British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne is expected to announce in his budget on Wednesday that driverless trucks are to be tested on UK roads. By doing so he will herald the arrival of a new era of automation that is likely to have a dramatic effect on the job prospects of many millions of workers in the UK.
The Bank of America recently claimed that automated systems would be doing nearly half of all manufacturing jobs within a generation — saving an astonishing US$9 trillion in labor costs. The effects of this technological shift are likely to be as profound and far-reaching as those of the first industrial revolution.
British Shadow First Secretary of State Angela Eagle is to frame my party’s response to the huge social and economic upheavals that these developments will usher in, and I believe that a new industrial strategy should be at the heart of that response.
Illustration: Tania Chou
If ever there was a time for politics underpinned by notions of the empowering state, it is now.
The question facing the UK is how do we make technological change our ally instead of our foe? We cannot leave it to fate, as the chancellor and his colleagues at the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills are doing.
Too many senior Tories think they are powerless to act — they wrap their powerlessness up in economic and political libertarianism and pray to the gods of the free market. They eschew any role for government and reject most notions of an industrial strategy.
Deloitte, the consultancy firm, has claimed that automation, although a net benefit to the British economy, has removed 800,000 jobs since 2001, and that up to 11 million jobs in the UK have a high chance of being automated within the next decade.
Never have we seen such a change in the landscape of the labor market. I believe the potential consequences to be so great that we should regard automation as the most urgent issue facing the nation. So why is the not government addressing it?
There is no minister for this new technology. No special Cabinet committee has been set up to come up with solutions. There is no royal commission to look at the economic impact robots might have, or the ethical dilemmas they could pose. Where is the new institution that brings together trades unions, employers and government to establish how the time liberated and wealth created by robots is equitably shared?
A robot driving a truck might sound daunting, just as a horseless carriage did in 1890, but a driverless car does not get tired, or drink alcohol, or have blind spots. The policy implications posed by just this one technology are almost infinite. Road deaths should plummet. It is likely to lead to greater efficiency in our existing road networks as cars become personal trains, driving faster and closer together on our motorways; there would be huge improvements to freight delivery times and increased competition with the rail sector. However, it might also mean a massive displacement of jobs in the transportation industry.
We need only look at the past to understand the scale of the change to come. The first machine age unleashed the stunning power of capitalism and changed society forever. Our towns and cities are shaped by the industrial revolution. It brought us the railways, which were fiercely resisted by rural communities and powerful landowners. It built our great cities, with their town halls, libraries, galleries, museums, public statues and great squares.
This wave of industrialization created great wealth, great philanthropy and great advances in the human condition, but it also created huge upheaval and vast misery: child labor; infectious disease; industrial injury; fetid slums; and infant mortality.
It took an amalgam of municipal leadership, benevolent capitalism and the collective strength of workers to civilize that economic landscape. However, there were huge changes to the lives of millions. At one point more British soldiers were being deployed to deal with the Luddites who smashed the new machinery than to fight Napoleon.
Today, sensors and actuators, together with advances in computation, memory and communication capability, are making every product smarter. The results are likely to be positive for the vast mass of the global population, bringing knowledge, connections and consumer choice to billions, but they are likely to be challenging for the millions in jobs that might not exist in a decade.
We already have an hourglass economy, with plenty of room at the top for those with existing wealth and access to capital, and a wide, flat base of lower-paid jobs that cannot be automated. There is a hollowing out of the middle — the jobs in retail, or high street banking for example. We are becoming a country of affluent leaders and struggling workers, with less space in the middle and fewer chances for progression.
New technology is likely to exacerbate this trend. Unlike previous waves of industrial progress, it is not just working-class jobs, primarily done with the hands, that automation threatens. Automated systems are diagnosing diseases, writing annual reports, researching criminal cases in court, designing software and pouring our coffee.
Richard and Daniel Susskind, in their remarkable work The Future of the Professions, argue that it is jobs in medicine, law, accountancy and engineering that are likely to bear the initial impact of the rise of the machines. Why would we need a general practitioner, when a robot can read our complex physiologies and prescribe, manufacture and distribute the exact blends of medications we need?
If Deloitte is right, nearly one-third of UK jobs are facing eradication within a decade.
The government is not ideologically equipped to address the challenges we would face in this new world. Enterprise and hard work grow businesses that become employers and contribute to the fabric of society in many ways, social and cultural, as well as through taxation.
However, just as the great capitalists of the last industrial revolution realized they needed to build homes and provide healthcare for their workers, the business owners of the future would have to adapt to a world where productivity is dramatically improved through automation.
It has been 20 years since former British prime minister Tony Blair said that under Labour “every school would be connected to the information superhighway.” It sounded like science fiction, but today, my 10-year-old has access to more information in his pocket than the president of the US had 20 years ago, standing in the White House situation room.
When Blair delivered those words we could not begin to imagine the impact of the Internet. Yet, the golden age of the knowledge economy has not yielded all that it promised. The success of big technology platforms like Google, Amazon and Facebook has seen huge amounts of cash accrue to their balance sheets, but very little investment in social infrastructure, education, skills and health. The situation is worsened by the apparent inability of government to tax these technology giants.
The Labour Party is likely to be at the forefront of developing a new industrial strategy, fit for the second machine age and the epoch of drones, bots and artificial intelligence. This new industrial strategy must address head-on the hourglass economy, the future of the professions, the skills gap, the need to spread prosperity not concentrate it in fewer hands and the threats, as well as the potential of change.
None of that will be easy, but all of it is necessary if the UK is to claim its share of the benefits that automation is likely to bring.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with