經濟學家多數支持英國留在歐盟 Membership of reformed EU seen as vital to economic security

David Cameron’s claim that British membership of a reformed EU is vital to Britain’s economic security is today backed by an overwhelming majority of economists in an annual Financial Times survey.

英國首相戴維慍蕓倫(David Cameron)聲稱，英國作爲改革後歐盟(EU)一員的身份，對英國的經濟安全至關重要。最近參加英國《金融時報》一項年度調查的經濟學家絕大多數支持這一說法。

Regardless of the UK prime minister’s renegotiation of Britain’s terms of EU membership, most of the more than 100 economists thought economic prospects following a Brexit would be hit if voters decided to leave. Economic arguments are central to both the “in” and “out” camps as they prepare for a referendum on whether the UK should leave the EU to be held as early as June.

不管卡梅倫就英國作爲歐盟成員國的條件所開展的重新談判結果如何，在接受調查的100多名經濟學家中，多數人認爲，如果公投結果是英國脫離歐盟，那麼在脫歐後英國經濟前景將受到打擊。對主張“留在歐盟”的陣營和主張“脫離歐盟”的陣營來說——雙方正在爲最早可能在6月舉行的英國是否脫離歐盟公投做準備——經濟上的理由都是核心問題。

The survey results show decisive support from economists for Britain to remain in the EU; of those surveyed, none thought a vote to leave would enhance Britain’s economic growth this year, with 67 thinking the outlook would deteriorate.

這次調查結果顯示，經濟學家明確支持英國留在歐盟。在受調查者中，沒人認爲脫歐決定會提高英國今年的經濟增長率，67人認爲經濟前景會惡化。

Stuart Rose, former Marks and Spencer boss and chair of the Britain Stronger in Europe campaign, said: “They say that if you get 100 economists in the room you’ll get 100 different answers, but this survey more than bucks the trend.”

曾執掌瑪莎百貨(Marks and Spencer)、“留在歐洲更強”(Britain Stronger in Europe)的主席斯圖亞特圠斯(Stuart Rose)表示：“有人說，如果房間裏有100位經濟學家，你會得到100個不同答案。然而，這次調查明顯不一樣。”

Many Tory MPs believe Mr Cameron would quit as prime minister if he failed to secure Britain’s future in the 28-member bloc. He has placed economic and national security at the centre of his argument for staying in.

許多保守黨議員認爲，如果卡梅倫未能確保英國未來留在歐盟，他或將辭去首相一職。卡梅倫把經濟和國家安全作爲支持英國留在歐盟的核心理由。

The 11th FT survey of economists, which had success a year ago in predicting the outlook for 2015, was otherwise positive about the outlook for a fourth year of decent economic growth, a continuation of ultra-low interest rates with only one rise expected. There were concerns about Britain’s trade performance, still elevated house prices and scepticism that the deficit would fall as quickly as George Osborne hoped.

這是英國《金融時報》第11次開展這項調查，一年前該調查成功地預測了2015年前景。拋開是否脫歐不談，受訪經濟學家對英國連續第四年保持良好經濟增長的前景、繼續推行超低利率政策的可能性持積極態度（預計只有一次加息）。他們對英國貿易表現、居高不下的房價表示擔憂，並懷疑英國赤字的降低會不會像喬治攠斯本(George Osborne)希望的那麼快。

Brexit was top of the risks to prosperity that economists cited. For this year, there was concern that a vote to leave would cause capital to flee the UK because of the uncertainty of Britain’s place in the world that a vote to leave the EU would create. Neville Hill of Credit Suisse said a Brexit vote “could well be the catalytic event that turns the UK’s current account deficit from ‘something to worry about’ to ‘a problem’”.

在經濟學家提及的英國繁榮所面臨風險中，脫歐高居榜首。對於今年來說，有人擔心，如果公投結果是脫離歐盟，將給英國在世界上的地位帶來不確定性，從而導致資本逃離英國。瑞士信貸(Credit Suisse)的內維爾希爾(Neville Hill)表示，脫歐的公投結果“很可能成爲催化劑，把英國的經常項目赤字從‘需要擔心的事’變成‘問題’。”

Willem Buiter, chief economist of Citi, said the effect on Britain would be “dramatic”.

花旗(Citi)首席經濟學家威廉姆比特(Willem Buiter)表示，脫歐對英國的影響將是“巨大的”。

“The rest of the EU would drive a very hard bargain with the UK, the City would lose most euro-related business [and] foreign direct investment into the UK would collapse. Deep recession and a financial crisis are inevitable,” he predicted.

他預計：“歐盟其他國家會與英國開展一輪非常艱難的討價還價，金融城或將喪失大多數與歐元相關的業務，英國的外商直接投資或將大幅減少。深度衰退和金融危機將不可避免。”

But Ruth Lea, chairman of Economists for Britain, denounced what she called “baseless scaremongering” and said that given the UK’s yawning trade deficit with the rest of the EU it would be in everyone’s interest to get a trade deal after any Brexit.

但Economists for Britain董事長露絲萊亞(Ruth Lea)痛斥了她所說的“毫無根據的危言聳聽”的言論，她表示，鑑於英國與歐盟其他國家不斷擴大的貿易逆差，在英國脫歐後達成一項貿易協議將符合所有人的利益。

“I remember only too well how certain eminent economists warned of the potentially catastrophic dangers of not joining the euro,” she said. “But foreign investment has been resilient and the City has flourished.”

“我還清楚記得，一些知名經濟學家曾警告不加入歐元區會有潛在災難性危險，”她表示，“但外商投資一直保持彈性，金融城也欣欣向榮。”

In the medium term, where opinion in the FT survey was even more strongly opposed to exit, the concerns were that companies would no longer use Britain as a base for their European operations, investment would suffer, the City would be harmed and there was no guarantee of favourable trading relationships with other parts of the world.

中期而言，受訪者反對脫歐的傾向更爲強烈，一些經濟學家擔心企業將不再把英國作爲歐洲業務總部，投資將收縮，金融城將受到影響，同時也無法保證英國與全球其他國家保持有利的貿易關係。

Some 76 economists thought leaving the EU would harm the prospects with only eight thinking the outlook would be better outside the EU and 18 believing it would make little difference, creating an overwhelming majority in favour of remaining in the EU.

約76名經濟學家認爲，退出歐盟將損害英國前景，只有8位經濟學家認爲，退出歐盟後的前景將會變得更好，18位經濟學家認爲脫歐與否沒有多大差別，這表明大多數經濟學家支持留在歐盟。

Charlie Bean of the London School of Economics and formerly deputy governor of the Bank of England said: “The continuing uncertainty surrounding the terms of access of UK firms to the EU market mean that this dampening effect on investment could be expected to last for several years.”

前英國央行(BOE)副行長、目前在倫敦政治經濟學院(London School of Economics)任職的查理比恩(Charlie Bean)表示：“圍繞英國企業進入歐盟市場的准入條款持續存在的不確定性意味着，對投資的削減效應料將持續多年。”

Many economists noted, however, that the exact terms of any separation would be crucial to outcomes and these were highly uncertain.

然而，很多經濟學家指出，脫歐的具體條款對結果至關重要，而這些條款非常不確定。

“The impact on medium-term prospects is more difficult to predict as it does depend on the precise post-exit arrangements with the EU, as this will determine the degree to which we lose the benefits of belonging to a large, relatively integrated market,” said Sushil Wadhwani, director of Wadhwani Asset Management.

瓦德瓦尼資產管理公司(Wadhwani Asset Management)董事蘇希爾瓦德瓦尼(Sushil Wadhwani)表示：“對中期前景的影響較難預測，因爲這依賴於脫歐後與歐盟之間的具體安排，這將決定我們隸屬於一個相對一體化的巨大市場的好處會損失多少。”

The minority of economists who favoured Brexit cited additional freedoms from Europe as a potential spur to growth and prosperity. Ryan Bourne of the Institute of Economic Affairs said: “It’s clear that EU membership is neither a necessary or sufficient condition for good economic growth — domestic policy is far more important.”

支持退出歐盟的少數經濟學家認爲脫歐後獲得的更多自由可能會促進增長和繁榮。經濟事務研究所(Institute of Economic Affairs)的瑞恩伯恩(Ryan Bourne)表示：“顯然，歐盟成員國身份既非良好經濟增長的必要條件也非充分條件，國內政策要重要得多。”

Some other economists feared that there was no guarantee that Britain would legislate better regulations if it were outside the EU, so additional freedoms might be dangerous.

其他一些經濟學家擔心，如果英國脫離歐盟，英國未必會制定更好的法規，因此新增加的自由可能會帶來危險。