英國退歐公投相當於是自殘
What were they thinking? It is extraordinary to read a succession of official reports arguing, rightly, that a vote to leave the EU would impose long-term damage and a short-term shock. What sort of government would run such a risk, particularly when the economy has barely recovered from the financial crisis of less than a decade ago? The answer is one that has put the needs of short-term party management above its responsibility for the country’s welfare. David Cameron, prime minister, might soon be known as the man who left the UK in far-from-splendid isolation.
他們在想什麼？看着一系列的官方報告正確說明退出歐盟將對英國造成長期損害及短期衝擊，令人感到非同尋常。什麼樣的政府甘冒公投的風險——特別是在經濟剛剛從不到10年前的金融危機中復甦之際？答案是，一個把短期政黨管理需要置於對國民福利的責任之上的政府。英國首相戴維•卡梅倫(David Cameron)或許很快就會因使英國陷入不光彩的孤立而聞名。
The Treasury has already argued that leaving the EU might lower real gross domestic product by between 3.4 and 9.5 per cent in the long term. This is broadly in line with estimates from other reputable forecasters. Patrick Minford of Cardiff University, a proponent of leaving, argues that the UK would enjoy a jump of 4 per cent in aggregate economic welfare after leaving the EU and adopting free trade (an unlikely choice). But this result is an outlier. It rests on implausible assumptions, not least on the impact of EU non-tariff barriers on domestic prices.
英國財政部已表示，長遠來看，退出歐盟或將使英國實際國內生產總值(GDP)下降3.4%至9.5%。這大致與其他受尊敬的預測者的估計相符。而支持退歐的卡迪夫大學(Cardiff University)的帕特里克•明福特(Patrick Minford)則表示，退出歐盟並實行自由貿易（一個不大可能的選擇）後，英國的總經濟福利將激增4%。但這種結果是一種例外。其依據的是不合實際的假設，尤其是在歐盟非關稅壁壘對國內物價的影響方面。
The Treasury has now followed up with a report on the short-term consequences of a vote to leave. In summarising the results, George Osborne, the chancellor of the exchequer, has stated that the UK would suffer a “do-it-yourself” recession if it decided to leave. One might better call it a “do-it-himself” recession. For it was the government’s decision to take this risk.
財政部現已就退歐的短期後果發佈了新的報告。在總結這些後果時，財政大臣喬治•奧斯本(George Osborne)表示，如果決定退歐的話，英國將遭受“自身造成的”衰退。人們或許會更形象地稱之爲“他自身造成的”衰退。因爲是英國政府決定冒這種風險的。
The new report’s main scenario predicts that GDP would be 3.6 per cent lower after two years than if the UK voted to remain, unemployment would be 520,000 higher and the pound would be 12 per cent lower. Under a worse scenario, GDP could be 6 per cent lower, unemployment 820,000 higher and sterling 15 per cent lower. The Institute for Fiscal Studies adds that, instead of an improvement of ￡8bn a year in the fiscal position, as the net contribution to the EU fell, the budget deficit might be between ￡20bn and ￡40bn higher in 2019-20 than otherwise, sharply slowing the planned fiscal consolidation.
這份新報告在設想的主要情景中預測，比起留在歐盟，退歐兩年後英國GDP將下降3.6%，失業人數將多出52萬人，英鎊將下跌12%。在更糟糕的情景下，GDP可能下降6%，失業人數多出82萬，英鎊下跌15%。倫敦財政研究所(Institute for Fiscal Studies)補充表示，財政狀況不但不會因省下向歐盟支付的預算攤派款而得到每年80億英鎊的改善，2019-20年的預算赤字還可能比留在歐盟高出200億至400億英鎊，極大地拖累規劃中的財政整固。
Indeed, the Treasury argues, plausibly, that the very possibility of a vote to leave is already having an impact on the economy. But an actual vote to do so in June’s referendum would crystallise this risk and create significant and immediate effects, via three channels.
實際上，財政部似乎頗有道理地指出，退歐的可能性本身已對經濟造成了影響。但假如6月公投結果真的支持退歐的話，這種風險將變爲現實，並且立即在三方面產生重大影響。
The first of these would be the tendency of households and businesses to adjust at once to becoming permanently poorer. This would lead to significant cuts in consumption and investment.
第一個影響將是，家庭、企業會立刻作出調整以適應長期變窮的狀態。這將導致消費與投資的大幅縮減。
The second effect would come from prolonged uncertainty about how the UK’s relations with the EU would work out. It is difficult to exaggerate the scale of this uncertainty. After a vote to leave, the country would not know the complexion of its new government, the UK’s desired approach to renegotiation of its relations with the EU, or the response of the other members, let alone any final outcome. The uncertainty could also be long-lasting. Even the formation of a new government and agreement on its new approach might prove difficult. The likely leaders of a new government have also said things in this campaign that must hinder the chances of reaching an amicable settlement with EU partners.
第二個影響將來自英國與歐盟關係走向的長期不確定性。很難誇大這種不確定性。公投決定退出歐盟後，英國人將不知道新政府的傾向、英國重新談判與歐盟的關係時希望採用的方式、或是歐盟其他成員國的反應，更不用說任何最終結果了。不確定性也會長期存在。甚至組建新政府以及就其處理與歐盟關係的新策略達成一致可能都有困難。可能成爲新政府領導人的那些人還在這場運動中說了一些話，這些話肯定有損於英國與歐盟夥伴達成和解的機會。
The third effect would be the shift in financial conditions. Markets would at once reassess the UK’s economic prospects. Asset prices, including the exchange rate (as the Bank of England has already noted), are likely to adjust downwards immediately. An appreciable increase in the risk premia on UK assets could emerge. Asset price volatility would also increase. The BoE might face a difficult dilemma, since there is likely to be a simultaneous rise in expected inflation and a decline in expected output in the short term.
第三個影響是金融環境的變化。市場會立刻重估英國的經濟前景。正如英國央行(BoE)早已指出的，包括匯率在內的資產價格很可能立即下調。英國資產的風險溢價可能出現大幅上升。資產價格波動也將加劇。英國央行可能面臨一種進退兩難的境地，因爲短期內可能同時出現預期通脹上升和預期產出下降並存的局面。
Official sources have described, in painful and quite plausible detail, how far the referendum unleashed by this government is a risky and dangerous gamble with the health of a fragile post-crisis economy. This is apart from the risks to the future cohesion of the UK and, quite possibly, of the EU, too.
官方消息人士曾以令人痛苦但似乎非常有道理的細節，描述本屆政府發起的公投，是以後危機時代脆弱經濟的健康爲賭注進行的一場多麼冒險和危險的賭博。這還不包括對英國以及很有可能對歐盟未來凝聚力造成的風險。
This referendum is, arguably, the most irresponsible act by a British government in my lifetime. To the objection that this is to deny democracy, one can respond that the country was a successful democracy well before it embarked upon such referendums. Furthermore, the right time for a referendum would be when the UK is asked to accept further treaty changes or some other significant alteration in its position in the bloc. Right now one can only hope that the country does not soon learn what it means to divorce in haste and repent at leisure.
可以說，此次公投是我有生之年見過的英國政府最不負責任的行爲。對於認爲不進行公投就意味着拒絕民主的反對觀點，我們可以回答，英國在開始進行此類公投很久前便已是成功的民主國家。此外，舉行公投的合適時機應是英國被要求接受條約的進一步修訂，或是接受英國在歐盟中地位的其他重大變化之時。現在，我們只能希望英國不會很快嚐到匆忙退出的代價，不要事後追悔莫及。
