From Open Democracy yesterday:
We might just have a chance to stop a secretive Silicon Valley firm, which was first funded by the CIA, from being handed a £480 million NHS data contract.
The deal would allow Palantir to build a single database that will put a huge trove of NHS patient data in private hands, despite warnings from privacy campaigners and a wide range of organisations. The firm is heavily tipped to secure the contract but there are now suggestions that UK health secretary Steve Barclay is concerned about how unpopular the plans are.
It is of course about NHS England and it is of course a serious concern for their patients but it doesn’t seem to apply to Scotland.
I did a bit of digging and I think we’re OK.
As far as I can see, there are no suggestions that Palantir is being considered for any role in NHS Scotland.
There’s some detail about Scotland’s National Digital Platform at:
While NHS Scotland does have plans to work with industry partners, only Astra Zeneca UK and Lenus Health have signed a memorandum of understanding. You can read more on this at:
https://www.digitalhealth.net/2022/09/nhs-scotland-set-for-transformation-with-new-collaboration/
While Lenus Health is a digital consultancy managing patient data, they are compliant with User-Managed Protocols enabling patients to control what data they share and who can access it. You can read more on them at:
https://lenushealth.com/platform/
I welcome any informed comment.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
A slightly informed comment:
I read somewhere that Sunak was talking with companies in California about health contracts during the last visit to his home there.
There is no question that this bunch of right wing Tory idealogues would desperately like to privatise all public services but the only way to do this to the NHS is through secrecy and stealth due to adverse public reaction.
It is no coincidence that we are seeing an outbreak of advertising by private health companies in the UK so as to “jump” the NHS waiting list queues (Stealth).
However,there is only one pool of qualified medical professionals to draw on so whether it is public or private,there will be waiting lists.
My wife recently had to go into hospital for a cataract operation and was referred to a private hospital by the NHS in order to try to reduce waiting times.
When she saw the consultant,due to other medical condition, he referred her back to the NHS because he didn’t have an anaesthetist available.
Some time later,she attended the NHS facility and was attended to by the SAME consultant who told her he couldn’t perform the operation because he didn’t have an anaesthetist available.
Same consultant,same issues.
The problem,whether public or private is down to insufficient numbers of trained staff which is almost entirely down to lack of funding from central government and a poorly constructed immigration policy.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Unless the Tory (blue and red) bastards invoke the Internal Market Bill, which is, after all we’ve seen so far is certainly a realistic possibility.
AYE.
LikeLiked by 5 people
the Internal Market Bill?
Good point
A worry
LikeLiked by 1 person
If they did invoke the Internal Market Bill you can sure they will impose it on us first.
Like the Poll Tax.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Given this thread has reached into the role of big corporates and the insidious UK Internal Market Act these notes may not be too O/T!
This popped up in my inbox recently: ‘Trading away sovereignty?’ It’s an article about arguably little known aspects of the UK’s latest trade deal, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or CPTPP.
Source https://mailchi.mp/neweconomybrief/in-focus-trading-away-sovereignty?e=657449e541
Read from a Scotland perspective, it brings into sharp focus our country’s present status – the removal of Scotland from the European Union against democratic majority wishes; the UK Internal Market Act 2020 and its overarching powers to prevent policy divergence between Holyrood and Westminster; our lack of agency not only over international trade but also over the domestic implications of the terms and conditions of trade deals entered into by governments in Westminster that either a majority of voters in Scotland reject or over which we in Scotland have precious little influence once in power.
Reading this should cause reflection on recent and prospective reductions in our effective ‘sovereignty’ – on threats of today – at a time when some in Scotland’s pro-independence movement are concerned with matters of sovereignty based on history centuries old. I wonder what those still persuadable to support our independence might find the more salient when it comes to casting votes?
Firstly, to recall the background: the UK agreed to join the CPTPP , a ‘free trade alliance’ of 11 countries including Japan, Canada, Australia, Malaysia and Singapore . This happened in earlier in 2023 when UK ministers hailed membership of the trade bloc as a measure to boost exports to member countries, and as a ‘pivot away’ from trade with the EU. However, the briefing notes: ‘ the government’s own analysis found that it may only add 0.08% to UK GDP “in the long run”. On the other hand, the Trade Justice Movement has warned that the agreement brings “significant risks” to the UK government’s domestic priorities.
Here are some of the main points about what this CPTPP may also ‘deliver’ in future:
1. Joining the CPTPP involves accepting a system of international arbitration – Investor-State Dispute Settlements (ISDS) – which allows companies from signatory countries that are investing in another to argue that new laws or regulations could damage their expected profits or investment potential, and seek compensation in a binding (often secret) tribunal.
2. Corporations have used ISDS ‘over a thousand times in recent years to sue governments for billions of pounds’: One example is a tobacco company based in Switzerland suing the Uruguayan government for implementing anti-smoking legislation. More recently, a group of cryptocurrency billionaires who bought an island in Honduras to found a ‘libertarian paradise’ in a ZEDE – zones where companies have autonomy from the countries regulations such as workers rights and tax law – are suing the Honduran government for nearly $11bn (2/3rds of their national budget for 2023) for a democratic decision to abolish ZEDEs, due to fears by some that they would become a ‘vector for corruption’ .
What implications for future democratic government control over the UK’s Freeports?
3. The argument advanced is that the Investor-State Dispute Settlements system used within the CPTPP could threaten UK sovereignty. For example, ‘the UK government could face being sued for billions of pounds by private corporations who regard their profits as being threatened by policies such as improving public health or moving faster on mitigating climate change’. Campaigners are arguing that ISDS effectively places the rights of corporations above a country’s democratic right to decide its own laws in the interests of its citizens.
Yet another push backward of Scotland’s government and parliament from effective agency?
4. The most (in)famous case of what an ISDS can mean concerns its application within the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). This allows energy companies to sue governments for changes in energy policy that might cost them money, including policies that support renewables. The briefing recalls: ‘A Canadian firm brought the largest ever fossil fuel litigation under the ECT against the US government, after President Biden cancelled the Keystone XL oil pipeline.’ Countries are now leaving the ECT, including Germany, France, Poland and the Netherlands: President Biden has said he will not include ISDS in any future trade deals. It is understood that the UK is currently “reviewing its membership” of the ECT.
5. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has argued that ISDS can cause ‘regulatory chill’ by detering necessary legislation for fear of being sued. Global Justice Now has reportedly suggested that Labour’s refusal to commit to revoking the current UK government’s new oil and gas licences is because Keir Starmer fears that legal obligations under the ECT could mean the taxpayer ends up footing a big bill.
The article notes that accepting ISDS is not a mandatory part of joining the CPTPP – ‘New Zealand opted out of the system through bilateral agreements with trading partners.’ Campaigners are seeking to convince Prime Ministers Rishi Sunak and Justin Trudeau to implement a similar ‘side-letter’ agreements between the governments of UK and Canada, ‘due to “particularly aggressive users of ISDS” from “notoriously litigious Canadian firms”.’
We in Scotland will just have to spectate as these important matters play out before us – for now.
The briefing concludes with this broader perspective (with my emphasis): ‘The purported benefits of new trade deals featured heavily in the debate around Brexit, but THE IRONY FOR THE UK IS THAT IT IS PURSUING THESE DEALS AT A TIME WHEN MAJOR TRADING BLOCS OF THE WORLD SEEM TO BE MOVING AWAY FROM THE ‘WASHINGTON CONSENSUS’ THAT HAS GOVERNED GLOBALISATION.
‘THE UK’S APPROACH LOOKS OUT OF STEP WITH MORE FORWARD-THINKING NATIONS THAT INCREASINGLY PREFER TRADE RULES THAT RESPECT NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND PROTECT DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES. Under President Biden, the US has begun to flout WTO rules by prioritising efforts to reshore domestic industries and secure more resilient supply chains for green technology. Likewise IN THE EU, STATE-AID LAWS THAT STOPPED GOVERNMENTS INTERVENING IN THE ECONOMY ARE BEING WATERED DOWN.
‘In short, the paradigm that put shareholder returns above all else in international trade is beginning to shift, and the rules are being rewritten to give governments the flexibility they need to meet other democratically-decided priorities.’
Scotland forced out of step with the EU – Scotland forced into lockstep with what England’s voter need and want when a Westminster government is chosen.
For information: the New Economy Brief is an output from The Economic Change Unit, a London-based non-profit organisation that ‘campaigns to change the way the economy works so everyone has the freedom and security to live a good life’ .For more details on purpose, people and funders see https://www.econchange.org .
LikeLiked by 4 people
Some years ago I attended a three day conference in Liverpool. Unfortunately, I forgot to take my prescription tablets. I could, probably, have coped without them for those three days, but I felt I ought to see if I could get three days’ supply from a local pharmacy. The pharmacist said I could got the supply, but I needed a prescription which I could get from a drop-in NHS clinic elsewhere in the shopping mall. I went to the clinic, explained my predicament, showed proof of identity, gave my date of birth and my GP’s name. And, there on the screen was my record. I consented to the clinic accessing it. They noted the medicines and doses and gave me a prescription. They exited my records. It was as easy as that.
Of course, it is great to be able to get a prescription anywhere in the U.K., but it seems to me, it would be easy for Palantir to access NHS Scotland data via a similar mechanism.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes!
I was thinking similar.
Apologies, Prof – this is not an informed comment.
But, similar to the anonymous contributor above, I’m now (gratefully) back in Scotland. But, I lived in England for 24 years. So, this company could get a sizeable chunk of my health data from that period. We may just have to live with that, but perhaps it could be something the Scottish government could use as leverage to counter the attack?
LikeLike