We now move on to the short debate, so if you're leaving the Chamber please do so quickly.

Right, can we all leave—? Those who are leaving, please do so. We now move to the short debate, and I call on Lee Waters to introduce the debate topic he has chosen. Lee. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. 

'And we will build brutal energy cut into a much better home. It's a movement towards the beautiful legal scams and better share. And it was a gingelly deal, and I don't think they're never worth in a middle deal to be parted to Mexico.'

Not the most inspiring opening to a speech, I'll admit, but what sets this opening apart is what sets this debate apart. It was written by a robot, a gimmick carried out by The New Yorker last year. They fed 270,000 words spoken by Donald Trump into a computer programme that studies language patterns. It analyses word choice and grammar, and learnt how to simulate Trump's speech. It doesn't totally make sense, but neither does Trump. Although I like the term 'gingelly deal', I don't think it's yet part of the popular lexicon, but I opened with it because I want to bring the abstract into the real quickly. 

Until now, automation and robotics has largely been confined to manufacturing industries, but the exponential growth in the application of artificial intelligence will now hit every industry, every profession. Doctors, accountants, lawyers, translators—any role that has a repetitive element is likely to be impacted. It's estimated that around 700,000 jobs in Wales will be hit by automation, and we need to mobilise to prepare people for the change that is coming, and it's a big change. Indeed, analysts have compared the impact of artificial intelligence with the arrival of electricity in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century; it's that big a shift. The technology writer, Luke Dormehl, used the parallel to help us get our heads around the scale of the change that we are facing. That was a profoundly disruptive change that interrupted the regular biological rhythms of life: electric light allowed people for the first time to create their own schedules for work and play, so night and day no longer mattered, and it unleashed a chain of innovation. The network of wires ushered in a slew of connected devices that created industries and changed lives forever.

It's that scale of profound change that we're on the cusp of again. Right now, we're in the early adopter stages of the artificial intelligence revolution, but we can discern an outline of the type of change that’s ahead of us. I was blown away by the robot who was able to cook a meal by just being shown a 'how to cook' video on YouTube without any direct human input. Researchers at the University of Maryland did this experiment two years ago now, and they're planning to use a similar deep learning approach in areas like military repair. Elon Musk at Tesla thinks that a car manufacturing factory without any human workers is within reach. Amazon are trialling a shop without workers, where you're automatically billed when you leave the store. These are all game changes, changing the way we behave. Amazon, Airbnb and Uber are all demonstrating how quickly technology can change how we shop, sleep and move from A to B. And they're up-ending business models in the process. You won’t find the largest global retailer on the high street. The world’s largest accommodation provider doesn’t own a single hotel. And the largest taxi firm doesn’t own a single car.

As the director of the Confederation of British Industry in Wales points out in a recent article, in 2004, Blockbuster had 84,000 employees and had revenues of $6 billion. In 2016, just 12 years later, Netflix employed 4,500 people and made $9 billion. It's called disruptive change for a reason, and it's evolving quickly. In the early days of the internet, it was about tasks like finding information or listening to music, but now technology is moving to anticipate our needs. Innovation expert Alec Ross points out that robots used to be stand-alone machines carrying out basic tasks. Now they're all connected to the cloud and are learning as they go, not just from their own experiences, but, because they can be linked to every other similar machine across the world, they learn from each other and adapt in real time. He calls it a quantum leap for the cognitive development of robots.

It's the equivalent of you and I being able to tap into the combined brainpower of every other human on earth to make a decision and to do so in a split second. Imagine how much smarter we'd be. Imagine how much better we'd be at making decisions. That's what's happening with robots. It is extraordinary. And it's also terrifying. For an economy like ours, there is a disproportionate number of jobs that are vulnerable to automation, but this change is unstoppable and we must get our heads around it and adapt. I wouldn't swap my digital alarm clock for a knocker-upper, just as nobody would turn back the clock to a world lit by candlelight or horsepower. So, too, we shouldn’t try to halt automation; we should harness it.

'The graveyards are full of indispensable men'

Charles de Gaulle famously said, and of course it's human nature to resist change. None of us wants to face up to the fact that our job may be made obsolete. But it's our responsibility to ensure that this wilful blindness is not replicated at a national level. When Gerry Holtham recently suggested at an Institute of Welsh Affairs event that we might get rid of GPs altogether because technology could do their job for them, the professions jumped on him. Both the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Physicians denounced him. Like the guild of craftsmen from the days of old that orchestrated the banishment of William Lee in 1589 because he'd invented a knitting machine, we must not let their desire to protect their trades stop us from harnessing these changes.

'Consider thou what the invention could do to my poor subjects' 

Queen Elizabeth I told him. 

Let’s be clear: the threat of job losses will pale into insignificance to what will happen if we don’t take advantage of the possibilities. We know there is a shortage of doctors and that demand is rising and public spending is falling. We know that many of the new technologies are more accurate than humans and that patients in many cases would prefer to be diagnosed by a machine. So, let's free up overworked paramedics to do what only they can do and let's harness technology. And this is my plea in this afternoon’s debate, Cabinet Secretary: if we face up to the enormity of the challenge that is upon us, we can use it to improve public services, to free people from dangerous or routine tasks. But if we hold back, there's a danger that the downsides of change will dominate the debate and create a climate of fear.

Atos and other consultancies are as we speak touting themselves around cash-strapped councils offering to save millions by cutting routine jobs and replacing them with automated processes. If we allow this approach to take hold, all talk of automation will be seen by the workforce as a cost-cutting exercise, and it needn't be. If we harness it, we can use new labour-saving devices to free up staff to work on the front line, to improve public services. That’s the debate we need to have. And Government needs to mobilise, right across its whole breadth, to face up to how we can use these new technologies to help tackle the problems we know we face—[Interruption.] Yes, I'm happy to give—

No, there is no intervention. The Member may offer you a minute at the end of his speech.

Apologies. I am unfamiliar with the rules of these debates, too.

In education, for example, we need to ensure that we’re preparing young people for roles that do not yet exist, and we need to be mindful that many of these changes are coming in the next 10 to 20 years. I don’t know about you, but I still hope to be gainfully employed in my fifties. We must think about training for those already in work, too. In the economy, Ken Skates's new economic strategy recognises the productivity gains that can be made through encouraging the adoption of automation, but we need to be smart in how we apply this new criteria. Inevitably, Government will end up giving financial assistance to firms, which will lead to them cutting some jobs, but when that happens, we must make sure that companies are helping those who are displaced to upskill, to be redeployed rather than made redundant. In finance, the evolution of blockchain technology offers us an opportunity to be totally transparent in how we spend public money. And in rural Wales, we must seize opportunities presented by big data, not only to transform how we farm and produce food, but also to position Wales at the forefront of this emerging precision agriculture industry. In local government, we must follow the example of other cities that have gone smart, trialling real-time-driven services such as smart parking, smart refuse collection and smart lighting.

There are huge opportunities in healthcare to improve patient care and outcomes, from therapeutic robots that can help deal with our loneliness crisis to sensors that can track if people are missing meals or behaviour is becoming more erratic, helping dementia patients remain independent in their own homes for longer; contact lenses capable of measuring glucose levels that can then trigger the injection of insulin via a pain-free patch; and smart hospital machinery that can alert nurses to real-time changes in patients' vital signs, ensuring that changes in condition are picked up immediately, rather than periodically, and leaving nurses to focus on other aspects of patient care.

Actually, if we look at the implantable technologies coming our way, these are just the tip of the iceberg. This is a cross-Government agenda, relevant to every Cabinet Secretary. These innovations will save money and they'll improve the quality of public services. But these are all examples of technologies that are already out of date—and we haven't adopted any of them. Where are we in Wales? We're not even in the foothills of this. The NHS is the biggest purchaser of fax machines. And the two reports issued in the last week—the Wales Audit Office report on informatics, and yesterday's parliamentary review—painfully highlight that we are way behind. The Government needs to be radical here. We not only need new systems, we need new cultures and new leadership to bring about this transformation. As technology evolves, people come, increasingly, to expect to be able to access the services they need where and when they need it. If I can’t see a doctor and Babylon Health is giving me the chance to talk to one online for £25, the chances are I’m going to take it. But if we fail to keep pace with public expectation and private providers step in, it could threaten the very foundations of our public services.

This is a huge challenge for Government, especially since we are fighting on so many other fronts. Local government is almost paralysed by austerity and central Government by Brexit. And it's constraining our ability to respond to a rapidly evolving environment. But, our future generations Act demands that we face up to these long-term challenges. Llywydd, Wales needs a plan. We need a unit in the First Minister's office dedicated to horizon-scanning new developments and rapidly experimenting with new approaches to benefit public service delivery and encourage the growth of new industries in the private sector.

I'll close with a quote from the World Economic Forum—an organisation not known for its alarmist views: 

'The individual, organizational, governmental and societal adjustments are not trivial, and everyone will feel their impact. The speed of various aspects of the transition is hard to predict, but it is not difficult to see that the world will function quite differently 10 to 15 years from now. Being prepared to navigate the transition begins with awareness of the shifts to come, and some understanding of their implications.'

Diolch.

Thank you. Did you intend to offer a minute to the Member?

Nobody has indicated, but I'm happy to offer a minute if anybody wishes.

All right then, thank you. So, I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport to reply to the debate—Ken Skates.

Can I thank the Member for his contribution today and for bringing forward the subject to a short debate? It's a subject that I know he feels particularly passionate about, and today, again, he has delivered an outstanding speech, which identifies some of the major challenges, but also the opportunities that can be had if we adapt to the fourth revolution ahead of our competitors. It is interesting; I'm spending a good amount of my time at the moment in the constituency of Alyn and Deeside, and it was brought to my attention by the local Member of Parliament Mark Tami earlier this week that that particular constituency of all across Britain is the fifth most vulnerable to automation in the UK. That's a constituency that is home to some of the biggest employers in the private sector, some of the most innovative companies in the private sector in the UK, but it's an area that we must ensure can be resilient in the future, given its contribution to the Welsh economy.

Now, we're not just developing a new economic action plan to enhance the prospects of Alyn and Deeside and its local manufacturing base, which is home, of course, to Europe's biggest industrial park. We're also rolling out, as a priority and an immediate intervention, the advanced manufacturing research centre that will focus very much on the opportunities of automation for the manufacturing base in that area and, indeed, across the entire region. But I think this debate reflects the importance of this issue and its impact upon constituents we represent right across the country. Lee is most certainly correct to assert that how we respond will determine our future prosperity and the security of our economy. As others have pointed out in the past, our economy and our industrial base have confronted technological change before from the first industrial revolution, through the second, into the third, and now, as we approach the fourth revolution. We've always had to rise to new challenges and face fresh opportunities, but I do think, Deputy Presiding Officer, that it's fair to say that in the past Welsh industry hasn't always kept apace with changing technology.

We're now on the cusp of a fourth industrial revolution, with breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and automation that will transform the very fabric of our economy and the way we live our lives. In the midst of this unprecedented change, Government most certainly has a pivotal role to provide leadership and to develop a strategic response. We simply cannot sit back and leave this change to the markets. So, our role is ensuring that that leadership, that vision and that support for business are available at all times. We can't stop the development of new technologies in the fourth industrial age, nor should we try to prevent the progress that it represents. But we can, and we must, equip our businesses and our people to futureproof themselves against the change that lies ahead. That's why the economic action plan that was launched just before Christmas clearly identifies automation and digitisation as some of the key strategic challenges and opportunities facing the Welsh economy over the coming years. 

The five calls to action contained within the plan provide us with a platform, working together with industry, trade unions and other partners, to respond to the challenges that Lee has outlined. We're focusing funding around supporting businesses to prepare for the challenges of tomorrow, to futureproofing our economy and workforce for what automation is likely to bring. It's why the action plan places such an emphasis on skills, on innovation and on building upon regional economies that are productive and competitive. Deputy Presiding Officer, it's why we want to build our approach in the context of a constructive and mature relationship with business, an approach that is founded upon the new economic contract, where businesses may well ask us to show them the money, but where we ask them to show us their plans for the fourth industrial revolution. It's easy to despair—

Will the Minister give way? I think you're being reassuring and really competent and diligent and thorough, but I think what I got from Lee Waters was just the pace of change. We had 10,000 years of the agricultural revolution, 200 years of the industrial revolution. This is all within a generation almost how we've been transformed by the revolution in computing, which started in the second world war but, in the last 10 or 20 years, has really gone to remarkable depth. We need deep thinking in the Welsh Government and he suggested a unit in the First Minister's office. Well, why not have that?

The Member's absolutely right. We're likely to see change take place over the next 10 years that is greater than the change that has taken place over the past 200 years. Indeed, many changes will come so fast that we won't see them by the time they've already passed. I think it is essential that we look at emerging technological changes and trends. Certainly, that's a role that has been occupied in recent years by the digital team. When I was in the position now held by the leader of the house, where I was responsible for technology, we had an intelligence unit that was able to provide us with that sort of horizon scanning over a period of a single decade, two decades, right out to 2050, analysing the challenges and the opportunities for Wales. Also, there are units within higher education that do just that. There's also the Public Policy Institute for Wales, which has a responsibility and a role for ensuring that we are horizon scanning in a way that can equip our economy and our workers with the skills that are required to adapt to the fourth industrial revolution. I don't think it's just for the First Minister's office to do that. It's for the First Minister's office to ensure that it has the intelligence that is gathered from a number of bodies, organisations and from across Government to, in turn, guarantee that policy is well informed and is based on the future rather than just on today's challenges and opportunities.

I think it's sometimes easy to despair that automation and digitalisation and artificial intelligence will have a devastating impact on employment. What they do is show us the need to prepare today in a way that David Melding highlights is absolutely crucial. I don't think that we should overlook the potential impact of automation on productivity, which is exactly what Lee mentioned. Increased productivity could result in businesses being more competitive, in winning more business and in growing, therefore potentially displacing some of the jobs that could be lost to automation. In developed countries such as ours, increasing healthcare for ageing societies and investment in infrastructure and also in energy will create demand for work that we should use to again partly offset the displaced jobs.

I think, in terms of adapting to change and preparing ourselves for what is certainly down the tracks, the key will be working proactively with business and, indeed, others to ensure that there are sufficient opportunities emerging in the new economy to replace those jobs and businesses that will be lost in the old economy. A key element will be in ensuring that people right across the country, as I've said, are equipped with the skills to exploit them. That's very much the intention of our action plan, and the dignity of skilled employment is critical to this plan. We held a round-table event back in June of last year and I'd like to thank Lee Waters again for arranging that. In that session, we discussed the concern of jobs at risk from automation in Wales over the next two decades. That work has certainly helped to shape the thinking behind the economic action plan, because Wales needs to be at the forefront of the adoption of new technologies. That's why we've developed the Tech Valleys initiative—

Will the Minister take an intervention?

Yes, of course. Yes.

Very briefly, could I urge him, in line with David Melding's intervention, to look specifically at this idea of creating what many Governments—they call them i-teams, which are cross-Government, which are a dedicated team of people looking at public service innovation. This is an area where Wales could lead. We have a public sector that's large relative to our economy as a whole, but if we became really good at deploying these technologies to public sector policy issues, the world could beat a path to our door.

I think it's not within my gift, but I would agree that this is something that we're urging the private sector to do very regularly to make sure that they're scanning opportunities that currently, perhaps, aren't being considered. I think it's essential that, right across Government—within Government and within local government—there are units that are set up, there are ways of learning from others, from best practice that can apply lessons and can also futureproof those organisations at whatever level they may sit.

I think skills are a huge building block for the exploitation of technology and for changing the mindset and the behaviours within institutions and organisations. And the development of a futureproofed skills agenda and the need to find ways of encouraging, in particular, Deputy Presiding Officer, girls and women into STEM subjects and careers is vital for future economic success. Because human capital will be key and there will be an increased demand, no doubt, for a knowledgeable workforce and a highly skilled set of workers right across every sector.

It's important that we don't overlook the opportunities to work beyond our borders. We'll be holding the UK Government to its commitments in its industrial strategy and its promise to invest in the technologies and the businesses and in the skills of the future. The five foundations of productivity laid out in the UK industrial strategy—ideas, people, infrastructure, business environment and places—are central to addressing those factors responsible for raising productivity and earning power within an economy, and under these sit four grand challenges where Britain can lead the global technological revolution.

Now, there are very clear overlaps, in my view, between the grand challenges and our calls to action, and between the five foundations of productivity and the objectives in the economic action plan. The economic contract, calls to action and national thematic sectors set out in the economic action plan are all central to meeting these challenges and opportunities.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I'm mindful of the time I've taken so far to respond to this short debate, but the debate has shown that there are huge challenges. We recognise them and we are taking mitigation very seriously indeed. The speed of technological change and its adoption is rapid, and, in some cases, we're standing on a burning platform. The message could not be clearer: we need to invest and embrace. Automation and digitisation is coming right now, and now is the time to innovate and to improve productivity to create new opportunities, or we risk losing competitiveness and economic stagnation could ensue.

There is cause for optimism—sure—and for confidence about the future so long as we are prepared to act now to harness the opportunities and to manage the threats posed by the fourth industrial revolution. I would again like to thank Members for their contributions today.

Thank you very much. That brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.

The meeting ended at 18:08.