-gave-gpdpr-opt-out-deadline-in-error-says-gps-must-set-own-dates/

The opt out codes must be on patient’s records by 1^st September 2021.

Can patients opt out online?

NO! To opt out of GP record sharing, the patient needs to complete a type-1 opt out form, and give it to their GP Practice.  This form is available online, on the above website. It needs to be completed either on a computer or by hand, and emailed or posted to the GP Practice.

What about the NHS app?

The NHS app does not allow patients to opt out of GPDPR. It does allow patients to opt out of National Data collection, which is different to GPDPR.

What do GP practices need to do?

Practices need to inform their patients about GPDPR and how to opt out. Some practices have sent text messages to patients with the details about GPDPR, and how to opt out. NHS digital has suggested a statement which practices can display on their websites and in newsletters to inform their patients. The key point is that patients understand what their data will be used for, and who will have access to their data if they don’t opt out before 1^st September 2021 (or sooner if deadline set to be earlier by the GP practice)

The NHS digtal statement can be found at https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/data-collections-and-data-sets/data-collections/general-practice-data-for-planning-and-research/gp-privacy-notice

DAUK feels this statement does not clearly explain to patients what GPDPR is, and enable them to fully consent to their data being shared- or to opt out.

A clearer explanation about GPDPR and the implications of this can be found at https://www.foxglove.org.uk/news/the-nhs-data-grab-we-do-the-governments-job-and-explain-it-for-you

The opening paragraph indicates plainly what GPDPR actually is: 

“The government wants to collect the confidential health records of every GP patient in England and put them into one huge new data pool. It says “third parties” will be able to access this pool, including commercial companies, but won’t say who or how.”

When the practice receive the opt out forms, they need to add the form the patient’s records, and add the code below.

Can GPs opt out all our patients en-mass? 

While the Secretary of State’s Direction remains valid, you cannot do this. However, if the legal case of DAUK and others successfully challenges the Direction, this may change. We will keep you posted.

GPs are too busy to add all these forms and codes to patient records; what happens if we don’t do this?

Being over stretched isn’t a valid reason for failure to act in accordance with patients’ wishes. Under the UK GDPR you could be referred to the ICO and face a fine if you do not opt out patients who have given you their form.

Do Practices get funding this?

No. This directive has come from the Secretary of State, but there is no funding available to cover. GP Practices are expected to pay themselves for the time staff will spend processing forms and ensuring the opt-out code is added to patient records. This is one of DAUK’s concerns.

Now that the date for extracting patients’ data from primary care has been postponed, the government should use this time to to enable meaningful patient consent to be obtained, say DAUK GPs Dr Rosie Shire and Dr Ellen Welch.

DAUK expressed concerns that sharing patient data could erode the doctor/patient relationship.

Read the full article here.