Protecting Young Lives: Homes, Screens and NHS Data

High-Level Summary

Westminster Hall hosted three items: a Select Committee statement on neuroscience and digital childhoods; a Backbench Business debate on the housing needs of young people; and a debate scrutinising the NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP). The Committee outlined concerns about social media harms and announced a new inquiry to map neurological impacts and evidence gaps, with Members pressing for swift Government action. The housing debate examined affordability, renting, care leavers and supply, and the Minister set out reforms on planning, affordable homes, mortgages and renting. The FDP debate focused on procurement transparency, data sovereignty and trust in Palantir; Ministers argued the platform is NHS‑controlled, already delivering benefits, and that any contract extension will be decided later this year. Both motions on housing and the FDP were agreed without division.

Detailed Summary

Select Committee statement: Neuroscience and Digital Childhoods

Dame Chi Onwurah, for the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, launched a new inquiry into how digital technologies affect children’s developing brains and wellbeing. She said prior work had uncovered platform incentives and potential harms, citing “evidence that is consistent, strong and temporally linked to its use”, and noted that while “the Government accepted all our conclusions, they rejected all our recommendations” on algorithms, digital advertising and AI in the Online Safety Act. The inquiry will “map the existing evidence and, crucially, identify where the gaps lie”, distinguish active versus passive engagement, and assess effects on brain and eye development, sleep, behaviour and attainment.

In questions, Members pressed for greater platform responsibility and swift policy change. Onwurah said platform companies “have not done enough”, urged “speedy Government action”, and undertook to share findings with Northern Ireland authorities: “We will certainly make sure that happens”. She also encouraged participation in both the Government’s consultation and the Committee’s call for evidence: “as many people as possible, particularly young people, respond to that consultation”. Outcome: inquiry launched. Next steps: evidence gathering and reporting; Government response timeframe not stated in the transcript.

Backbench Business: Housing Needs of Young People

Opening the debate, Susan Murray argued that affordability pressures are delaying independence, citing Office for National Statistics data: “a third of men aged 20 to 34 were living with their parents”, and that the lowest‑income private renters spend “63% of their income on rent”. She floated a rent‑to‑buy scheme. Sally Jameson highlighted risks for care leavers, noting that in 2024‑25, “4,610 care leavers aged between 18 and 20 experienced homelessness”—a “54% increase over five years”. Other contributions covered regional supply and prices (e.g. Oxfordshire and London), second homes (Andrew George said that in Cornwall over the last decade “in excess of half a billion pounds” has gone to second‑home owners via the tax system), and private renting. Andrew George argued “we need rent controls”, while Jeremy Corbyn criticised section 21 no‑fault evictions.

For the Government, the Minister said England remains in “an acute and entrenched housing crisis”. He outlined a 10‑year, £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, of which “60% will be allocated towards social rented homes”, measures to widen mortgage access—“most lenders now allow borrowers to borrow about 10% more”—and a permanent mortgage guarantee scheme. He referenced rising housing starts, plans to reform home buying to make it quicker and more transparent, and said that “From 1 May, the first phase of our reforms will give renters greater stability”. On rural housing, he stated: “we propose to strengthen national policy in respect of rural exception sites”. On second homes and short‑term lets, he argued the Government has made “serious reforms to rebalance” the market and continues to keep taxation and local powers under review. Outcome: motion agreed—“Resolved, That this House has considered the housing needs of young people”. Next steps: analysis of the revised National Planning Policy Framework consultation and a forthcoming Treasury consultation on a new first‑time buyer product to replace the Lifetime ISA.

NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP)

Martin Wrigley questioned the procurement, design and supplier choice for the Palantir‑built FDP, noting that in 2023 “a contract for services approaching £500 million was signed”, and alleging the platform diverges from its stated aims: “the FDP developed by Palantir is far from that description”. He argued the deal “delivers a subscription service that leaves no deliverables after the subscription” and cited NHS users’ concerns that “we already have similar tools in use that presently exceed the capability” of the FDP. Other Members raised transparency—when the contract was published, “417 of its 586 pages were completely blanked out”—and ethics and trust, including Palantir’s ties to US immigration enforcement: “Palantir has long-standing contracts with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement”. Several called for a UK‑owned or sovereign alternative.

Responding, the Minister said the FDP is “fundamentally an NHS construct” delivered by multiple consortia. He cited reported benefits since go‑live, stating it has “exceeded every single target”, supported “more than 100,000 additional patients” to undergo procedures, and is generating savings “worth up to £2.4 billion” (independent estimate). On governance and safeguards, he said NHS bodies remain data controllers with privacy‑enhancing technology, and that “Palantir does not own the data, the products or the intellectual property”; the FDP “cannot be legally used for non-health purposes such as immigration enforcement”. He confirmed the contract’s extension decision will be taken “later this year” and handled transparently. Wrigley disputed the intellectual property position, stating: “the intellectual property of all specially written software, which is defined to include the data collection software, belongs to Palantir”. Outcome: motion agreed—“That this House has considered the NHS Federated Data Platform”. Next steps: publication of FDP performance data in May, an independent economic impact study by Imperial College, and a decision on any contract extension later this year.