Skip to main content

1-20 of 37 results for answeredby:"Lord Coaker"

Subject X
Contracts

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Contracts (37)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

My Lords, government departments operate within a robust procurement and assurance framework, ensuring that contracts are awarded only where requirements are met and no exclusion grounds apply. Palantir’s software is used globally across public and private sectors. Within the UK Government, its use is governed through established legal and assurance frameworks. In defence, Palantir supports data integration and AI-enabled analysis, providing timely insights that improve operational planning, decision-making and effectiveness.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c845
House
House of Lords

My noble friend is quite right to challenge the Government on these incredibly important issues around human rights and how the Government establish their contracts. To be clear about the UK Government, we are talking about a relationship and contracts that are negotiated with Palantir UK. The contracts that we operate with Palantir UK have strict protocols in place. We retain full ownership and sovereign authority over all defence data, including how it is stored, how it is accessed and how it is used. Contracts with suppliers include legally enforceable provisions to ensure that data sovereignty is maintained. I understand the points that my noble friend raises, but with respect to our contracts with Palantir UK, we ensure that the correct provisions are in place.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c845
House
House of Lords

My noble friend makes a really important point. Many people across this Chamber will know that the responsibility of government requires difficult decisions to be made. As my noble friend Lady Chakrabarti has rightly raised, there are sometimes difficult decisions and difficult dilemmas to be resolved. Alongside that—my noble friend asked about defence—we have a responsibility to ensure that with the AI capability and the data management capability, we can take forward our strategic defence review and can give our Armed Forces and those who work with them the best possible tools to ensure that we deliver the objectives of His Majesty’s Government. That is what we seek to do, while recognising the moral responsibilities we also have.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c846
House
House of Lords

My understanding is that the mayor and the commissioner have now reached an arrangement with respect to the activity of Palantir within the Metropolitan Police, where there will be a 12-month period to establish a proof of concept as to whether Palantir can move forward. The mayor and the Metropolitan Police commissioner have agreed that because, as the noble Lord says, the commissioner believes it will help fight crime. It is a matter for them to resolve that, but it seems they have found a way in which both are happy to try to take it forward.

I do not want to underestimate the moral questions that Governments sometimes have to answer. The noble Lord knows the issue of education particularly well, but let us look at the issue with respect to health: 41 ICBs and 171 trusts have signed up to use the NHS federated data platform; more than 100,000 extra patients have been seen; hundreds of thousands of patients have been safely removed from the waiting list; and nearly 94,000 patients have been supported on their cancer journey. That is the sort of dilemma that Governments need to resolve to try to find the best way forward.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c846
House
House of Lords

The noble Baroness is quite wise to raise that point; it is a question I asked too. Officials told me that it was the only company—the only available platform—that could provide what the MoD needed and give us the operational capability that was required. Under the single tender regime—I cannot remember the exact title—where there is no other option available, it is okay and legal for the Government to operate in that way. That is why the Government did that. Of course we are looking at whether other people can provide the sort of expertise that the noble Baroness refers to, but there was no point going out to procurement when the only provider was Palantir.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c847
House
House of Lords

The noble Baroness will see in due course some of the ways in which we are taking forward AI, but she is quite right to ask about this. AI is crucial to the future provision for our Armed Forces and to enabling them to have the capability and capacity they need for the conflicts of the future. Palantir is one example of the way in which we seek to take that forward. Other options will be brought forward as part of the defence investment plan. Clearly, AI is the future of much of the technological co-operation that will be needed both within government and with our allies.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c847
House
House of Lords

My noble friend makes a really important point. Palantir provides us with the capability that we require at the moment, but he will be reassured by the fact that, alongside granting this contract to Palantir for the next three years from this April, we are seeking to look at options with small and medium-sized and other companies that could provide the same capability, so that we have a competitive process in future. That also answers the noble Baroness’s point. I suggest that will keep Palantir on its toes in the marketplace as well.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c847
House
House of Lords

I understand the point that the noble Baroness is making, but the point I made at the beginning is that these contracts are with Palantir UK. Anyone who has been a Minister knows that contracts signed on behalf of the Government have to have a fit and proper process. We will not take on people to run things for us who have criminal records of a particular sort, do not pass the monetary test or have other considerations around them that mean we see them as a security threat—of course we would not. The people who have gone through this process and been given the contracts have passed the tests set for them as part of the risk assurance process.

The noble Baroness is perfectly entitled to her opinion, but taking the decision not to grant Palantir the contract would have consequences as well—many patients now being seen would not be seen, many crimes being solved would not be solved and the operational abilities and capabilities of our Armed Forces would be undermined because no one else can provide that capability. That is the side that I am on. The noble Baroness can take the side that she is on.

Answered by
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 c848
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the human rights and reputational risks presented by their public service contracts with Palantir.

Asked by
Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Date
29 June 2026
Reference
857 cc845-8
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what assurances they have received from Palantir about the government of the USA's designation of Anthropic as a supply chain risk.

Asked by
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 April 2026
Reference
HL15839
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Coaker on 27 January (HL13563), when the contract for the Defence Marine Services Next Generation In-Port Services was signed; and in doing so what consideration was given to social value in line with the provisions of the Procurement Act...

Asked by
Lord Spellar (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
13 February 2026
Reference
HL14159
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what the cost was of developing in-house army training as an alternative to the contract that was secured by Raytheon; and what assessment they have made of the security and resilience considerations of outsourcing army training to a company with US ownership.

Asked by
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
28 January 2026
Reference
HL13575
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government when they will award contracts under Programme EUSTON.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
5 January 2026
Reference
HL13082
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the decision to award the Defence Marine Services Next Generation Contracts to Serco on UK shipbuilding jobs.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12153
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they had with the National Shipbuilding Office about the requirements of the vessels needed as part of the Defence Marine Services Next Generation Contracts.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12151
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the ability of Damen to deliver as a subcontractor under the Defence Marine Services Next Generation Contracts following Damen's receipt of an emergency loan from the Dutch Government.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12192
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what investigation they have undertaken into the award to Damen under the Defence Marine Services Next Generation Contracts following the prosecution of Damen in the Netherlands for bribery.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12191
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government how many contracts the Ministry of Defence has with Damen either directly or through contracts with third parties, and what is the value of those contracts.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12152
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with Serco about the delivery of the Defence Marine Services Next Generation Contracts and the ability of Damen to deliver as a subcontractor.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12149
House
House of Lords

To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they had with Serco prior to awarding the Defence Marine Services Next Generation Contracts about the ability of UK shipyards to build the vessels required under the contract.

Asked by
Lord Beamish (Labour)
Answering body
Ministry of Defence
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
8 December 2025
Reference
HL12150
House
House of Lords