The global tech sphere has exploded in a supernova of investment with billions of dollars pouring into artificial intelligence research and development. New AI models are released almost weekly, even as experts raise the alarm about the Promethean genie we’ve unleashed that is bringing us closer to artificial general intelligence (AGI): superintelligence that exceeds human capability. Yet amidst the din of Australian electioneering, there remains a deafening silence about the tsunami of disruption AI may unleash on our workforce, economy, and society sooner than many realise.
While people still joke about AI taking over the world, the reality is we’re no longer in the realm of science fiction. Most experts agree it has the potential to cause significant harm if mismanaged. Predictions suggest that within one to three years AI could be writing its own code and producing more capable versions of itself – a process called ‘recursive self-improvement’. The birth of AGI may well be realistic within that timeframe.
The International Monetary Fund reported in 2024 that between 40-60 per cent of jobs globally will be affected by AI, noting it ‘…has the potential to reshape the global economy’ and highlighting women and university-educated workers as particularly exposed. In March this year, Bill Gates predicted that within a decade, humans won’t be needed for ‘most things’. Only this month former Google CEO Eric Schmidt warned that AGI as smart as the ‘…smartest mathematician, physicist, artist, writer, thinker, politician…’ could arrive within 3-5 years. Schmidt added that AI is progressing ‘faster than our society, our democracy, our laws will address’ and warned of sweeping implications.
In 2024, former OpenAI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner published a series of essays titled Situational Awareness AI, warning that AI is already transforming white-collar professions and could soon give rise to ‘vastly superhuman AI systems’. Even if AGI is still some years off, the current pace of development guarantees sweeping societal shifts.
Aschenbrenner’s essays sparked debate for framing AGI as a national security imperative – arguing that whichever country develops it first will gain decisive economic and military advantage. His projection of AGI by 2027 has drawn criticism for leaning into speculative forecasting. While his timeline is contested – and may well prove overly ambitious – it would be reckless to ignore the possibility entirely.
The problem is that many Australians still underestimate the scale of what’s coming. The Industrial Revolution is often invoked as a parallel, but it doesn’t capture the magnitude of the change we are facing. When James Hargreaves invented the Spinning Jenny in the 1760s, hand-spinners lost jobs, but many were eventually re-employed in textile factories. This is the disruption most people imagine AI will bring – a painful transition, but one that ends in re-employment. A better analogy might be the fate of the humble lamplighter.
Lamplighters were once ubiquitous in cities – lighting street lamps at dusk, extinguishing them at dawn, trimming wicks, checking gas flow, and cleaning glass. Then electricity arrived, and nearly all of them disappeared from the workforce. The same fate befell the window-knockers when alarm clocks became affordable. Sometimes disruption is not evolution – it’s extinction.
While AI will boost productivity in many areas, it will also reduce labour demand, displace workers, and deepen inequality – and as a service economy, Australia is especially exposed. Around 80-90 per cent of our GDP comes from the services sector. While not all of that is white-collar work, many industries – finance, professional services, education – are particularly vulnerable to automation.
One question I keep returning to is: how will Australians prepare for this? What should the next generation study? Programming may be obsolete within years. The same could apply to graphic design, communication, finance, economics, research, mathematics, law – even medicine, in time.
The stakes are immense. How will Australia ensure this technological dividend benefits all of us? How will we protect key industries and manage the societal impacts: job displacement, education disruption, ethical quandaries, and growing strain on social cohesion?
Why then do we hear so much about housing, immigration, cost of living and tariffs – and almost nothing about AI? It’s not that political parties have no policies. Labor released a discussion paper in 2024 exploring AI guardrails. The Greens election platform proposes a new AI Workplace Change Division at Fair Work Australia. The Liberals, meanwhile, have criticised Labor for a ‘go-slow’ approach. Clearly, there’s thinking going on – but it hasn’t made it into the public conversation.
This election campaign is the right time for our political leaders to make their case for a coordinated national approach to AI. Australians need to know what our plan is. We need a robust national dialogue – one that includes urgent investment in AI skills and education, the development of ethical standards for deployment, a re-imagining of social safety nets, and public engagement to build understanding and trust.
We must also consider how to position Australia strategically in the global AI race. This isn’t a passing tech trend – it is the defining transformation of our age. It is incumbent upon our politicians, our media, and every voter to elevate this issue beyond the periphery of the national conversation.
The AI transformation is not a distant threat. It is a rapidly approaching reality of unprecedented scale. Australia faces a stark choice: to actively engage, plan, and shape our AI future – or to be swept along by a tide of change we failed to anticipate.
The time for silence is over. The conversation must begin now.
Ben Roberts is the founder and principal of Saga Strategic Communication