評論
打印
Breaking up the Treasury
財政部分裂
Your money or your life
要錢還是要命？
The knives are out for Whitehall's mightiest department
利刃直指白廳最強大的部門
TONY BLAIR once kidnapped a civil servant. It was 2005 and the then prime minister, who was heading to EU budget talks in Luxembourg, needed an economic expert. So he purloined a Treasury official. The reluctant bureaucrat was later dumped in Paris without passport or money, recalls Jonathan Powell, a former adviser, in his book “The New Machiavelli”. Oddly, the man “just wanted our assurance that we wouldn't tell the Treasury that he had been travelling with us.” If the news got out, his career could have ended.
托尼·布萊爾曾綁架過一位公務員。這發生在2005年，當時正前往盧森堡參加歐盟預算談判的首相急需一位經濟專家。所以他帶走了一名財政部官員。據前任顧問喬納森·鮑威爾在他的書作《新馬基雅弗利》中回憶，那位本就不情不愿的官員在巴黎被丟下，不僅沒有護照，更是身無分文。可奇怪的是，他“只想我們保證不會告訴財政部他與我們同行?！比绻⒆呗?，他的事業也就完蛋了。
The tale illustrates the potency of Britain's finance ministry, which has long wielded more power than its international counterparts—or, it sometimes seems, the prime minister's office. In the post-war years the Treasury was a hub for Keynesian demand management. Under Margaret Thatcher it became the engine room of a monetarist revolution. It commandeered social policy during Mr Blair's administration. Now it oversees austerity, the lodestar of the coalition government.
這個故事正說明了英國財政部的權勢，它的權利涉及范圍之廣已超過它的國際同行，有時似乎更甚于首相辦公室。在戰后幾年財政部曾是凱恩斯主義需求管理的中心。在瑪格麗特·撒切爾任職期間，財政部成為了貨幣改革的中流砥柱。布萊爾手下行政機構的社會政策也被它霸占。如今它監視財政緊縮，這正是聯合政府的目標。
Yet a report published on September 4th, “The Destruction of HM Treasury”, says Whitehall's leviathan should count its days. The two authors know their stuff. Stian Westlake directs policy at the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts, a charity taken seriously by Treasury types. Giles Wilkes was an adviser to Vince Cable, the business secretary.
但是9月4日出版的報告《英國財政部的破壞》指出白廳興風作浪的時日無多了。報告的兩位作者有非常確切的報告素材。他們分別是斯蒂安·韋斯特萊克和賈爾斯·韋爾克斯，前者在國家科學、技術和藝術基金會指導政治，因為這個基金會是由財政部嚴肅對待的慈善項目。后者曾擔任商務部長維斯·凱博的顧問。
Mr Westlake and Mr Wilkes argue that the rhythm of twice-yearly financial statements, in the budget and the autumn statement, makes the Treasury short-term in outlook and prone to headline-grabbing wheezes. Moreover, all three main parties have embraced the interventionist “sector strategies” championed by Michael Heseltine on the right and Lord Adonis on the left. Because the Treasury detests that sort of economic meddling, politicians have it in their sights. The department's functions might, the authors suggest, be distributed to an expanded prime minister's office, a stronger business department and a dedicated finance ministry.
韋斯特萊克和韋爾克斯在預算和秋季聲明中辯解道，財務報表一年兩次的節奏是財政部短期之內在前景和傾向方面的頭條伎倆。另外，三個主要黨派均已與右翼代表邁克爾·赫塞爾廷和左翼代表阿多尼斯勛爵共同掌管的干預性“部門策略”合作。因為財政部憎恨的正是這種經濟干預，而這正在政客們的掌控之中。兩位作者還猜測，這個新的部門的作用或許是用來擴大首相辦公室的權利，建立起一個更強大的商務部和一個專用的財政部。
A plan to dismantle the Treasury was pitched to—and well received by—senior Labour figures at a private seminar last winter. Shadow cabinet ministers talk eagerly about the idea, though in the ruling Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties it is more a niche interest.
在去年冬天的一個非公開研討會上制定了一個針對工黨高級官員的拆除財政部計劃，這個計劃也被這些官員欣然接受。盡管這對執政的保守黨和自由民主黨來說只是小眾興趣，但并不妨礙影子內閣的部長們對這個計劃討論的熱火朝天。
Even if any of this comes to pass, however, the Treasury's mandarins will remember that governments have tried to trim their wings before. Harold Wilson's Labour government set up a new Department of Economic Affairs to rival the Treasury. It too was supposed to concentrate on long-term planning, and it too was created partly for political reasons, to appease the ambitions of George Brown, the perpetually tired and emotional deputy leader of the party. The Treasury fought it, and won. Brown moved to the Foreign Office and the upstart department was unceremoniously closed down in 1969. The lesson? Never underestimate the power, and self-interest, of the Treasury.
但即便這個計劃的任何一條被通過，財政部的官員們將會明白政府曾試圖折斷他們的羽翼。哈羅德·威爾遜手下的工黨政府成立了一個新的經濟事務部門來對抗財政部。這個部門應該也是致力于長期的計劃，而且它也是因部分政治原因而建立起來的，用來滿足疲憊不堪且情緒化的黨派副領導人喬治·布朗的野心。財政部與之對抗并最終勝利。布朗調到外交部，而自命不凡的經濟事務部于1969年關閉。這一課教給我們什么呢？絕對不要小覷財政部的利欲熏心。譯者：邵夏沁 校對：崔夢雪
譯文屬譯生譯世
