苏格兰要进行第二次独立公投?

This month, in a plebiscite on Catalan independence, four out of five voters opted to secede from Spain. The vote was symbolic: Madrid does not recognise Catalans’ sovereignty or their legal right to leave the Spanish state. Artur Mas, the Catalan president, is under criminal investigation for holding the poll. The Spanish government says his plan for independence in 2016 is “a road to nowhere”.

最近，在加泰罗尼亚的独立公投上，五分之四的选民赞成脱离西班牙。这场投票只是象征性的：西班牙政府并不承认加泰罗尼亚的主权，也不承认该地区人民拥有脱离西班牙的法律权利。该自治区主席阿图尔•马斯(Artur Mas)因举行独立公投面临刑事调查。西班牙政府称，马斯寻求在2016年独立的计划是“一条绝路”。

We do things differently in Britain. We have real referendums on independence, where even the defeated parties end up as winners. On September 18, 55 per cent of Scots voted against seceding from the UK in a referendum whose question, timing and franchise were shaped by the Scottish government. By then, dizzied by the yeasty nationalists, the leaders of the main UK parties had vowed that a No vote would still lead to devolution of “extensive new powers” to Edinburgh. This week, a cross-party group tasked with turning that vague promise into reality issued its recommendations. The conclusion of the commission led by Lord Smith of Kelvinmeans that Scotland should soon become one of the most powerful devolved nations in the world.

在英国，我们处理事情的方式不同。我们举行了真正的独立公投，而即使是被击败的党派，最后也成为了赢家。9月18日，在一场问题、时机和投票权都掌握在苏格兰政府手中的全民公投中，55%的苏格兰人选择留在英国。公投举行之时，被煽风点火的民族主义者搞得头晕脑胀的英国主要政党的领袖们誓言，如果苏格兰选择不独立，将向苏格兰下放“广泛的新权力”。最近，负责落实这个模糊承诺的跨党派团体发表了建议。由史密斯勋爵(Lord Smith of Kelvin)领导的委员会做出的结论意味着，苏格兰很快将成为世界上得到最多放权的民族地区之一。

After a rushed process described by close observers as “ghastly”, “awful” and nearly ruined by “halfwits”, the group has proposed sweeping reforms. Most important are those to do with tax and spending. Under the Smith deal, Scotland would raise almost 40 per cent of its own taxes (up from less than 10 per cent) and control about half of the spending in the country. These changes are substantial. But it is naive to think they form Scotland’s final settlement.

密切观察这一进程的人士称，委员会仓促的决议过程“令人反感”、“糟透了”，几乎被“白痴”毁了。委员会提出了全面改革方案，其中最重要的是与税收和公共支出相关的改革。根据史密斯提出的方案，苏格兰将有权征收本地区近40%的税（目前这个比例低于10%）并控制大约一半的公共支出。这些改变具有实质意义，但如果认为它们将一劳永逸地解决苏格兰问题，就太天真了。

Its champions believe that the Smith report means Scottish politics can return to normal. Since 2007, when the Scottish National party took charge of the devolved parliament, constitutional questions – culminating in the independence referendum – have defined politics north of the border. As if plagued by status anxiety, the SNP has agonised over what it does not have while neglecting what it has. Only independence, it argues, can activate Scotland’s latent social democracy. The party’s opponents now argue that Holyrood will soon have the powers to redistribute income and introduce benefits. If the SNP wants to fund munificent statism, they imply, it will need to persuade Scots to foot the bill. Unionists want to end the SNP’s double life as both a party of protest and a party of power.

改革方案的捍卫者认为，史密斯报告意味着苏格兰政治将恢复常态。2007年苏格兰民族党(Scottish National Party，简称SNP)入主苏格兰议会后，宪法问题成了苏格兰政治的中心，最终带来独立公投。就像一个“地位焦虑症”患者，苏格兰民族党一直对自己没有的东西耿耿于怀，而对自己拥有的东西视而不见。该党提出，只有独立才能激活苏格兰内在的社会民主主义。该党的反对者现在主张，苏格兰议会很快就会拥有收入再分配和引入福利的权力。他们暗示，如果苏格兰民族党想搞福利优厚的国家主义，就需要说服苏格兰人为此买单。统一派想要终结苏格兰民族党既做抗议党、又是执政党的双重身份。

Scotland would certainly benefit from having its governing party govern. Holyrood politics is cozily consensual. Cults have more genuine disputes. The few self-reflective nationalists admit that their party is incurious about policy. There is no proper debate in Scotland about how to improve its awful public health or how the widest educational inequalities in the UK could be narrowed. Scotland already controls these areas. A moratorium on independence talk would give Holyrood the room to take on entrenched problems.

苏格兰肯定能获益于一个当家作主的执政党。目前苏格兰议会政治基本上是一团和气的共识政治。就连极端宗教团体内部的意见分歧也比它更加真实一些。一些自我反思的民族主义者承认，他们的政党对政策毫不关心。对于如何改善糟糕的公共卫生，如何缩小整个联合王国范围最严重的教育不平等，苏格兰没有展开认真的辩论。苏格兰已经控制这些领域。暂缓关于苏格兰独立的讨论，将让苏格兰议会腾出精力应对一些根深蒂固的问题。

However, the Smith commission is only a scene in the denouement of Scotland’s modern history. It will not end the tension between London and Edinburgh. For a start, there are thorny issues arising from the Smith recommendations. Universal credit, the UK’s foundering flagship welfare policy, will be run from Westminster and may work against Scottish efforts to reduce unemployment. Because of the tax powers still vested in London, Holyrood will not be able to redistribute income to the bottom fifth of Scottish earners. The “fiscal framework” is subject to negotiation; changes to the grant given to Scotland may cause resentment. And then there is the Conservative opposition to Scottish MPs voting on how income taxes are imposed in the rest of the UK.

然而，史密斯委员会只是苏格兰现代史结局的一段情节。它不会结束伦敦和爱丁堡之间的紧张关系。首先，史密斯的建议将引发一些棘手的问题。联合王国议会将运行“统一福利”(Universal credit)——英国问题多多的旗舰福利政策，这可能不利于苏格兰减少失业的努力。由于税收权力仍归伦敦，苏格兰议会将无法对苏格兰收入分布最底层五分之一的人群重新分配收入。“财政框架”还需要经过谈判，对苏格兰拨款的变化可能会引起不满。此外，英国保守党反对苏格兰议员参与对英国其他地区征税事务的投票。

The SNP will still be able to protest. Governing is the party’s MacGuffin: the aptly named literary device that serves no purpose other than as a trigger for the plot, in this case independence. The nationalist reaction to the Smith report was laughably typical. Having signed up to the cross-party agreement at 7pm on Wednesday, it had briefed against it by 9pm. On Thursday came the predictable complaints that Smith did not go far enough. It never does. It never will.

苏格兰民族党仍能抗争。执政是该党的“麦高芬”(MacGuffin)：一种恰当命名的文学手法，其唯一作用就是推动情节（苏格兰独立事业）发展。民族主义者对史密斯报告的反应实在可笑。上周三晚7点签署了跨党派协议后，当晚9点该党就举行反对该协议的吹风会。不出所料，上周四开始有人抱怨史密斯走得不够远。放权从来都是不够远的，而且永远不会够远。

And why would the SNP change? The party has gone from an esoteric pursuit to within 400,000 votes of independence in a generation. There has been no reflection on why they lost in September because they do not believe that assessment of the result.

再说，苏格兰民族党为什么要改变？该党在开始时只是少数人的追求，但在一代人时间内已将统独票数之差缩小到40万票以下。他们没有对9月份公投失败进行反省，因为他们不相信对公投结果的那种评估。

The party’s membership has quadrupled. The SNP conference had the tenor of a revivalist meeting. If Jim Murphy wins the Scottish Labour leadership election next month, he would offer stronger opposition to the nationalists. But he is one man. A strong SNP performance in the 2015 UK general election, and/or the 2016 Scottish elections, will encourage the nationalists to think they have a mandate for even more devolution: “Smith plus”.

苏格兰民族党的党员已翻了两番，该党大会的基调为复兴。如果吉姆•墨菲(Jim Murphy)下月赢得苏格兰工党领导人选举，他会成为针对民族主义者的更强大反对派。但他只是一个人。苏格兰民族党如果在2015年英国大选，及/或2016年苏格兰选举中有强劲表现，将鼓励民族主义者相信他们有资格争取更多权力下放：“史密斯建议增强版”。

In September, Scotland rejected independence but affirmed that its participation in the union is voluntary and contingent. British identity is dissolving in the slow ebb of empire. The referendum suggests that the union will survive so long as Scots feel they are better off within it. In spite of the nationalists’ disingenuity, most still believe in that practical rationale. But this could change if the Conservatives retain power in May and hold an EU referendum. If Britain were then to choose to leave the EU, Scotland would probably demand the right to a second independence vote.

苏格兰在9月份拒绝了独立，但确认了自己是自愿及有条件加入联盟的。随着大英帝国的衰落，对英国的认同感已逐渐消解。独立公投的结果暗示，只有在苏格兰人觉得自己留在联盟内更划算的情况下，联盟才会存续。尽管民族主义者不老实，但多数人仍相信这一现实的逻辑。但如果保守党在明年5月份守住权力，并举行是否脱离欧盟(EU)的全民公投，这种情况可能会发生改变。如果到时候英国选择离开欧盟，苏格兰很可能会要求举行第二次独立公投。

The Smith commission was not able to change the increasingly transactional – and therefore fragile – Anglo-Scottish relationship. Paradoxically, the most important news for the future of Scotland this week had little to do with constitutions. The oil price, upon which nationalist hopes for a viable economy rest, continues to fall. Its volatility is a reminder that Scotland’s future will be determined by global events as well as domestic politics.

史密斯委员会无法改变这种日趋交易性的——因而脆弱的——盎格鲁-苏格兰关系。矛盾的是，上周对苏格兰未来最重要的消息与宪法没什么关系。民族主义者将苏格兰经济的未来寄望于石油价格，然而油价持续下跌。这种波动性是个提醒：苏格兰的未来除了取决于国内政治外，还将受到全球事件影响。

Pragmatism won in September and it remains the main reason among Scots for staying in the UK. Devolution can do so only much to alter that fact; Lord Smith went with the flow of history rather than arresting it.

务实主义赢得了9月公投，而且仍是苏格兰留在英国的主要原因。权力下放对这一事实能够做出的变更是有限度的。史密斯勋爵顺应了历史潮流，而没有阻碍它。