Palantir Technologies has strongly criticised London mayor Sadiq Khan after he blocked a £50m deal between the company and the Metropolitan Police. The contract was meant to bring artificial intelligence tools into criminal investigations, but it was stopped over concerns about procurement rules and public trust. The decision has created a major political and tech industry dispute in the United Kingdom. Palantir accused Khan of putting politics ahead of public safety. The company said the technology could help police solve crimes faster and improve intelligence work. Khan’s office said the deal raised serious concerns about fairness, transparency, and proper tendering rules. The blocked contract was planned to last two years. It would have allowed the Metropolitan Police to use AI systems to analyse large sets of intelligence data. The goal was to detect patterns, link suspects, and support investigations into serious crimes. Police leaders had supported the project, saying it could improve efficiency at a time when resources are under pressure. However, City Hall stepped in and stopped the agreement. Officials said there had been a clear breach in procurement rules. They also said that such a large public contract must follow open competition processes to ensure fairness and public confidence. Palantir, a US-based data company known for its work with governments and security agencies, rejected the criticism. A senior UK executive at the firm said the focus should be on public safety, not political debate. The company argued that advanced technology is needed to help police deal with rising crime levels in London. The firm also pointed to its wider global work. It has contracts with several governments, including defence and immigration agencies in the United States. It also works with military and intelligence organisations in different countries. Critics say this raises ethical questions about how its tools are used. During the dispute, Palantir defended its record and said it follows legal standards in every country it operates in. It also said it should not be singled out when other major technology companies provide similar services to governments. The decision has divided political opinion inside the UK. Some Labour Party members support Khan’s move. They say public services should not rely too heavily on foreign technology companies without strong oversight. Supporters of the ban argue that policing data is highly sensitive. They warn that AI systems must be carefully controlled to avoid misuse or bias. They also say public trust in law enforcement must come before cost-saving technology. Other politicians, however, have criticised the decision. They argue that blocking the contract could slow down police investigations. Some say the UK risks falling behind in artificial intelligence use in public services. The Metropolitan Police said it was disappointed by the decision. Police leaders warned that without new digital tools, they may need to reduce officer numbers. They said this could affect their ability to respond to crime in London. The controversy has also sparked concerns among police staff groups. Some officers have described AI monitoring systems as intrusive. They fear that increased digital tracking could create a “big brother” environment inside the force. At the same time, the UK government has expressed interest in expanding domestic AI industries. Ministers have said they want to reduce reliance on foreign tech companies in sensitive public services. They also support growing British AI firms to compete with global players like Palantir. Inside Parliament, opinions are split. Some Labour MPs strongly support Khan’s decision. They argue that companies working with controversial government projects should be carefully evaluated before receiving public contracts. Others, including senior government figures, believe Palantir offers advanced tools that are difficult to replace. They argue that rejecting such companies could slow innovation in policing and healthcare systems. The debate has also raised wider questions about technology, ethics, and public safety. Experts say governments must balance innovation with accountability. They warn that AI in policing must be transparent and regulated to avoid public distrust. Palantir maintains that its systems are designed to support, not replace, human decision-making. The company insists that its tools help investigators find patterns faster and improve outcomes in complex cases. Despite the backlash, the dispute is unlikely to end soon. Both sides remain firm in their positions. Khan continues to defend his decision as necessary for public trust. Palantir continues to argue that the move puts political concerns ahead of safety needs. The row highlights a growing global debate about the role of AI in public services. As governments rely more on digital systems, the balance between security, privacy, and innovation is becoming more difficult to manage.