Public sector workers in Coventry have expressed significant concerns following the city council’s decision to enter into a £500,000-per-year contract with the U.S. data technology firm Palantir. This contract marks the first collaboration of its kind between a local UK authority and the Denver-based company, which has faced criticism for its technology’s use by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and its involvement in U.S. immigration enforcement.
Following a pilot program in the council’s children services department, where AI was utilized for tasks such as case-note transcription and social worker record summarization, the council plans to extend Palantir’s system to support children with special educational needs. Chief Executive Julie Nugent aims to improve data integration and service delivery through this collaboration, exploring what she described as transformative opportunities presented by artificial intelligence.
However, trade unions representing council staff have raised ethical questions regarding the contract. Independent council member Grace Lewis has urged the council to cancel the contract, emphasizing that spending such a sum on a company known for its controversial practices is indefensible—especially at a time when local public and voluntary sector budgets are being cut.
Palantir has obtained several public sector contracts across the UK, providing technology for combatting organized crime and aiding in the development of the NHS’s federated data platform. The company co-founded by tech entrepreneur Peter Thiel, known for his backing of Trump’s 2016 election campaign, has extended its reach into various governmental areas. Reports indicate that Coventry has already begun employing Palantir’s AI to screen applications for household support funds, although some council members have likened these developments to intrusive surveillance practices.
Nicky Downes, joint secretary of the Coventry branch of the National Education Union, questioned Palantir’s data collection practices, highlighting the possible implications for citizen privacy and concerns over predictive policing systems. Downes demanded clarification on the ethical considerations and risk assessments factored into the council’s decision-making process regarding such contracts.
In defense of the decision, Nugent assured that the council undertook thorough due diligence in line with procurement policies before appointing Palantir. The temporary contract is intended to help the council explore AI’s potential benefits by running proof-of-concept tests in key operational areas, leading to a business case for future AI investments.
According to Palantir, the partnership aims to assist in alleviating administrative burdens, thus allowing social workers and professionals working with special educational needs to focus more on direct support for children. Palantir representatives claimed “early signs are extremely promising” and expressed their eagerness to aid in enhancing public services through AI technology.
As the council seeks to evaluate various AI solutions, including partnerships with companies like Palantir, they reaffirm the importance of maintaining robust data protection and compliance with governance standards. The council’s spokesperson emphasized that all contracts are awarded according to standard procurement procedures, ensuring rigorous adherence to security requirements.
As concerns around ethical implications and data security grow, the ongoing integration of AI in public services continues to provoke substantial debate and scrutiny, particularly regarding the balance between innovation and accountability.