歐加貿(mào)易模式將害慘英國(guó)

The language of Brexit matters. “Transition” sounds soothing, which is why Remainers like it. “Implementation” suggests something short and sharp, which is why Theresa May, UK prime minister, likes it. “Triggering Article 50” sounds technical and unstoppable. And “soft Brexit” has a less painful ring than “hard Brexit”, which sounds faintly indecent.

英國(guó)退歐的措辭很重要。“過渡”聽上去讓人寬心，這是支持留歐人士喜歡它的原因。“實(shí)施”暗示著短暫和急劇，因此英國(guó)首相特里薩•梅(Theresa May)喜歡它。“觸發(fā)第50條”聽上去具有技術(shù)性，且不可阻擋。與聽上去隱約有些不雅的“硬退歐”相比，“軟退歐”給人的感覺不那么痛苦。

Soon, another Brexit phrase will trip off every tongue: “A Canada-style free trade agreement”. This is the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, or Ceta — a model which David Davis, the Brexit secretary, declared last year to be “a perfectly good starting point” for discussions with the European Commission about future UK-EU trade relations. Last month, Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, reciprocated by explaining that he knew from the moment the UK said it wanted out of the single market and the customs union, “we will have to work on a model that is closer to the agreement signed with Canada”.

很快，另一個(gè)英國(guó)退歐短語(yǔ)將掛在所有人嘴邊：“加拿大風(fēng)格的自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定”。這是指歐盟與加拿大之間的《全面經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易協(xié)定》(EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement，簡(jiǎn)稱：Ceta)。英國(guó)退歐事務(wù)部大臣戴維•戴維斯(David Davis)去年宣稱，這種模式將是與歐盟委員會(huì)(European Commission)討論未來(lái)英國(guó)與歐盟貿(mào)易關(guān)系的“非常良好的起點(diǎn)”。上月，歐盟首席談判代表米歇爾•巴尼耶(Michel Barnier)在回應(yīng)時(shí)解釋道，從英國(guó)表示希望退出單一市場(chǎng)和關(guān)稅同盟的那一刻起，他就知道，“我們將不得不拿出一個(gè)與我們與加拿大簽訂的協(xié)議更為接近的模式”。

Whitehall is abuzz with talk of a “Canada Plus” agreement. To the untrained ear, what’s not to like? “Free trade” has a stout, 19th-century ring to it, redolent of Britain in its imperial heyday. Better still, Canada is a place where they speak English, love the Queen and their current premier is dashing and dynamic. So a “Canada-style” deal does the trick, restoring our fraught relationship with the EU to safer shores: the Anglosphere and our glorious past.

白廳正充斥著有關(guān)“加拿大+”協(xié)議的談?wù)?。?duì)于外行來(lái)說，這有什么不好的呢?“自由貿(mào)易”帶有濃厚的19世紀(jì)韻味，讓人聯(lián)想起帝國(guó)鼎盛時(shí)期的英國(guó)。更好的是，加拿大人說英語(yǔ)、喜歡英國(guó)女王，同時(shí)該國(guó)現(xiàn)在的總理風(fēng)度翩翩且活力十足。因此“加拿大風(fēng)格”的協(xié)議讓英國(guó)人動(dòng)心，它將讓我們與歐盟之間麻煩不斷的關(guān)系回到更安全的岸邊：盎格魯經(jīng)濟(jì)圈和我們的輝煌昔日。

But such linguistic appeal is dangerously deceptive. Compared to the unfettered trade the UK now has with the EU, the Canada model — a much narrower trading arrangement — would mean erecting new barriers to business. In the words of one well-placed trade analyst this would be “the largest programme of re-regulation and re-protection” of trade since the disastrous introduction of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs in 1930. Far from being a free-trade agreement, it would be a trade restriction agreement — an act of protectionism by the UK.

但這種語(yǔ)言上的吸引力具有危險(xiǎn)的欺騙性。相比英國(guó)與歐盟現(xiàn)在不受限制的貿(mào)易，加拿大模式(范圍狹窄得多的貿(mào)易安排)將意味著設(shè)置新的商業(yè)壁壘。用一位消息靈通的貿(mào)易分析人士的話來(lái)說，這將是自1930年美國(guó)災(zāi)難性地出臺(tái)《斯姆特-霍利關(guān)稅法》(Smoot-Hawley Act)以來(lái)“最大的貿(mào)易再監(jiān)管和再保護(hù)計(jì)劃”。它遠(yuǎn)非一項(xiàng)自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定，而是一項(xiàng)貿(mào)易限制協(xié)議，是英國(guó)做出的保護(hù)主義舉措。

If they press ahead with the Canada-style deal, the Conservatives would forfeit their claim to be a party of open markets and free trade. Their one-eyed obsession with the Anglosphere would finally bury what little remains of a commitment to liberal economics.

如果他們堅(jiān)持要達(dá)成加拿大風(fēng)格的協(xié)議，英國(guó)保守黨人將喪失有關(guān)他們支持公開市場(chǎng)和自由貿(mào)易的招牌。他們對(duì)于盎格魯經(jīng)濟(jì)圈的狹隘執(zhí)迷，將最終葬送他們對(duì)自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)僅存的一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)承諾。

To explain why, compare the main features of Ceta with Britain’s current membership of the EU. For a start, Ceta largely focuses on goods, not services. Yet services are the lifeblood of the UK economy, accounting for 80 per cent of gross domestic product and a larger share of our trade than any developed economy. Even if the Brexit deal were to include stronger services provisions, it would be bound to include new restrictions damaging to the significant surplus — £17bn in 2014 — which the UK runs in its trade in services with the EU.

要解釋其中的原因，我們可以把Ceta的主要特點(diǎn)與英國(guó)目前在歐盟的成員國(guó)地位進(jìn)行比較。首先，Ceta基本上側(cè)重商品，而非服務(wù)。然而，服務(wù)業(yè)是英國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的命脈，占國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值(GDP)的80%，在貿(mào)易中所占比例高于其他任何發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)體。即便英國(guó)退歐協(xié)議納入更為強(qiáng)有力的服務(wù)業(yè)條款，它也必將包括新的限制，從而損害英國(guó)在服務(wù)貿(mào)易中與歐盟的可觀順差(2014年為170億英鎊)。

In the trade in goods, Ceta is not as adventurous as it seems. By the time the deal was done, tariffs had already been removed in areas where there is little mutual competition — pearls, precious metals and mineral products are Canada’s largest exports to the EU. By contrast “peak” tariffs on many agricultural products remain, and there are no provisions covering food safety and labelling requirements. There is no agreement on common or mutual recognition of standards — the key impediments to trade — just a vague commitment to greater regulatory co-operation.

在商品貿(mào)易領(lǐng)域，Ceta不像看上去那么具有冒險(xiǎn)精神。等到協(xié)議達(dá)成時(shí)，彼此間幾乎沒有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的領(lǐng)域的關(guān)稅已被免除：珍珠、貴金屬和礦產(chǎn)是加拿大對(duì)歐盟的最大出口。相比之下，針對(duì)很多農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的“峰值”關(guān)稅仍然存在，而在食品安全和貼標(biāo)要求方面沒有任何規(guī)定。雙方?jīng)]有就共同標(biāo)準(zhǔn)或標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的相互承認(rèn)(這是限制貿(mào)易的關(guān)鍵要素)達(dá)成協(xié)議，只是含糊承諾擴(kuò)大監(jiān)管合作。

UK trade with the EU is eight times larger than Canada’s. Fewer than 30 Canadian companies dominate trade with the EU, while the UK’s interdependence with the European single market involves thousands of companies, many enmeshed in complex continental supply chains. Britain is part of the warp and weft of Europe’s economic fabric. Canada is 6,000km away.

英國(guó)與歐盟的貿(mào)易規(guī)模是歐盟與加拿大貿(mào)易規(guī)模的8倍。不到30家加拿大公司主宰著該國(guó)與歐盟的貿(mào)易，而英國(guó)與歐洲單一市場(chǎng)的互相依賴涉及數(shù)千家公司，其中很多嵌入復(fù)雜的大陸供應(yīng)鏈。英國(guó)是歐洲經(jīng)濟(jì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)的一部分。加拿大遠(yuǎn)在6000公里以外。

In her Florence speech, Mrs May drew attention to the deficiencies of Ceta. Yet it remains the template for Messrs Davis and Barnier. There is only a limited amount of embellishment the EU will tolerate. “Cherry picking” will not be accepted. A Canada-style agreement might sound seductive, but it would be an act of reckless protectionism that must be resisted at all costs.

英國(guó)首相梅在佛羅倫薩發(fā)表演講時(shí)，曾提醒人們注意到Ceta的不足。然而，該協(xié)定仍是戴維斯和巴尼耶的模板。歐盟容許的點(diǎn)綴有限。“挑挑揀揀”不會(huì)被接受。加拿大風(fēng)格的協(xié)議可能聽上去吸引人，但它將是一種不計(jì)后果的保護(hù)主義做法，必須不惜代價(jià)予以抵制。

The writer is the former UK deputy prime minister

本文作者曾擔(dān)任英國(guó)副首相