I agree that it is an attack on those on benefits (as I have said) but by the same token, I also believe we need strong and tough legislation to minimise the risk of AI forcing large numbers of people into involuntary unemployment and possible poverty.
AI isn't likely to be as big an issue in this country as many fear. For starters we have a rapidly aging population (there's now more over 80 year olds than under 18's), which is likely to lead to a shortage of people in the workforce for a given population size (whilst the workforce may not shrink by very much, if the overall population is growing than the number of people working per million people will be shrinking). However that's only one aspect, with more older people there's a need for more people to care for them (including a greater need for medical staff).
There's likely to be a change in what people do, but that's always been the case.
AI is likely to be not all that different to spreadsheets or the loom in terms of impact on the workforce, people will do things differently, there maybe a shift in what people do, but ultimately there will still be jobs which need doing, yes with fewer staff. What's happened to the rings of typing pools? They no longer exist, yet there's now more women in work than there was when they existed.
Likewise the advent of trains being run with as few as one person in board hasn't lead to massive amounts of people but in work.
The deindustrialization of the UK did happen too quickly, which did cause some issues, however they tended to be limited in duration (although some areas still are haunted by the impacts, it's generally the car that the impact is reducing as time goes by), whilst that duration can be decades long, it's less likely that office job loses would be quite as impactful.
For example, I use CAD based programs to design roads, the reality is that I could draw most things people want in a CAD based program. That could be Roads, things to be 3D printed, houses, games, etc. However I could also use that computer skill to learn a new system and do something else.
The reality is, actually a lot of what I do isn't as straightforward as a road from A to B (motorway design is fairly boarng and could be done by AI), but rather the complexity of how to fit a new junction into a unique space with the need to balance a number of factors which may not be easy to define and so may not be as easy for AI to do.
There's likely to be a reduction in the need for staff, however to get to zero it's unlikely quickly.
This reminds me of my experiences when I was temporarily unemployed for a month or two after university (this was many years ago now, in the era of Lilley as social security secretary).
The member of staff was rude and discourteous and singularly unhelpful. They didn't want to help, you just got the impression that they looked down on you.
My wife had a similar experience, although she had to help the member of staff use their computer.