"such as increased unemployment or income for citizens"
Which isnt happening. Instead we have full employment and greater incomes (globally we are really ridiculously rich).
"resulting in reduced government income and therefore reduced services"
Except government has been increasing its take of income in a rich country which is growing. Unions stopping automated trains cost more and paying high wages for a job that doesnt require such a large wage reduces government funds because they pay more for reduced services.
"As an example, I don't believe that Payroll Tax applies to robots (yet), so each time a human worker is replaced by a robot one, less tax goes to our esteemed government, so they start eyeing up my pay packet."
Unfortunately that is the common misunderstanding. We have full employment, so that doesnt work. We have a net migration of people into the country and full employment and additional automation thanks to the 'living wage' rubbish.
What we have is automation being more productive and people going off and doing other things. That means money from the increased productivity and those ex workers doing something else and paying tax. We are not all sitting about doing nothing now we have automated and improved agriculture. Nor manufacturing. We wouldnt have the smart phone or even the phone at all if we didnt increase productivity and get out of the field.
"Also at a wider level, education outcomes may need to change to cope with different requirements and expectations."
It already has. We have an education. We do primary and secondary + kids clubs and kindergarten and more because we are a rich country. In large parts of the world they work in a field or work in a manufacturing plant. We have taken it so far that university has been opened up to everyone.
"This is not a problem that's going to be addressed by the businesses busy automating"
Of course it is. Kids can probably teach computing classes better than the teachers because devices are so cheap and disposable (again we are rich) that even poor kids have these toys to play with. Food used to be a majority expense for a household and is now a much smaller part of the average wage. It used to be practically everything in peasantry.
"So, governments need to deal with these wider implications"
This is where I am not convinced that government can adapt. Look at the mess they make in education. They try to direct and it causes problems. We need them for some things but for a lot they need to back away.
"As for your "governments ramping up labour costs" - you may wish to pursue this line of your thinking to its logical conclusion. There's a word for free labour."
Cool. Just as there is free NHS, free welfare, free school, free allsorts to be honest and if automation is dragging costs down to practically nothing then everyone can afford it. We are not yet there though. Full employment and plenty of things we want now and in the future.
Its like the story of an economist visiting a poor country, witnessed a public-works project that had people making a road with picks and shovels. When he asked why they did not use earth-moving machines instead, a local official responded that the goal was to provide people with jobs. In that case, the economist asked, why not just have the workers use spoons instead?
Are we better off with the road or a load of people standing around but being given money? Which one makes money and which one costs?