各自成長--英國如何從脫歐中獲益

 

Growing apart 各自成長

How Britain can benefit from Brexit

英國如何從脫歐中獲益

Damage is inevitable, but there are ways of mitigating it

損害雖無可避免，但是有方法減輕

Leaders

Mar 13th 2021 edition

In january britain faced two simultaneous problems. Its departure from the European Union’s single market and customs union on the first day of the month hit trade. Exports of goods to the European Union (eu) fell by 40% between December 2020 and January 2021, while imports dropped by almost 30%. While the pandemic disrupted trade, much of that seems to have been the effect of Brexit. The second blow came from a surge in covid-19 cases. Britain, which already had the highest death rate in any big economy, saw deaths peak at 1,361 on January 19th.

1月的英國同時面臨兩個問題。當月第一天離開歐盟的單一市場和關稅同盟，衝擊貿易。在2020年12月到2021年1月期間，出口歐盟的商品減少40％，而進口降近30％。儘管疫情擾亂貿易，但大部分似乎是脱歐的影響。第二個打擊來自新冠病例激增。英國死亡率稱冠所有大型經濟體，在1月19日死亡人數達1,361人新紀錄。

The way Britain managed the second of these problems holds lessons for how it should deal with the first. The speed with which its medical regulator approved covid-19 vaccines allowed a swifter roll-out than in any other large country, which has helped slash the daily death toll to around 200. If Britain is to derive any benefit from leaving the eu, nimble regulation is one of the ways of doing so.

英國處理第二個問題的方式，可作處理第一個問題的借鏡。醫療監管機構迅速批准新冠疫苗，讓配送施打速度比其他大國更快，有助於使每日死亡人數降至200人左右。英國若要從脫歐受益，靈活的監管是達此目標的一種途徑。

Britain’s economy has experienced other big shocks in the past century, but the one brought about by Brexit is different from those inflicted after the second world war and in the 1980s. Clement Attlee’s and Margaret Thatcher’s governments had clear ideas about the direction in which they were taking the country. Boris Johnson’s does not. Brexiteers burbled about a British economic model, distinct from the European social-democratic model, without specifying what it should look like. The budget speech on March 3rd by Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, included a single reference to Brexit; the 111-page “plan for growth” that was published alongside the budget offers only a couple of pages of platitudes about Brexit at the end. Rather than producing a plan, the government has been going out of its way to pick fights with the European Commission instead.

在過去的一個世紀，英國的經濟經歷其他重大衝擊，但脱歐帶來衝擊與二戰後和1980年代所承受的不同。艾德禮和柴契爾政府對領導國家的方向有清晰的想法，但強生沒有。支持脱歐者嘟囊著英國的經濟模式與歐洲的社會民主模式截然不同，卻未具體說明應有的模樣。財政大臣蘇納克在3月3日的預算報告包含英國脫歐的單一參考，長達111頁的「成長計劃」與預算案一起公布，最後僅提供兩頁關於脱歐的陳詞濫調。政府沒有制定計劃，而是費勁心思與歐盟委員會纏鬥。

This failure has several causes. Britain’s scope for diverging from the eu is limited. The trade deal agreed on Christmas Eve between the two commits Britain to staying close to European norms. If it does not it may be punished by trade restrictions; anyway, most businesses are fine with the eu’s standards. To sell into the bloc, they need to stick to its rules, and working with one set of regulations is cheaper than working with two. Northern Ireland’s half-in half-out position raises the costs of divergence, for a bigger gap between Britain and the eu hardens the border in the Irish Sea and angers unionists committed to keeping the province inside the United Kingdom. And British voters do not have much appetite for the hyper-liberal economy which some Brexiteers advocated. Britons want their food safe and their employers to be required to treat workers well.

失敗的原因有多種。英國偏離歐盟的範圍是有限的。依照雙方在耶誕節前夕達成的貿易協議，英國承諾貼近歐盟規範。如果不這樣做，可能遭貿易限制懲罰；無論如何，大多數企業都願意接受歐盟標準。想賣東西給大國，他們需遵守規則，執行一套法規要比執行二套法規的成本便宜。北愛爾蘭半脫歐的狀況增加分歧的成本，因為英國與歐盟之間的差距，加深愛爾蘭海邊界的鴻溝，並激怒致力將北愛爾蘭留在英國境內的統一主義者。英國選民對部分脱歐主義者提倡的高度自由的經濟沒有太多的興趣。英國人只希望他們的食物安全、雇主善待勞工。

In most ways, therefore, Britain should aim to stay close to Europe. Yet there is scope for it to diverge in both damaging and beneficial ways. Britain could, for instance, abandon the eu’s restrictive state-aid regime; indeed, the government is already consulting on how to go about it. Britons should be wary of these moves. No doubt, Britain has room to improve on the eu’s rules, which are pernickety, but voters should regard the prospect of ripping up limits on state aid as a risk, rather than a benefit, of Brexit. Shovelling money in the direction of private companies is not a habit that taxpayers should want their governments to acquire.

因此，大致來說，英國都應致力於與歐洲保持緊密聯繫。然而，它在傷害和受益方式上都有分歧的餘地。例如，英國可以拋棄歐盟的限制國家補貼制度；的確，政府已在諮詢如何進行。英國人應對這些舉動保持警惕。毫無疑問，英國有改善歐盟苛刻規定的餘地，但是選民們應視取消國家補貼的限制，為脱歐的風險而非利益。政府若養成把錢掃向私人企業的習慣，並非納稅人所樂見。

In other ways, divergence could work in Britain’s interests. The process of regulation can be faster for one country than for 27 and, as the medical regulator showed with vaccines, there is much to be said for speeding it up. The nature of rules can be different, too. Where Britain has critical mass—as in finance—and in others in which it has innovative companies, such as fintech, life sciences and artificial intelligence, the country can help set the standard for liberal, nimble regulatory regimes, rather than taking whatever rules Brussels makes. And Britain can sharpen up competition. It will need to, since Brexit will reduce competitive pressure and thus undermine productivity. The Competition and Markets Authority has offered a number of wise proposals for opening up sectors to new challengers—by, for instance, overhauling antiquated eu rules that shield airlines from competition. The turmoil in the travel business makes this an excellent time to do so.

其他方面的分歧，則可能符合英國的利益。 監管一個國家的過程，要比管理27國快，正如醫療監管機構核准疫苗所示，加快流程的優點不勝枚舉。法規的本質也可以不同。在英國具有群聚效應的產業（例如金融業），以及其他擁有創新企業的領域（例如金融科技、生命科學和人工智慧），國家可協助制定自由、靈活的監管制度，而不是對歐盟定的規則照單全收。英國可以加強競爭，這是必須的，因為脱歐將減少競爭壓力，進而損害生產力。競爭和市場管理局已經提出許多明智的建議，向新進者開放市場，例如，全面修改過時的歐盟規則，保護航空公司免於競爭。旅行業的動盪，成為執行的絕佳的時機。

This newspaper still regards the decision to leave the eu as a self-inflicted wound. But Britain will, for the moment at least, have to live with it. It should therefore grab advantages from Brexit where it can find them, and exploit them thoroughly. ■

本報仍然將離開歐盟的決定視為自殘。但是，至少目前來說，英國必須勇敢面對。因此，英國應當盡可能找出脫歐的益處，並充分利用。