When Keir Starmer landed in Washington last February to strengthen Britain’s international standing, expectations were predictable. A statesman’s itinerary. A meeting with allies. Perhaps a speech on diplomacy or humanitarian leadership.
Instead, one of his first stops after meeting Donald Trump was something else entirely.
A quiet visit to Palantir Technologies, the American surveillance and intelligence contractor headquartered just minutes from the Oval Office.
No press release.
No official minutes.
No transcript.
Just a handshake — and growing questions.
Behind the scenes, the meeting had reportedly been arranged by Peter Mandelson, the UK ambassador to Washington and one of Labour’s most seasoned political operators. But there is no formal record of what was said. The Foreign Office says it holds no emails confirming the arrangements.
For critics, that absence speaks volumes.
A Company Born in the Shadows
Palantir is not your typical Silicon Valley startup.
The firm emerged from the War on Terror, seeded with funding from the CIA’s venture arm, In-Q-Tel. Its platforms — Gotham and Foundry — were designed for intelligence agencies, military operations and predictive policing.
Its tools have reportedly helped track migrants for deportation, coordinate drone strikes, and power law enforcement databases later accused of reinforcing systemic bias.
Yet today, the same systems sit deep inside Britain’s public infrastructure.
Hospitals.
Police forces.
Local councils.
The Ministry of Defence.
Palantir’s UK chief recently boasted that every NHS hospital runs its software. The company leads the £330 million Federated Data Platform contract for NHS England — a deal so heavily redacted that three-quarters of the paperwork is blacked out.
For a technology that handles patient histories, treatment records and sensitive national data, transparency appears scarce.
The Lobbying Links
The visit becomes more complicated when you follow the money.
At the time of Starmer’s trip, Palantir was still a client of Global Counsel — the lobbying firm founded by Mandelson. Although he stepped away from day-to-day management years ago, Mandelson remains its president and chairs its international advisory board.
The overlap has raised eyebrows across Westminster.
Why would a sitting ambassador broker access between Britain’s prime minister and a former client?
Why was the meeting informal and undocumented?
And why does the government insist it was casual when the company involved holds contracts worth hundreds of millions?
Labour figures have also circled the firm. Former MP Tom Watson reportedly took a paid advisory role linked to Palantir’s public services outreach, while PR agencies connected to senior insiders have represented the company.
To critics, it looks less like coincidence — and more like alignment.
Data Is the New Power
Palantir’s ambitions go beyond contracts.
The company wants to become the operating system of government.
Since 2014, it has worked with Britain’s defence establishment, including Royal Navy data pilots and a £75 million Defence Digital contract aimed at modernising military systems. Several former generals and intelligence chiefs now advise the company.
Police forces are equally cautious about disclosure. Dozens have refused to confirm whether they use Palantir tools, citing national security exemptions under Freedom of Information laws.
Even small councils are signing on. Coventry secured a £500,000 AI platform. Sunderland previously commissioned a multi-million-pound intelligence hub.
The pattern is unmistakable: once embedded, Palantir becomes difficult to remove.
Ownership of the data may remain with the government — but architecture shapes power. Whoever builds the system influences how decisions are made.
That subtle leverage worries civil liberties groups.
Ideology Beneath the Code
Palantir’s culture has hardly calmed fears.
CEO Alex Karp once remarked that when the whole world uses Palantir, people “will have no choice.” Co-founder Peter Thiel has publicly questioned whether freedom and democracy are compatible.
The language is not one of stewardship — but dominance.
For campaigners, that tone clashes sharply with public-service values. Healthcare and policing depend on trust. Citizens must believe their data is handled ethically.
Can that trust survive when critical systems are outsourced to a firm whose roots lie in surveillance warfare?
Advocacy groups say Britain risks sleepwalking into dependency.
If Palantir designs the digital backbone of the NHS, defence and law enforcement, the state becomes reliant on a private contractor whose priorities may not align with democratic accountability.
A Question Without an Answer
So what exactly did Starmer and Mandelson discuss during that quiet Washington meeting?
Investment?
Expansion?
Future contracts?
Or something more strategic?
Without records, the public may never know.
But symbolism matters in politics. And when a prime minister’s first diplomatic stop is not a hospital, school or humanitarian institution — but a surveillance tech giant — it sends a message about priorities.
Transparency, critics argue, should not be optional.
Because once the keys to the kingdom are handed over — once the data flows through systems few can inspect — reclaiming control may prove impossible.
For now, the meeting remains a footnote in the official diary. Yet it has become something larger: a warning sign about the quiet convergence of politics, profit and power — and the uneasy role of Keir Starmer at its center.