The government must prepare for the possibility of unprecedented disruption to the labour market caused by artificial intelligence, a UK minister has warned. AI Minister Kanishka Narayan stressed there is currently no evidence of an overall reduction in jobs resulting from AI adoption, but emphasised the need for contingency planning should worst-case scenarios materialise.
Speaking at a fringe meeting during the Labour Party Conference in Liverpool, Narayan acknowledged the technology’s potential impact while urging caution against complacency. “If it’s going to hit us in a big way, you are going to want to be as ahead of the curve as possible,” he told attendees.
Economic Impact Could Be Severe
The potential scale of job displacement has drawn significant concern from policy analysts. Carsten Jung of the IPPR think tank suggested that in a worst-case scenario, approximately 8 million positions could be negatively affected by AI adoption. Jung noted that while current AI implementation remains limited across industries, its eventual impact could surpass even the industrial revolution in magnitude.
According to Jung, roughly 11% of UK jobs face high exposure to replacement by AI chatbots, with secretarial and administrative occupations most vulnerable. However, with the emergence of more sophisticated agentic AI systems, the proportion of tasks at risk could escalate to approximately 60% across the economy.
The IPPR specialist admitted that “stark scenarios” produced in 2024 were “to some extent” inaccurate, arguing that AI has evolved rapidly from handling mundane tasks to performing complex reasoning and creative functions. “We are not preparing enough for something quite big that’s coming,” he warned the conference audience.
Gender Disparities in AI Exposure
The potential impact of AI adoption reveals significant gender disparities in the labour market. Jung highlighted that women face 40% greater exposure to AI-related job displacement than men, reflecting the higher proportion of female workers in service sector roles.
Narayan acknowledged this imbalance while outlining his priorities for the transition period. He called for retraining programmes to support service sector workers and suggested measures to “slow down the transition slightly” to preserve employment. This could involve restructuring tax systems to make retaining human workers more financially attractive than automation.
However, Jung cautioned that implementing such protective measures would require substantial investment, particularly given the UK’s service-based economy compared to other G7 nations. “A lot of the policies we might want to do in a really severe disruption scenario will cost a lot of money,” he noted.
Government Response and Transparency
Narayan addressed concerns about the “silent adoption” of AI by workers, which often goes undetected in industry surveys. He revealed that while UK firms reported no aggregate impact on the labour market, one technology company had admitted to hiring fewer staff due to task automation. “The actual net impact might not be fully captured,” the minister observed.
The AI minister pledged “much better transparency when AI and technology is adopted” to accurately measure productivity gains. He affirmed his commitment to ensuring workers have a voice in the transition, identifying contingency planning as a top priority. This could involve adjustments to “labour market policy” and potential regulatory changes.
Mike Clancy, general secretary of the Prospect trade union, welcomed the government’s commitment to worker representation but warned against “creating the conditions in which working people become victims” of AI advancement.
International Leadership on AI Safety
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband reinforced the government’s stance during his conference speech, issuing a direct warning to technology companies. He criticised “tech titans” who cannot be relied upon to manage AI safety risks independently, noting that while some firms “are calling for us to act,” others “are saying we should leave it all to them.”
Miliband argued that historical lessons demonstrate the impossibility of leaving regulatory guardrails to corporations motivated by profit maximisation. “It is neither their purpose nor their motive, theirs is to maximise profits. We cannot and will not allow that to come at the expense of our children or indeed humanity,” he declared.
The Foreign Secretary affirmed that the UK would confront “urgent risks” posed by AI, including through its forthcoming G20 presidency, which will provide a platform to “lead the efforts to manage AI so we keep our country and our world safe.”
Why it Matters
As artificial intelligence continues its rapid evolution from handling routine tasks to performing complex cognitive functions, the potential disruption to global labour markets represents one of the most significant economic challenges of our time. The UK government’s acknowledgement of worst-case scenarios, combined with its commitment to transparency and worker representation, signals a necessary shift toward proactive governance of technological change. With millions of jobs potentially at stake and significant gender disparities already emerging, the decisions made in the coming years will shape not only economic outcomes but social stability itself. The international dimension, particularly through the G20 presidency, suggests that AI regulation will become a central pillar of British foreign policy, with implications stretching far beyond domestic borders.