Lead

The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, has blocked a £50m contract between the Metropolitan police and the US technology company Palantir, citing a "clear and serious breach" of procurement rules. City Hall's decision has drawn a sharp response from Palantir, whose UK chief executive accused Khan of "putting politics above public safety," and has reignited debate over the role of artificial intelligence in British public services.

Coverage Comparison

Reporting on the dispute has centred on the procurement breach that prompted Khan's intervention, the political fallout, and the broader implications of police reliance on AI. The Guardian's coverage traced the sequence of events: Scotland Yard had been in talks, revealed by the Guardian, to use Palantir's AI technology to automate intelligence analysis in criminal investigations. Khan intervened on Thursday to stop the contract, which would have been Palantir's largest yet in British policing.

The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (Mopac), which must approve contracts of this size, withheld approval, stating that Scotland Yard had seriously engaged with only one potential supplier. Khan's office also said the Met risked becoming locked into Palantir's technology and that the proposed deal had not "ensured or demonstrated value for money." A spokesperson said Londoners only wanted to see public money being paid to companies that "share the values of our city."

Palantir's UK and Europe chief executive, Louis Mosley, rejected the mayor's rationale, accusing him of politicising procurement. In comments to Times Radio, Mosley said: "What Londoners value is not being mugged, not being raped by a serving police officer and that's really what the focus here should be … If we are going to politicise procurement in that way then we are going to compromise public safety."

His remarks drew an angry response from Labour MP Stella Creasy, who said Mosley "should be ashamed" — a sign of tensions within the Labour party over its involvement with the company.

Key Claims

  • The £50m Met police deal with Palantir was blocked by Sadiq Khan due to a "clear and serious breach" of procurement rules.
  • Palantir's AI technology was intended to automate intelligence analysis in criminal investigations.
  • Khan's office cited the risk of the Met becoming locked into Palantir's technology as a reason for blocking the deal.
  • Palantir has more than £600m in contracts with the NHS, Ministry of Defence, and police forces in the UK.
  • Palantir accuses Khan of putting politics above public safety.
  • The FCA's deal with Palantir raises concerns over data sovereignty, as US law may obligate Palantir to disclose information to American authorities.
  • The US Cloud Act may apply to Palantir's deal with the FCA, potentially giving US authorities access to sensitive UK data.

Perspectives

Sadiq Khan and Mopac

Khan's office framed the decision as a matter of procurement integrity and value for money, citing a "clear and serious breach" of rules and the risk of technological lock-in. The mayor has previously said Londoners only wanted to see public money being paid to companies that "share the values of our city."

Palantir

Louis Mosley, Palantir's UK and Europe chief executive, accused Khan of putting politics above public safety and politicising procurement. He argued that the focus should be on protecting Londoners from crime, such as mugging and sexual assault.

Metropolitan Police

Scotland Yard described Khan's move as "disappointing," warning that without new technology it would have to cut officer numbers, which would affect the force's ability to keep London safe.

Labour MP Stella Creasy

Creasy responded angrily to Mosley's remarks, saying he "should be ashamed," reflecting divisions within the Labour party over engagement with Palantir.

Martin Wrigley MP and Data Sovereignty Concerns

Martin Wrigley, a Liberal Democrat MP on the House of Commons science and technology select committee, has urged the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to prove its relationship with Palantir will not provide the Trump administration with backdoor access to sensitive data. He noted that US law may oblige the company to disclose information to American authorities.