英国退欧的措辞很重要。“过渡”听上去让人宽心，这是支持留欧人士喜欢它的原因。“实施”暗示着短暂和急剧，因此英国首相特里萨?梅(Theresa May)喜欢它。“触发第50条”听上去具有技术性，且不可阻挡。与听上去隐约有些不雅的“硬退欧”相比，“软退欧”给人的感觉不那么痛苦。
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.
很快，另一个英国退欧短语将挂在所有人嘴边：“加拿大风格的自由贸易协定”。这是指欧盟与加拿大之间的《全面经济贸易协定》(EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement，简称：Ceta)。英国退欧事务部大臣戴维?戴维斯(David Davis)去年宣称，这种模式将是与欧盟委员会(European Commission)讨论未来英国与欧盟贸易关系的“非常良好的起点”。上月，欧盟首席谈判代表米歇尔?巴尼耶(Michel Barnier)在回应时解释道，从英国表示希望退出单一市场和关税同盟的那一刻起，他就知道，“我们将不得不拿出一个与我们与加拿大签订的协议更为接近的模式”。
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”.
白厅正充斥着有关“加拿大+”协议的谈论。对于外行来说，这有什么不好的呢？“自由贸易”带有浓厚的19世纪韵味，让人联想起帝国鼎盛时期的英国。更好的是，加拿大人说英语、喜欢英国女王，同时该国现在的总理风度翩翩且活力十足。因此“加拿大风格”的协议让英国人动心，它将让我们与欧盟之间麻烦不断的关系回到更安全的岸边：盎格鲁经济圈和我们的辉煌昔日。
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.
但这种语言上的吸引力具有危险的欺骗性。相比英国与欧盟现在不受限制的贸易，加拿大模式（范围狭窄得多的贸易安排）将意味着设置新的商业壁垒。用一位消息灵通的贸易分析人士的话来说，这将是自1930年美国灾难性地出台《斯姆特-霍利关税法》(Smoot-Hawley Act)以来“最大的贸易再监管和再保护计划”。它远非一项自由贸易协定，而是一项贸易限制协议，是英国做出的保护主义举措。
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.
如果他们坚持要达成加拿大风格的协议，英国保守党人将丧失有关他们支持公开市场和自由贸易的招牌。他们对于盎格鲁经济圈的狭隘执迷，将最终葬送他们对自由主义经济学仅存的一点点承诺。
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.
要解释其中的原因，我们可以把Ceta的主要特点与英国目前在欧盟的成员国地位进行比较。首先，Ceta基本上侧重商品，而非服务。然而，服务业是英国经济的命脉，占国内生产总值(GDP)的80%，在贸易中所占比例高于其他任何发达经济体。即便英国退欧协议纳入更为强有力的服务业条款，它也必将包括新的限制，从而损害英国在服务贸易中与欧盟的可观顺差（2014年为170亿英镑）。
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.
在商品贸易领域，Ceta不像看上去那么具有冒险精神。等到协议达成时，彼此间几乎没有竞争的领域的关税已被免除：珍珠、贵金属和矿产是加拿大对欧盟的最大出口。相比之下，针对很多农产品的“峰值”关税仍然存在，而在食品安全和贴标要求方面没有任何规定。双方没有就共同标准或标准的相互承认（这是限制贸易的关键要素）达成协议，只是含糊承诺扩大监管合作。
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.
英国与欧盟的贸易规模是欧盟与加拿大贸易规模的8倍。不到30家加拿大公司主宰着该国与欧盟的贸易，而英国与欧洲单一市场的互相依赖涉及数千家公司，其中很多嵌入复杂的大陆供应链。英国是欧洲经济网络的一部分。加拿大远在6000公里以外。
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.
英国首相梅在佛罗伦萨发表演讲时，曾提醒人们注意到Ceta的不足。然而，该协定仍是戴维斯和巴尼耶的模板。欧盟容许的点缀有限。“挑挑拣拣”不会被接受。加拿大风格的协议可能听上去吸引人，但它将是一种不计后果的保护主义做法，必须不惜代价予以抵制。
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.