Ottawa contributes $50 million in federal budget to protect against job-stealing AI

Are you worried about artificial intelligence coming to your work? So is the federal government: enough, at least, to set aside $50 million for worker retraining.

One of the central promises of the federal budget released Tuesday was $2.3 billion in investments aimed at boosting the adoption of artificial intelligence technology and the industry in Canada.

But along with that was a promise to invest $50 million over four years “to support workers who may be affected by AI.” Workers in “potentially disrupted sectors and communities” will receive new skills training through the Sector Workforce Solutions Program.

“There is a significant transformation of the economy and society on the horizon around artificial intelligence,” said Joel Blit, associate professor of economics at the University of Waterloo.

Some jobs will be lost, others will be created, “but there will be a transition period that could be somewhat chaotic.”

While jokes about robots taking over jobs predate the emergence of generative AI systems in late 2022, the widespread availability of systems like ChatGPT made those fears a reality for many, even as All industries began to integrate technology into their workday.

In June 2023, a briefing note to Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland warned that the impact of generative AI “will be felt across industries and around 40 percent of all working hours could be affected.”

“Banking, insurance and energy appear to have greater potential for automation compared to other sectors,” states the note, obtained through access to information and citing information from Accenture.

“This could have substantial impacts on jobs and skills requirements.”

The budget only singles out “creative industries” as an affected sector that will be covered by the program. In February, the Canadian television, film and music industries asked parliamentarians for protection against AI, saying the technology threatens their livelihoods and reputations.

Finance Canada did not respond to questions about what other sectors or types of jobs would be covered by the program.

“The creative industries were used as an illustrative example and are not intended to exclude other affected areas,” Deputy Finance Spokesperson Caroline Thériault said in a statement.

In an interview earlier this year, Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labor Congress, said unions representing actors and directors have been very concerned about how AI systems could use their images or work. But the “reality is that we have to look at the implications of AI in all jobs,” she said.

Blit explained that large language models and other generative AI can write, generate new ideas and then test them, analyze data and generate computer programming code, music, images and videos.

Those who will be affected are people in white-collar professions, such as people who work in marketing, healthcare, law and accounting.

In the long term, “it’s actually quite difficult to predict who will be affected,” he said. “What’s going to happen is that entire industries, entire processes will be reinvented around this new technology.”

AI is a problem “across all sectors, but certainly administrative and customer service jobs are most vulnerable,” Hugh Pouliot, a spokesperson for the Canadian Union of Public Employees, said in an email.

The federal government has used AI in nearly 300 projects and initiatives, new research published earlier this month revealed.

According to Viet Vu, director of economic research at the Dais of the Metropolitan University of Toronto, the impact of AI on workers in a sector such as the creative industry does not have to be negative.

“That’s only the case if it’s adopted irresponsibly,” he said, noting that creative professionals have been adopting new digital tools in their work for years.

He noted that only four per cent of Canadian companies use any form of artificial intelligence or machine learning. “And that’s why we haven’t gotten to that point yet where these cutting-edge models and technologies” have an impact.

When it comes to how AI will affect the job market, it’s more useful to think about what types of tasks the technology can do better, rather than whether it will replace entire jobs, Vu said.

“A job is made up of so many different tasks that sometimes, even if a new technology comes out and 20 or 30 percent of your job can be done using AI, you still have that 60 or 70 percent left,” he said.

“So it’s weird that (an) entire occupation is sort of erased from existence because of technology.”

Finance Canada also did not respond to questions about what new skills workers would learn.

Vu said there are two types of skills that make sense to focus on upskilling: computational thinking, or understanding how computers operate and make decisions, and skills that deal with data.

There is no artificial intelligence system in the world that does not use data, he said. “And so being able to really understand how the data is selected, how it’s used, and even some basic data analysis skills, will be very helpful.”

But given the scope of change that AI technology will unleash, critics say much more than $50 million will be needed.

Blit said the money is a good first step, but it will not be “sufficient” when it comes to the scale of the coming transformation, which will be comparable to globalization or the adoption of computers.

Valerio De Stefano, Canada Research Chair in Innovation Law and Society at York University, agreed that more resources will be needed.

“Jobs may be reduced to the point where retraining is insufficient,” and the government should consider “forms of unconditional income support, such as basic income,” he said.

The government should also consider requiring AI companies to “contribute directly to paying for any social initiatives that address people who lose their jobs because of the technology” and asking “employers to reduce their payrolls and increase their profits thanks to AI to do the same.”

“Otherwise, society will end up subsidizing technology companies and other companies as they increase their profits without giving back enough so that the technology benefits us all.”