Kenneth Tiong calls for universal AI access, strategic AI firm recognition & stronger retrenchment protections

SINGAPORE: Workers’ Party MP Kenneth Tiong urged the Government to provide universal access to premium artificial intelligence tools, warning that unequal access could widen social and economic divides.

On 6 May, speaking during a parliamentary debate on the motion ‘An Artificial Intelligence with No Jobless Growth’, Tiong argued that access to advanced AI systems, particularly AI agents, should not be restricted by course enrolment or union membership.

He said such restrictions risk excluding individuals who cannot afford subscription-based tools, effectively embedding inequality at the outset of technological transformation.

Tiong described artificial intelligence as a “game changing” force, noting that he personally spends hundreds of dollars monthly on such tools due to their impact on productivity and workflow.

Experience with AI tools shapes concerns

Drawing from professional experience in developing AI-enabled applications, Tiong recounted two defining moments that shaped his perspective on the technology’s trajectory.

The first came in November 2022 with the release of GPT-3.5, which he said could generate ideas, write code, and iterate software features with unprecedented ease.

He noted that coding, once considered a critical and scarce skill, has rapidly become “cheap and abundant”, with even graduates from leading institutions facing difficulties in securing employment.

The second moment occurred in November 2025, when AI agents capable of executing tasks autonomously became widely available.

Tiong described these agents as akin to “a very smart junior colleague”, capable of completing complex work independently with minimal supervision.

He highlighted the contrast between conversational chatbots and task-oriented AI agents, which can operate continuously and deliver results after extended processing periods.

This shift, he said, marks a significant leap in productivity, but also intensifies labour market pressures.

Rising strain on workers and job seekers

Tiong warned that the acceleration of AI adoption is already reshaping work patterns and employment prospects.

He described a demanding environment where software engineers work extended hours while running multiple AI systems simultaneously to maintain productivity.

Job seekers, particularly fresh graduates, face increasing difficulty securing employment, with many submitting large numbers of applications without response.

He likened online job portals to “memory holes for resumes”, where applications disappear without feedback.

Against this backdrop, Tiong emphasised that the key concern is not the endpoint of AI development, but “who gets left behind on the way there”.

Proposals for universal access and strategic policy

Tiong outlined three proposals aimed at addressing emerging inequalities and economic risks.

First, he called for universal access to premium AI tools, particularly agent-based systems, arguing that “intelligence… should not stratify according to wealth”.

He acknowledged existing initiatives such as the SkillsFuture Premium AI Access scheme and subsidies covering multiple AI tools, but criticised their limitations.

He said these programmes are unnecessarily tied to course enrolment or membership requirements and may not include the most advanced AI agents.

Second, Tiong urged the Government to treat frontier AI companies as entities of strategic importance due to their influence over pricing, access, and productivity.

He noted that a small number of firms now shape global AI capabilities, with their decisions affecting national economic trajectories.

He proposed measures including sovereign-level licensing agreements for AI access, infrastructure partnerships, and efforts to attract research operations rather than sales offices.

Third, he called for an overhaul of retrenchment frameworks to address AI-driven job displacement.

Strengthening protections for displaced workers

Tiong proposed introducing a 90-day mandatory transition notice for AI-driven job eliminations, alongside a legal obligation for employers to prioritise redeployment and retraining.

He also suggested granting workers the right to challenge dismissals they believe are linked to automation.

He argued that current guidelines, including the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Excess Manpower, are non-binding and insufficient in addressing rapid technological disruption.

Citing labour market data, Tiong noted that retrenchments rose to approximately 14,500 in 2025, with higher rates among professionals, managers, executives and technicians.

He highlighted that the most affected sectors, including financial services and information and communications, are also the most exposed to AI adoption.

Tiong warned that without stronger protections, the costs of automation would be borne disproportionately by workers rather than employers.

International case highlights legal considerations

To illustrate his point, Tiong referenced a case involving a quality assurance supervisor in China who was dismissed after his role was automated.

According to his account, the worker challenged the dismissal and ultimately prevailed in court, with the ruling stating that automation is a deliberate business decision rather than an unforeseeable event.

The court held that employers should not transfer the full cost of such decisions onto workers and should prioritise retraining and redeployment.

Tiong suggested that similar principles could inform policy discussions in Singapore, particularly as AI adoption accelerates.

Tiong stressed that employment remains a central concern despite discussions around income support mechanisms.

He noted that individuals consistently prioritise meaningful work over unconditional financial assistance, highlighting the social and psychological importance of employment.

He argued that policy responses to AI should ensure that productivity gains are not concentrated among capital owners while workers bear the costs of transition.

Government response emphasises targeted approach

Manpower Minister Tan See Leng responded that the Government had considered universal access to advanced AI tools but concluded it was not necessary for all Singaporeans.

He said many individuals can already access free AI tools, and linking subsidies to training programmes ensures resources are directed towards those committed to upskilling.

Tan added that this approach promotes “optimal and responsible use” of AI while helping users build confidence gradually.

He emphasised that the Government’s strategy aims to make AI adoption broad-based, ensuring that individuals progress along a structured learning pathway.

Tan also highlighted plans to expand the Tech Skills Accelerator programme to develop AI capabilities across professions such as accountancy, law, and human resources.

In addition, more than S$400 million has been allocated to the Enterprise Workforce Transformation package to support businesses adapting to technological change.

Debate over access and adoption dynamics

Tiong later questioned whether course enrolment is a reliable indicator of commitment, citing feedback that some AI training programmes may lack quality.

He also asked whether universal access to advanced tools could itself stimulate demand and encourage broader adoption.

In response, Tan acknowledged varying levels of expertise among individuals and reiterated that the Government’s approach prioritises accessibility while ensuring users develop foundational skills.

He described the strategy as guiding Singaporeans along a “stable path” towards AI adoption, ensuring readiness before engaging with more advanced systems.

Concerns over implementation of retrenchment proposals

Nominated MP Mark Lee raised concerns about Tiong’s proposal for a fixed 90-day notice period, noting that AI adoption is often gradual and difficult to pinpoint to a specific moment of job elimination.

He cautioned that such requirements could either slow down innovation or lead to abrupt restructuring decisions by employers.

Tiong acknowledged the ambiguity but suggested that an adjudication process could assess whether redundancies are AI-driven based on factors such as task automation and salary adjustments.

He accepted that additional safeguards may introduce friction for businesses but argued that they are necessary to protect workers from rapid and potentially opaque restructuring processes.