評論
打印
The British constitution
英國憲法
Now for the English question
現(xiàn)在輪到英格蘭問題了
Scotland's place in the United Kingdom is settled. Time to deal with its much larger neighbor
蘇格蘭在英國的地位已經(jīng)得到解決。是時候該解決其更大鄰居的問題了。
THE national rejoicing did not last long. Shortly after six o'clock on the morning of September 19th, the BBC announced that Scotland had voted to stay in the United Kingdom. At seven o'clock, with unionists still hugging each other, David Cameron, the prime minister, triggered a new constitutional crisis—this time concerning England.
英國的喜悅并沒有持續(xù)很長時間。9月19日早上6點整剛過，BBC就宣布經(jīng)投票，蘇格蘭依然留在英國。7點整，統(tǒng)一派還在相互擁抱，而英國首相大衛(wèi)·卡梅倫卻引發(fā)了一場新的憲法的危機—這一次，關(guān)系到英格蘭。
The country is hard done by, he argued. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales have their own assemblies, which control much domestic policy. But England—with 84% of the union's population—is still run from Westminster. And, since Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales continue to send MPs to Parliament, they can sway decisions on English schools, health care and the like, without English MPs having reciprocal rights. This must change, Mr Cameron said.
他提出，這個國家受到了不公平的待遇。蘇格蘭、北愛爾蘭和威爾士擁有自己的立法機構(gòu)，能夠掌握大部分國內(nèi)政策。而英格蘭—擁有英聯(lián)邦84%的總?cè)丝凇獏s還是由威斯敏斯特掌管。隨著蘇格蘭、北愛爾蘭和威爾士不斷把自己的議員塞進國會，他們可以左右英國學校、醫(yī)療保健以及類似的東西方面的決定，但是沒有英格蘭議員有響應(yīng)的權(quán)利。這個狀況必須改變，卡梅倫聲稱。
It is an old anomaly. Tam Dalyell, a Scottish Labour MP, pointed it out so often in the 1970s and 1980s that it has been dubbed the West Lothian Question after his constituency. But it grows more irksome as the devolved assemblies become more powerful. They already control health and education. Scotland will get more power over taxes in 2016. And late in the Scottish campaign a panicky Mr Cameron, Ed Miliband (Labour's leader) and Nick Clegg promised yet more.
這是一個歷史很久的反常現(xiàn)象。一位蘇格蘭工黨議員譚姆·戴利埃爾在20世紀70年代到80年代之間多次指出這個問題，因此他的支持者把這個問題稱謂西洛錫安問題。但是隨著已經(jīng)發(fā)展的立法機構(gòu)變得越來越強大，這個問題也變得越來越讓人困擾。他們已經(jīng)控制了醫(yī)療和教育。到2016年，蘇格蘭在稅收方面權(quán)利將變得更大。而且在近期的蘇格蘭運動中，驚慌失措的卡梅倫、艾德·米利班德和尼克·克萊格給了蘇格蘭更多的承諾。
Albion's fatal flaw
阿爾比恩的致命弱點
Mr Cameron may be playing politics. Any limit on the power of Scottish or Welsh MPs to vote on English issues will hurt Labour. But his point stands: it is simply not fair to disadvantage English voters in this way. The system must be changed, ideally in a way that enhances democracy, buttresses the union and does not increase bureaucracy. Sadly, these aims clash.
卡梅倫可能在玩弄政治。任何一項對蘇格蘭或威爾士議員在英格蘭問題中的投票限制都會傷害到工黨。但是他持這樣的觀點：讓英格蘭選民以這種方式處于劣勢當然是不公平的。這個體系必須改變，最理想的就是以一種既能夠提高民主，支持英聯(lián)邦又不加劇官僚體制的方式來改變。遺憾的是，這些目標相互矛盾。
The least cumbersome way to equalise things at Westminster would be to cut the number of MPs from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to reflect their growing autonomy. Northern Ireland was docked in the mid-20th century, when it ran its own affairs. But it would be hard to work out a formula—should Wales have proportionately more MPs than Scotland because its assembly is weaker?—and an ugly fudge would result. Scots would still be voting on English education bills, albeit in smaller numbers. But when it came to voting on war, Scots would have less say. That seems unfair, too.
最緩慢復雜的實現(xiàn)威斯敏斯特平等的方式就是削減來自蘇格蘭、威爾士和北愛爾蘭的國會議員，以示其日益增長的自治權(quán)。北愛爾蘭在20世紀中期在管理自己的事務(wù)時被剔除了。但是很難計算出一個公式——由于威爾士的立法機構(gòu)更弱，威爾士就應(yīng)該比蘇格蘭擁有更大比例的議員嗎？——那樣只是做做表明文章。蘇格蘭人還會在英格蘭教育費用方面投票，盡管人數(shù)較少。但是當提到戰(zhàn)爭問題，蘇格蘭人就很少有發(fā)言權(quán)。那看起來也不公平。
A more democratic and bolder alternative would be to set up a separate English parliament. It would handle domestic policy, leaving foreign affairs and economic co-ordination to a federal parliament. This is a logical solution: everyone, including the English, would then have an assembly. English MPs would be accountable for English policies, British MPs for British ones, and voters would know whom to blame for what.
一個更加民主更勇敢的選項可能是建立一個獨立的英格蘭議會。議會可以處理國內(nèi)政策問題，而國外事務(wù)和經(jīng)濟協(xié)調(diào)問題還是由聯(lián)邦議會決定。這是一個合乎情理的解決方法：每個人，包括英格蘭人，都會有一個議會。英格蘭議員對英格蘭政策問題負責，英國議員對英國問題負責，所有的投票者都知道自己對什么負責。
But England's sway would make that arrangement unsustainable. The most powerful part of the federation would dominate the federal parliament. The English and British parliaments would surely end up feuding, particularly over money. In the end the English parliament would probably prevail, and the British parliament would atrophy. Mr Cameron would probably want to be first minister of England and prime minister of Britain. The political union that politicians (and this newspaper) have spent two years defending as a bastion of tolerance would be endangered. England's power could be countered with a broader redesign, including, say, an elected president or a more regionally balanced senate. But that entails even more upheaval.
但是英格蘭的勢力會使得那樣的格局不穩(wěn)定。聯(lián)邦中最有權(quán)力的部分將會統(tǒng)治聯(lián)邦議會。英格蘭議會和英聯(lián)邦議會必然會以長期不和結(jié)束，尤其在錢的問題上。最后，英格蘭議會很可能會勝利，而英聯(lián)邦議會則會衰退。卡梅倫可能想成為首位英格蘭部長以及英國首相。政客花了兩年時間以捍衛(wèi)包容為防御的政治聯(lián)盟可能會有危險。英格蘭的權(quán)力和更廣范圍的重新計劃相悖，包括，比方說，獲選的總統(tǒng)或更地區(qū)性的公平參議院。但是那牽涉到更多的動蕩。
The civil servants who designed Germany's federal system after the second world war came up with a solution to the dominant-country problem. To prevent the huge state of Prussia from overwhelming the system, they broke it into several new ones. This could be done in England, too. The south-west, north-east and other regions could be given powers roughly equivalent to Scotland and Wales. But the English do not think of themselves as living in regions; they identify more with cities and counties. In 2004 the residents of north-east England crushed plans for a regional assembly by four to one.
二戰(zhàn)后，設(shè)計德國聯(lián)邦體系的公務(wù)員提出了解決統(tǒng)治性國家問題的方法。為了阻止普魯士大部分地區(qū)打破這個體系，他們把這個系統(tǒng)分成幾個新的體系。這個方法也可以再英格蘭實行。西南、東北和其他地區(qū)可以平等地享有蘇格蘭和威爾士享有的權(quán)利。但是英格蘭人不以生活的地區(qū)來區(qū)分，他們更多的以城市和國家來區(qū)分。2004年，英格蘭東北地區(qū)以四比一的比例阻止了建立地區(qū)性議會的計劃。
The English solution
英格蘭解決方法
This newspaper has long argued for constitutional reform—with an elected second chamber and a written constitution. We would also like to see more powers given to mayors. If Mr Cameron holds a convention prepared to consider these things, all well and good. But the issue now is “English votes on English laws”; and there is a practical answer within the current Westminster parliament, the “double majority”.
本報長期以來一直在憲政改革問題上爭論不休—爭論民選上議院和成文憲法的問題。我們也希望看到市長被賦予更多權(quán)力。如果卡梅倫召開大會準備考慮這些問題，那當然好。但是現(xiàn)在的問題是“英格蘭人在英格蘭法律方面投票”，目前威斯特敏斯特議會中現(xiàn)行的解決方法是“雙重多數(shù)決”。
Under this system, proposed by Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a Scottish Tory, a bill that only affects England would need to be passed by a majority both of the whole House of Commons and of English MPs. That would prevent a future Labour government unfairly using Scottish votes to force laws on the English; but (unlike a separate English parliament or a system that gave English MPs full power over English laws) it would stop English Tories from creating a shadow government. At present bills often have some clauses that affect only England, or England and Wales, and some that are broader. Such laws would have to be passed in bits.
在這個蘇格蘭保守黨黨員馬爾科姆·里夫金德提出的體系之下，一項只影響英格蘭的議案需要經(jīng)過整個下議院和英格蘭國會議員中的大多數(shù)同意才可通過。那樣可以預防未來工黨政府不公平地用蘇格蘭選票強制通過英格蘭的法律。但是，這可以防止英格蘭保守黨黨員創(chuàng)立影子政府。目前，議案中經(jīng)常有一些條款只影響英格蘭或者英格蘭和威爾士，還有些條款影響范圍更大。這種法律必須以大多數(shù)同意才可以通過。
There are flaws. The double majority would slow down legislation. To pass an English education or health bill, a national Labour government that relied on Scottish votes would have to court English Liberal Democrats or Tories. Since 1919 there have been only 36 months (in 1964-66 and 1974-76) when a national government has depended on Scottish votes for its majority. Even if that is more likely in the future, due to the fracturing of party politics, the system would have the good effect of pushing any such government to advance measures with broad support. A bit of haggling is better than an unjust vote.
這種做法還是有弱點的。雙重多數(shù)決會減緩立法進程。要通過一項英格蘭教育或醫(yī)療的議案，依賴蘇格蘭選票的國家的工黨政府要爭取英格蘭自由民主黨成員或者保守黨黨員的支持。自從1919年起，只有36個月（1964年到66年和1974年到76年），國家政府依賴蘇格蘭投票來獲得絕大多數(shù)支持。即使未來因為黨派政治的破裂，該體系很可能在推動任何一個這樣的政府獲得更廣泛的支持來提高措施方面有好的效果。一點點爭論比不公平的投票更好。
The main objection to the double majority is that English voters would still have less clout than their Celtic cousins. That is undeniable. Yet, as the panic about losing Scotland showed, the English are willing to give up something to save the union—and the democratic cost to mighty England in this case would be small. The double majority is a bit of a fiddle. But it is the least-bad solution to the English problem.
對于雙重多數(shù)決最主要的反對在于英格蘭選民還是比他們的凱爾特弟兄們擁有更少的影響力。這點毋庸置疑。但是，正如失去蘇格蘭的恐慌顯示，英格蘭人愿意放棄一些東西來挽救整個英聯(lián)邦—這個事件中，民主黨的損耗對于強大的英格蘭來講是很小的。雙重多數(shù)決有點像一場騙局。但是這是對英格蘭問題最好的解決方法了。譯者：王丹培
譯文屬譯生譯世界
