Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have given Starmer a worrying glimpse of the AI future
It might pay to be a fly on the wall when Sir Keir Starmer finally sits down from inspecting military lineups in China and making speeches designed not to say very much at all, and certainly not upset his hosts, and gets to study the press readout from home. In the mix will be the remarks of the investment minister Lord Stockwood, regarding jobs and AI. The Labour peer told the Financial Times: “Undoubtedly we’re going to have to think really carefully about how we soft-land those industries that go away, so some sort of [universal basic income], some sort of lifelong mechanism as well, so people can retrain.”A universal basic income or UBI is not part of official government policy, but here was his lordship, when asked if people in government were considering the need for it: “People are definitely talking about it.”Cue Sir Keir’s complexion going puce and much spluttering. There he was, in one of the world centres for AI development, hob-nobbing or kowtowing, take your pick, in the presence of a veritable tech superpower, while one of his colleagues was referencing the elephant in the room and letting the cat out of the bag – to use two metaphors. When it comes to AI and job losses, the evidence is all pointing one way, but Starmer chooses to ignore it, in public anyway, instead preferring to welcome more AI investment and deals, adding to the likelihood of, er, more of those redundancies and non-hirings. He seems intent on one and not the other, choosing to forget or park the consequences of where this is heading. At least, the thinking must be, that those wielding the axe and cutting recruiting programmes will have some British connection, and the economy will somehow benefit. If only that were true, because the AI drive is coming from the US and China; in terms of the technology that is actually ours and will remain so, the UK is nowhere. What is not being said in public, at least until Stockwood broke cover, is what it means. Everywhere you look, everything you hear is shrieking major societal disruption, which is a polite formula for saying misery and turmoil. A few will get richer, but many will be consigned to... what? To receiving a state handout, but where will the money for that come from? We know this because the minister says they are talking about it. What they are not doing is sharing. Anecdotally, the evidence is from tales of folks finding their jobs have gone, their career paths are curtailed or parents complaining the graduate milk round is drying up. open image in galleryKeir Starmer visits Yuyuan Gardens in Shanghai on January 30 (AFP/Getty)Empirically, this week alone, we saw research by Morgan Stanley finding the UK was losing more jobs than it creating because of AI and was suffering worse than other large economies. At just-finished Davos, Jamie Dimon, head of another mighty US bank, JP Morgan and arguably the world’s top banker, said that governments and businesses will have to intervene to help those out of work because of AI or risk civil disorder. He was speaking after the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, in his annual Mansion House speech, said AI could destroy swathes of jobs in the capital and “usher in a new era of mass unemployment, accelerated inequality and an unprecedented concentration of wealth and power”. Khan added: “We mustn’t drift, absent-mindedly, into a future we didn’t ask for and don’t want.” The mayor then slipped back into the by-now, all-too familiar trope of why the UK must step up (doubtless receiving approving nods from Starmer as these words were digested): “We need to wake up and make a choice: seize the potential of AI and use it as a superpower for positive transformation and creation, or surrender to it and sit back and watch as it becomes a weapon of mass destruction of jobs.”open image in galleryAmazon employees who were turning out a climate-friendly EV will now be manufacturing the Optimus robots that will put other workers and perhaps them (who knows?) out of work (AFP/Getty)Yes, but will that seizing really replace what will be lost? Clearly, some in high places believe not, which is why UBI is under discussion. Still, best to focus on the positive and bury the bad news. But what is that positive? There is Tesla reporting falling revenues and announcing it is ditching production of its Model S and Model X electric vehicles, and using that California factory space to make humanoid robots. So, employees who were turning out a climate-friendly EV will now be manufacturing a robot – it’s called Optimus in that nice, non-threatening, friendly corporately ambiguous manner – that will put other workers and perhaps them (who knows?) out of work. Amazon has confirmed 16,000 corporate job losses, bringing its total to 30,000 since October. It’s not done yet, saying there was the possibility of more in the future. Now, Amazon is not saying they’re all down to AI – far from it, as the online behemoth is shutting what’s left of its Fresh bricks-and-mortar grocery stores and Go markets and scrapping its Amazon One biometric payment system that relies upon the scan of a customer’s palm. Not all AI, by any means, but some are, and the changes are designed to further the advancement of AI, or as it’s known within Amazon, “Project Dawn”. CEO Andy Jassy has previously said that increased use of AI tools will lead to greater automation and job losses. Optimus, Project Dawn and the other countless seemingly benign, exciting-sounding projects topping boardroom agendas across the globe are one side of the equation; the flip side is those no-room-for-doubt three initials, UBI. We need a policy for the downside, Sir Keir, and it would be helpful to know what it is before it is too late.
