While most governments have focused their response to cyberthreats on the military and national infrastructure, Britain also is focusing on ordinary business, touting Internet security as a competitive advantage.
2011年10月30日星期日
2011年10月28日星期五
St Paul reopen as moves start to evict protesters
St Paul's to defy the tent army tomorrow: Cathedral will reopen as moves start to evict protesters
- Demonstrators play on giant Monopoly board as 'gift from Banksy'
Church officials did a U-turn after locking the cathedral doors for the first time since the Blitz as the number of tents in the ramshackle camp in its churchyard doubled to 200.
The move came as the Corporation of London announced that it is about to begin legal action to evict the demonstrators.
----
St Paul's Cathedral announces closure due to 'Occupy' protesters
It seemed a gesture of Christian tolerance when a clergyman at St Paul’s Cathedral told police to allow anti-capitalist protesters camped outside to continue their demonstration.
Girls equal in British throne succession
BBC News - David Cameron proposes changes to royal succession
Girls equal in British throne succession
If Prince William and Kate had a daughter first, she would take precedence over younger brothers Sons and daughters of any future UK monarch will have equal right to the throne, after Commonwealth leaders agreed to change succession laws.
The leaders of the 16 Commonwealth countries where the Queen is head of state unanimously approved the changes at a summit in Perth, Australia.
It means a first-born daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would take precedence over younger brothers.
The ban on the monarch being married to a Roman Catholic was also lifted.
Under the old succession laws, dating back more than 300 years, the heir to the throne is the first-born son of the monarch. Only when there are no sons, as in the case of the Queen's father George VI, does the crown pass to the eldest daughter.
The succession changes will require a raft of historic legislation to be amended, including the 1701 Act of Settlement, the 1689 Bill of Rights and the Royal Marriages Act 1772.
The change to the Royal Marriages Act will end a position where every descendant of George II is legally required to seek the consent of the monarch before marrying.
In future, the requirement is expected to be limited to a small number of the sovereign's close relatives.
Continue reading the main story 
Analysis
Equal rights for women in the British Monarchy? It's quite a change. The new rules will reverse 300 years of tradition, custom and law, so it's a big royal deal.
There have been at least 11 attempts to change the passage of succession down the years, but they've never got anywhere. Now, with the arrival of Kate and William on the public stage, a sense of urgency has overtaken the drag of inertia.
The leaders of the Commonwealth have, like David Cameron, recognised this and so decided to act, using Perth to give birth to these royal reforms.
The other modification, allowing future monarchs to marry Catholics, is just as radical, removing an anti-Catholic bias at the heart of the monarchy.
Will these changes make a difference? Potentially, yes, particularly the daughter/son succession one, especially if William and Kate's first-born is a girl. She could become queen and thereby alter the course of British history.
Announcing the succession changes, Prime Minister David Cameron said they would apply to descendents of the Prince of Wales. They will not be applied retrospectively.
"Put simply, if the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were to have a little girl, that girl would one day be our queen," he said.
"The idea that a younger son should become monarch instead of an elder daughter simply because he is a man, or that a future monarch can marry someone of any faith except a Catholic - this way of thinking is at odds with the modern countries that we have become."
Australia's Prime Minister Julia Gillard said it was an extraordinary moment: "I'm very enthusiastic about it. You would expect the first Australian woman prime minister to be very enthusiastic about a change which equals equality for women in a new area."
She said the changes appeared to be straightforward. "But just because they seem straightforward to our modern minds doesn't mean that we should underestimate their historical significance, changing as they will for all time the way in which the monarchy works and changing its history."
But the campaign group Republic - which wants an elected head of state in Britain - said "nothing of substance" had been changed.
"The monarchy discriminates against every man, woman and child who isn't born into the Windsor family. To suggest that this has anything to do with equality is utterly absurd," spokesman Graham Smith said.
Queen's speechOn scrapping the ban on future monarchs marrying Roman Catholics, Mr Cameron said: "Let me be clear, the monarch must be in communion with the Church of England because he or she is the head of that Church. But it is simply wrong they should be denied the chance to marry a Catholic if they wish to do so. After all, they are already quite free to marry someone of any other faith."
David Cameron: ''The idea a younger son should become monarch instead of an elder daughter simply because he's a man... is at odds with the modern countries we have become''
The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, said the elimination of the "unjust discrimination" against Catholics would be widely welcomed.
"At the same time I fully recognise the importance of the position of the established church [the Church of England] in protecting and fostering the role of faith in our society today," he said.
Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond also welcomed the lifting of the ban but said it was "deeply disappointing" that Roman Catholics were still unable to ascend to the throne.
"It surely would have been possible to find a mechanism which would have protected the status of the Church of England without keeping in place an unjustifiable barrier on the grounds of religion in terms of the monarchy," he said.
"It is a missed opportunity not to ensure equality of all faiths when it comes to the issue of who can be head of state."
In her opening speech to the summit, the Queen did not directly mention the royal succession laws, but said women should have a greater role in society.
"It encourages us to find ways to show girls and women to play their full part," she said.
Previous attemptsThe BBC's royal correspondent, Nicholas Witchell, said this was a hint that the Queen herself backed the change.
The Queen will celebrate her Diamond Jubilee next year and there are already two generations of kings-in-waiting - Prince Charles and his son Prince William.
In January 2011, Labour MP Keith Vaz tabled a Succession to the Crown Bill in the Commons to end gender discrimination in the succession to the throne.
He said his bill - due for its second reading on 25 November - could be used to introduce the reforms announced in Perth.
"As a society that values gender equality so highly, this is a long overdue," he said. "We will now have modern laws that fit our modern monarchy."
The royal author Robert Hardman said there had been 11 attempts in recent years by individual MPs and peers to change the succession laws.
The laws are not a matter for the 54-nation Commonwealth as a whole, only for the 16 countries which have the Queen as their head of state, known as realms.
These are Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Jamaica, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Papua New Guinea, St Christopher and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Tuvalu, Barbados, Grenada, Solomon Islands, St Lucia and the Bahamas.
Chogm summitMr Cameron said the realms would work to implement the changes but that for historic reasons the UK would have to publish its legislation first.
The necessary changes to laws will be introduced in the next session of Parliament and New Zealand will lead a working group co-ordinating the measures across the other nations.
In his speech, the prime minister also praised the Queen's 60 years of public service and announced the creation of a Diamond Jubilee Trust to help those in need across the Commonwealth. The trust will be chaired by former Prime Minister Sir John Major.
Mr Cameron said Britain would make a multi-million pound donation to the grant-making body and encouraged other commonwealth nations to do the same.
The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meetings (Chogm) are held every two years, and present an opportunity for the 54 nations with current or former ties to Britain to discuss a range of issues.
The Chogm summit will also discuss economic growth, climate change and human rights at this year's meeting.
2011年10月27日星期四
Britain sleepwalks towards break-up
小不列顛或成真
Little England: Britain sleepwalks towards break-up
英國《金融時報》專欄作家菲利普•斯蒂芬斯
Alex Salmond addressed the Scottish National party's annual conference the other day. Few beyond Scotland will have noticed. That is a pity. As David Cameron's Conservatives resume their obsessive debate about leaving Europe, Mr Salmond is advancing Scotland's departure from Britain.
亞歷克斯•薩爾蒙德(Alex Salmond)日前在蘇格蘭民族黨(SNP)年度大會上發表了講話。在蘇格蘭以外，肯定沒什麼人注意這次講話。這真令人遺憾。就在戴維•卡梅倫(David Cameron)的保守黨(Conservatives)再次一門心思圍繞脫離歐盟展開爭論時，薩爾蒙德正在推動蘇格蘭脫離英國。
North and south of the border with England, the SNP leader is a grown up among adolescents. Alone among Britain's party leaders, he has the confidence and guile to change the political weather. As Scotland's first minister he is running rings around unionist opponents in Edinburgh and Westminster.
不論是在蘇格蘭-英格蘭邊界線的哪一邊，這位蘇格蘭民族黨領袖都算得上是一位鶴立雞群的人物。在英國各政黨領袖中，唯獨他有信心和詭計來改變政治風雲。作為蘇格蘭的首席大臣，他遠比愛丁堡和威斯敏斯特的聯合派(Unionist)對手們更為能幹。
Mr Cameron is comfortable in 10 Downing Street. Labour's Ed Miliband is settling in for what could be an uncomfortably long spell as opposition leader. Nick Clegg has lost the haunted expression he wore during the Liberal Democrats first year in coalition. These are not leaders, though, who rewrite the terms of political debate.
卡梅倫在唐寧街10號過得優哉游哉。工黨(Labour)的埃德•米利班德(Ed Miliband)正在適應自己的反對黨領袖身份，因為他可能會在一個長得令人心煩的時期內扮演這一角色。尼克•克萊格(Nick Clegg)的臉上已經不再掛著他在自民黨(Liberal Democrats)進入聯合政府頭一年時展現出的那種焦慮表情。不過，他們都不是那類改寫政治辯論內容的領袖。
Mr Salmond is in a different class. You don't have to like or agree with him to acknowledge he has recast the argument about the 300-year-old union binding Scotland to England. Will Scotland still be tied to its southern neighbour in, say, 15 years hence? I wouldn't bet on it.
薩爾蒙德則是另一類領袖。你也許不喜歡他或者不贊同他，但你仍然會承認，他改寫了圍繞蘇格蘭-英格蘭聯盟的辯論。 300年來，這個聯盟一直把這兩個王國綁在一起。若干年後，比如說15年後，蘇格蘭還會與它南邊的鄰居綁在一起嗎？我不敢肯定。
At the very least, the SNP is leading Scotland to self-rule in all but foreign affairs – an autonomy comparable to that enjoyed by Catalonia. Many will think this is no bad thing – for the English or the Scots. But surely the relationship is worthy of serious discussion across Britain? It would be curious were the union to sleepwalk towards break-up.
至少，蘇格蘭民族黨正在帶領蘇格蘭走向除外交事務外的全面自治——這種自治權可與加泰羅尼亞(Catalonia)享有的自治權相媲美。許多人會認為這不是什麼壞事——不論對英格蘭人而言還是對蘇格蘭人而言。但毫無疑問的是，兩個王國之間的關係總值得拿出來在全英國范圍內進行嚴肅討論吧。假如英國在夢遊中走向分裂，那將成為一件奇聞。
Unionists are doing their best to assist Mr Salmond. The voting system for the Edinburgh parliament was designed to prevent the SNP from ever winning a governing majority. Mr Salmond has now secured just such a position. The electoral checks and balances failed to anticipate the self -destructive capacity of the unionist parties.
聯合派正在不遺餘力地幫薩爾蒙德的忙。愛丁堡議會的選舉制度是為阻止蘇格蘭民族黨贏得執政多數席位而設計的。而薩爾蒙德的政黨現在恰恰贏得了執政多數席位。選舉制衡機制難敵聯合派政黨的自我毀滅能力。
The rot began to set in for Conservatives, of course, during Margaret Thatcher's heyday. But the big failure since has been the Scottish Tories' unwillingness to adjust to devolution. Decisions about health, education and welfare – things that matter to voters – are now taken in Edinburgh. Tories invite the charge of irrelevance by talking about nothing but the union.
當然，保守黨的衰落在瑪格麗特•撒切爾(Margaret Thatcher)的鼎盛時期就開始了。但蘇格蘭保守黨在那之後的重大失誤，是不願針對英國政府向蘇格蘭移交部分權力作出調整、以適應這一現實。現在，蘇格蘭關於醫療、教育和福利（這些都是與選民息息相關的事務）的決策，都是在愛丁堡做出的。保守黨卻除了蘇格蘭-英格蘭聯合議題什麼也不談，難怪選民批評他們“離題萬里”。
Labour has been laid low by hubris. Gordon Brown saw Scotland as a personal fiefdom. It sustained Labour's (disproportionately Scottish) politicians at Westminster. The party's best and brightest from north of the border would not waste their time in local politics when they could play on a British stage.
工黨則敗於傲慢。戈登•布朗(Gordon Brown)視蘇格蘭為個人封地。這種傲慢使得工黨（工黨內的蘇格蘭人多得離譜）的政治家們不願離開威斯敏斯特。當有機會在英國的舞台上施展拳腳時，那些最出色、最聰明的蘇格蘭工黨成員是不會把時間浪費在蘇格蘭地方政治上的。
Unsurprisingly Scottish voters have woken up to the insult. Why should they back a party that treats their parliament as a parish council? Even now, leading Scottish Labour figures such as Jim Murphy and Douglas Alexander prefer opposition at Westminster to a shot at the top job in Edinburgh.
面對這種侮辱，難怪蘇格蘭選民會醒悟過來。他們為什麼要支持一個把他們的議會當作教區委員會(parish council)的政黨呢？即使是現在，像吉姆•墨菲(Jim Murphy)和道格拉斯•亞歷山大(Douglas Alexander)這樣的蘇格蘭工黨頭面人物，也仍然更願意呆在威斯敏斯特當反對黨，而不是在愛丁堡爭當執政黨。
The Lib Dems are paying a price for throwing in their lot with Mr Cameron. Mr Clegg wants to show that the party can shoulder responsibility at Westminster. A noble ambition. But there are better ways to win friends in Scotland.
自民黨把他們的籌碼壓在卡梅倫這邊，他們正在為此付出代價。克萊格想要證明，自民黨可以在威斯敏斯特承擔責任。這是一個宏大的抱負。但是，他可以選擇更好的方式在蘇格蘭爭取到朋友。
None of this is to deny Mr Salmond's achievement in taking nationalism from the margins to the mainstream of Scottish politics. Not too long ago much of polite society in Edinburgh, Glasgow or Aberdeen saw the SNP as a collection of leftish cranks. Now it has begun to look like the party of the establishment.
上述這一切並不能抹殺薩爾蒙德的成就，在他的帶領下，民族主義從邊緣地帶走入了蘇格蘭政治的主流。不久以前，愛丁堡、格拉斯哥或阿伯丁上流社會的許多人還把蘇格蘭民族黨視為一群左翼怪人。現在，蘇格蘭民族黨看上去已開始像個統治階層的政黨了。
This is not to say the business and professional classes have embraced separatism. My Scottish friends always draw an important distinction. They can vote for the SNP in Scotland while backing unionist parties in British general elections. Mr Salmond cannot be sure of winning if the choice posed in his promised referendum is a straightforward one between the status quo and independence.
這並不是說商界和專業人士階層已經接受了分離主義。我的蘇格蘭朋友心中始終有著一個重要的區分。他們可以在蘇格蘭議會選舉中把票投給蘇格蘭民族黨，同時在英國大選中把票投給統一派政黨。如果在薩爾蒙德承諾舉行的全民公決中，給出的選項只有“維持現狀”和“獨立”兩個，那麼公決結果不一定會合他的心意。
Now, though, we know that there will be a third option. Mr Salmond used his conference speech to throw his weight behind a three-question plebiscite – with the third option providing for what is called “devolution max”. The implication is that the return to Scotland of full control over the economy, spending, taxation and borrowing would represent a moderate third way.
不過，現在我們知道，還會有第三個選項。薩爾蒙德在上述年度大會的講話中，全力倡導帶有三個選項的全民公決。這第三個選項即是所謂的“最大限度移交權力”。言下之意是：英國政府把對蘇格蘭經濟、支出、稅收和舉債的控制權完全交還給蘇格蘭，代表著溫和的“第三條路”。
It would be nothing of the sort. Devolution max would put Scotland on the threshold of independence. It would demand a rewriting of the constitutional settlement that would inevitably leave many Scots asking why not independence. The fact that such an arrangement is presented as a “ sensible compromise” speaks to Mr Salmond's political genius in reframing the debate.
事情決非如此。 “最大限度移交權力”將把蘇格蘭推到獨立的臨界點。它要求對憲法性共識進行改寫，最終會不可避免地會讓許多蘇格蘭人自問：為什麼不干脆獨立呢？薩爾蒙德將這種安排稱為“明智的妥協”，這是他在重構這場辯論中表現出的政治天賦的明證。
For many in Mr Cameron's party, however, it seems that severing ties with Brussels is more important than preserving them with Edinburgh. Before they know it, the sceptics may find themselves demanding England's rather than Britain'sdeparture from the European Union. Perhaps they will call themselves Little Englanders.
然而，對保守黨中的許多人來說，斬斷與布魯塞爾的聯繫似乎比維持與愛丁堡的聯繫更為重要。這些懷疑論者可能會在不知不覺中發現，他們的訴求變成了要英格蘭而不是要英國脫離歐盟。或許那時，他們得稱自己為“小英格蘭”人（Little England，與Great Britain即“大不列顛”相對——譯者註）。
譯者/方舟
Little England: Britain sleepwalks towards break-up
英國《金融時報》專欄作家菲利普•斯蒂芬斯
Alex Salmond addressed the Scottish National party's annual conference the other day. Few beyond Scotland will have noticed. That is a pity. As David Cameron's Conservatives resume their obsessive debate about leaving Europe, Mr Salmond is advancing Scotland's departure from Britain.
亞歷克斯•薩爾蒙德(Alex Salmond)日前在蘇格蘭民族黨(SNP)年度大會上發表了講話。在蘇格蘭以外，肯定沒什麼人注意這次講話。這真令人遺憾。就在戴維•卡梅倫(David Cameron)的保守黨(Conservatives)再次一門心思圍繞脫離歐盟展開爭論時，薩爾蒙德正在推動蘇格蘭脫離英國。
North and south of the border with England, the SNP leader is a grown up among adolescents. Alone among Britain's party leaders, he has the confidence and guile to change the political weather. As Scotland's first minister he is running rings around unionist opponents in Edinburgh and Westminster.
不論是在蘇格蘭-英格蘭邊界線的哪一邊，這位蘇格蘭民族黨領袖都算得上是一位鶴立雞群的人物。在英國各政黨領袖中，唯獨他有信心和詭計來改變政治風雲。作為蘇格蘭的首席大臣，他遠比愛丁堡和威斯敏斯特的聯合派(Unionist)對手們更為能幹。
Mr Cameron is comfortable in 10 Downing Street. Labour's Ed Miliband is settling in for what could be an uncomfortably long spell as opposition leader. Nick Clegg has lost the haunted expression he wore during the Liberal Democrats first year in coalition. These are not leaders, though, who rewrite the terms of political debate.
卡梅倫在唐寧街10號過得優哉游哉。工黨(Labour)的埃德•米利班德(Ed Miliband)正在適應自己的反對黨領袖身份，因為他可能會在一個長得令人心煩的時期內扮演這一角色。尼克•克萊格(Nick Clegg)的臉上已經不再掛著他在自民黨(Liberal Democrats)進入聯合政府頭一年時展現出的那種焦慮表情。不過，他們都不是那類改寫政治辯論內容的領袖。
Mr Salmond is in a different class. You don't have to like or agree with him to acknowledge he has recast the argument about the 300-year-old union binding Scotland to England. Will Scotland still be tied to its southern neighbour in, say, 15 years hence? I wouldn't bet on it.
薩爾蒙德則是另一類領袖。你也許不喜歡他或者不贊同他，但你仍然會承認，他改寫了圍繞蘇格蘭-英格蘭聯盟的辯論。 300年來，這個聯盟一直把這兩個王國綁在一起。若干年後，比如說15年後，蘇格蘭還會與它南邊的鄰居綁在一起嗎？我不敢肯定。
At the very least, the SNP is leading Scotland to self-rule in all but foreign affairs – an autonomy comparable to that enjoyed by Catalonia. Many will think this is no bad thing – for the English or the Scots. But surely the relationship is worthy of serious discussion across Britain? It would be curious were the union to sleepwalk towards break-up.
至少，蘇格蘭民族黨正在帶領蘇格蘭走向除外交事務外的全面自治——這種自治權可與加泰羅尼亞(Catalonia)享有的自治權相媲美。許多人會認為這不是什麼壞事——不論對英格蘭人而言還是對蘇格蘭人而言。但毫無疑問的是，兩個王國之間的關係總值得拿出來在全英國范圍內進行嚴肅討論吧。假如英國在夢遊中走向分裂，那將成為一件奇聞。
Unionists are doing their best to assist Mr Salmond. The voting system for the Edinburgh parliament was designed to prevent the SNP from ever winning a governing majority. Mr Salmond has now secured just such a position. The electoral checks and balances failed to anticipate the self -destructive capacity of the unionist parties.
聯合派正在不遺餘力地幫薩爾蒙德的忙。愛丁堡議會的選舉制度是為阻止蘇格蘭民族黨贏得執政多數席位而設計的。而薩爾蒙德的政黨現在恰恰贏得了執政多數席位。選舉制衡機制難敵聯合派政黨的自我毀滅能力。
The rot began to set in for Conservatives, of course, during Margaret Thatcher's heyday. But the big failure since has been the Scottish Tories' unwillingness to adjust to devolution. Decisions about health, education and welfare – things that matter to voters – are now taken in Edinburgh. Tories invite the charge of irrelevance by talking about nothing but the union.
當然，保守黨的衰落在瑪格麗特•撒切爾(Margaret Thatcher)的鼎盛時期就開始了。但蘇格蘭保守黨在那之後的重大失誤，是不願針對英國政府向蘇格蘭移交部分權力作出調整、以適應這一現實。現在，蘇格蘭關於醫療、教育和福利（這些都是與選民息息相關的事務）的決策，都是在愛丁堡做出的。保守黨卻除了蘇格蘭-英格蘭聯合議題什麼也不談，難怪選民批評他們“離題萬里”。
Labour has been laid low by hubris. Gordon Brown saw Scotland as a personal fiefdom. It sustained Labour's (disproportionately Scottish) politicians at Westminster. The party's best and brightest from north of the border would not waste their time in local politics when they could play on a British stage.
工黨則敗於傲慢。戈登•布朗(Gordon Brown)視蘇格蘭為個人封地。這種傲慢使得工黨（工黨內的蘇格蘭人多得離譜）的政治家們不願離開威斯敏斯特。當有機會在英國的舞台上施展拳腳時，那些最出色、最聰明的蘇格蘭工黨成員是不會把時間浪費在蘇格蘭地方政治上的。
Unsurprisingly Scottish voters have woken up to the insult. Why should they back a party that treats their parliament as a parish council? Even now, leading Scottish Labour figures such as Jim Murphy and Douglas Alexander prefer opposition at Westminster to a shot at the top job in Edinburgh.
面對這種侮辱，難怪蘇格蘭選民會醒悟過來。他們為什麼要支持一個把他們的議會當作教區委員會(parish council)的政黨呢？即使是現在，像吉姆•墨菲(Jim Murphy)和道格拉斯•亞歷山大(Douglas Alexander)這樣的蘇格蘭工黨頭面人物，也仍然更願意呆在威斯敏斯特當反對黨，而不是在愛丁堡爭當執政黨。
The Lib Dems are paying a price for throwing in their lot with Mr Cameron. Mr Clegg wants to show that the party can shoulder responsibility at Westminster. A noble ambition. But there are better ways to win friends in Scotland.
自民黨把他們的籌碼壓在卡梅倫這邊，他們正在為此付出代價。克萊格想要證明，自民黨可以在威斯敏斯特承擔責任。這是一個宏大的抱負。但是，他可以選擇更好的方式在蘇格蘭爭取到朋友。
None of this is to deny Mr Salmond's achievement in taking nationalism from the margins to the mainstream of Scottish politics. Not too long ago much of polite society in Edinburgh, Glasgow or Aberdeen saw the SNP as a collection of leftish cranks. Now it has begun to look like the party of the establishment.
上述這一切並不能抹殺薩爾蒙德的成就，在他的帶領下，民族主義從邊緣地帶走入了蘇格蘭政治的主流。不久以前，愛丁堡、格拉斯哥或阿伯丁上流社會的許多人還把蘇格蘭民族黨視為一群左翼怪人。現在，蘇格蘭民族黨看上去已開始像個統治階層的政黨了。
This is not to say the business and professional classes have embraced separatism. My Scottish friends always draw an important distinction. They can vote for the SNP in Scotland while backing unionist parties in British general elections. Mr Salmond cannot be sure of winning if the choice posed in his promised referendum is a straightforward one between the status quo and independence.
這並不是說商界和專業人士階層已經接受了分離主義。我的蘇格蘭朋友心中始終有著一個重要的區分。他們可以在蘇格蘭議會選舉中把票投給蘇格蘭民族黨，同時在英國大選中把票投給統一派政黨。如果在薩爾蒙德承諾舉行的全民公決中，給出的選項只有“維持現狀”和“獨立”兩個，那麼公決結果不一定會合他的心意。
Now, though, we know that there will be a third option. Mr Salmond used his conference speech to throw his weight behind a three-question plebiscite – with the third option providing for what is called “devolution max”. The implication is that the return to Scotland of full control over the economy, spending, taxation and borrowing would represent a moderate third way.
不過，現在我們知道，還會有第三個選項。薩爾蒙德在上述年度大會的講話中，全力倡導帶有三個選項的全民公決。這第三個選項即是所謂的“最大限度移交權力”。言下之意是：英國政府把對蘇格蘭經濟、支出、稅收和舉債的控制權完全交還給蘇格蘭，代表著溫和的“第三條路”。
It would be nothing of the sort. Devolution max would put Scotland on the threshold of independence. It would demand a rewriting of the constitutional settlement that would inevitably leave many Scots asking why not independence. The fact that such an arrangement is presented as a “ sensible compromise” speaks to Mr Salmond's political genius in reframing the debate.
事情決非如此。 “最大限度移交權力”將把蘇格蘭推到獨立的臨界點。它要求對憲法性共識進行改寫，最終會不可避免地會讓許多蘇格蘭人自問：為什麼不干脆獨立呢？薩爾蒙德將這種安排稱為“明智的妥協”，這是他在重構這場辯論中表現出的政治天賦的明證。
For many in Mr Cameron's party, however, it seems that severing ties with Brussels is more important than preserving them with Edinburgh. Before they know it, the sceptics may find themselves demanding England's rather than Britain'sdeparture from the European Union. Perhaps they will call themselves Little Englanders.
然而，對保守黨中的許多人來說，斬斷與布魯塞爾的聯繫似乎比維持與愛丁堡的聯繫更為重要。這些懷疑論者可能會在不知不覺中發現，他們的訴求變成了要英格蘭而不是要英國脫離歐盟。或許那時，他們得稱自己為“小英格蘭”人（Little England，與Great Britain即“大不列顛”相對——譯者註）。
譯者/方舟
英國流花道Royal Flower Arrangement
我是翻過一本日文的"Royal Flower Arrangement" 才想起或許該注意一下
底下的 我自己都沒點閱過.....
底下的 我自己都沒點閱過.....
2011年10月25日星期二
The Out of Asia season
This autumn, Sadler's Wells presents a collection of works from across Asia. The Out of Asia season brings together artists from China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Japan and Taiwan.
倫敦沙德勒之井劇院（Sadler's Wells）舉辦《走出亞洲舞蹈季》，邀請亞洲國家和地區七個舞蹈團參加演出。北京當代芭蕾舞團演繹的現代芭蕾《霾》是參加演出的項目之一，它向外國觀眾展示了中國舞蹈的另外一面。
北京當代芭蕾舞團團長王媛媛由2009年中國汶川地震等諸多大事有感而發，創作了這部舞蹈作品。該作品 分為「燈」、「城」、「岸」三個章節以純粹的肢體語言，展現當下人們對經濟危機，環境危機的反應，反映了現代人對生命的反思，並進行內心探索的複雜過程。 這部作品融合了芭蕾舞和現代舞元素，表現形式非常抽像，這在一定程度上使西方觀眾更容易理解舞蹈的內涵。
薩德勒之井劇院是全英國最負盛名的現代舞蹈劇院，《霾》是該劇院在近期舉辦的六場「走出亞洲」系列舞蹈之一。此前，來自日本、越南和孟加拉國的舞蹈團體曾在此演出，而來自台灣和北京的另外兩個舞蹈團也將在11月進行表演。
2011年10月23日星期日
'Occupy London' start camp in Finsbury Square
BBC中文網
倫敦反資本主義抗議者在倫敦金融城的Finsbury Square開闢第二戰場。 此前因抗議者連續多日在聖保羅大教堂外安營扎寨，教堂被迫對公眾關閉。 倫敦的示威者以美國佔領華爾街的示威者為榜樣，給自己的行動起名為「佔領倫敦」。 他們說，約二、三百人已經在Finsbury Square ...
Finsbury Square
A protester lies in her tent in Finsbury Square 
Bride Natasha Ighodaro arrives for her wedding at St Paul's Cathedral 
Your comments (394)
倫敦反資本主義抗議者在倫敦金融城的Finsbury Square開闢第二戰場。 此前因抗議者連續多日在聖保羅大教堂外安營扎寨，教堂被迫對公眾關閉。 倫敦的示威者以美國佔領華爾街的示威者為榜樣，給自己的行動起名為「佔領倫敦」。 他們說，約二、三百人已經在Finsbury Square ...
Finsbury Square is a 0.7-hectare (1.7-acre) square in central London. [1] It was developed in 1777 on the site of a previous area of green space to the east of London known as Finsbury Fields, in the parish of St Luke's and near Moorfields. It is sited on the east side of City Road, opposite the east side of Bunhill Fields. It is approximately 200m north of Moorgate and 400m south of Old Street. Nearby locations are Finsbury Circus and Finsbury Pavement.
It is served by bus routes 21, 43, 141, 271, 214 and 274.
[edit] History
Past residents of the square include Pascoe Grenfell Hill, Thomas Southwood Smith and Philip Henry Pye-Smith. It has also been the site of the bookshop of James Lackington and the first home of the rabbinical seminary that became the London School of Jewish Studies (1855–81), of the Greek Orthodox church of Saint Sophia and of the Roman Catholic Church of St Mary Moorfields (1820–1900). The Square's Guildhall is still the HQ of the City of London Yeomanry. More recently, on 22 October 2011, Occupy London protesters began to camp on the Square.[2]
[edit] Recent improvements
On October 22 Finsbury Square was upgraded to membership of the global occupy movement.
--'Occupy London' start camp in Finsbury Square
The BBC's John Brain says the protest outside St Paul's is costing the cathedral £16,000 a day in lost tourism revenue
Anti-capitalist protesters have started a second camp in London - as a demonstration outside St Paul's Cathedral entered its seventh day.
About 30 tents have been put up in Finsbury Square in London's business district.
The move came as up to 300 protesters from Occupy London Stock Exchange (OccupyLSX) refused to leave the front of St Paul's.
The cathedral has been closed since Friday amid safety concerns.
A protester lies in her tent in Finsbury Square OccupyLSX said it had been working "to accommodate the cathedral's concerns".
The group says it is protesting against "corporate greed".
Although the cathedral was closed to tourists, a planned wedding did take place on Saturday.
Rather than using the cathedral's grand entrance, bride Natasha Ighodaro, an account manager for a PR company, entered through a side door.
The bride smiled broadly as she left the service, saying: "It's been amazing. There hasn't been any disruption at all - it's been wonderful, really amazing."
Meanwhile, some of her guests offered support to the activists.
John Giles, from Godalming in Surrey, said: "I think there are valuable comments being made and it seems to have been done in a peaceful way.
"They have a democratic right to protest."
A spokesman for the cathedral - which costs £20,000 per day to run and draws between 2,000 and 3,000 worshippers each Sunday - said it would lose about £16,000 in visitor donations for every day it is closed.
City of London Police said it would not comment on how many officers were attending the protest.
Bride Natasha Ighodaro arrives for her wedding at St Paul's Cathedral A police spokesman said "dynamic policing" was in place.
"We are communicating with protesters, the cathedral and local businesses to ensure sufficient policing response to facilitate peaceful protest," he said.
Senior staff at St Paul's Cathedral are continuing to meet City of London Corporation (CLC) officials over the decision to close to the public - for the first time since World War II .
One CLC member called on them to disband in a peaceful manner.
The action by the cathedral authorities and the Dean, the Right Reverend Graeme Knowles, follows appeals to the group whose numbers have grown during the week.
In a statement published on the cathedral's website, Dean Knowles said they were left with "no lawful alternative" but to close St Paul's.
The decision had been taken "with a heavy heart" but it was "simply not possible to fulfil our day to day obligations to worshippers, visitors and pilgrims in current circumstances".
"With so many stoves and fires and lots of different types of fuel around, there is a clear fire hazard," the letter said.
OccupyLSX protesters said they had tried to answer such concerns, reorganising their camp "in response to feedback from the fire brigade".
2011年10月19日星期三
Rising energy bills causing fuel poverty deaths 英國經濟不平等解剖
中央社報導，英國發生金融危機後一直積弱不振，經濟學家甚至看壞英國未來10年的發展。經濟低迷使貧富差距更為明顯，貧民為生活而掙扎，富人因財力雄厚可以安度危機。
倫敦政經學院接受英國政府委託，進行長達16個月的調查，2010年公布「英國經濟不平等解剖報告」（An Anatomy of Economic Inequality in the UK）。報告指出，2007到2008年，英國的收入不平等創下自第二次世界大戰以來最嚴重紀錄，收入在全國前10%的家庭，年收入至少85萬3000英 鎊（約新台幣4000萬元），而收入最低的10%，年收入僅8800英鎊，貧富的差距近100倍。
如果將企業執行長、銀行家等高收入的族群也計算進去，貧富的差距就更大，這些金融界高收入者約占總人口的1%，全家年收入至少260萬英鎊。
報告指出，和其他工業國家相比，英國貧富差距的情況最為嚴重，出生在那一個社會階級的家庭，幾乎就決定了這個小孩日後的命運，貧窮家庭出生的小孩，法受到良好的教育，畢業後也找不到好的工作，惡性循環的結果，就是人生長期居於劣勢。
相反的，出生在貴族及富裕家庭的小孩，可以上私立學校，接受優質教育，就業也因為家世良好而有更好的機會，他們不需要為房產憂心，因為父母早就為他們安排好，這種含金湯匙出生的人，壽命也比那些窮人來得長。
研究人員進一步調查家庭的財富，全國前10%的高收入者，到退休時（約55到64歲），連同房地產與退休資產，財富達220萬英鎊，但收入在底層10%的家庭，只有8000英鎊，兩者天差地別 。
英國研究種族平等的智庫「The Runnymede Trust 」政策研究主任歐瑪汗（Omar Khan）指出，英國少數族裔的財富普遍低於白人。根據就業與養老金部門的報告，60%的黑人及南亞人家庭沒有任何儲蓄，33%的白人家庭則都有儲蓄。
2009年英國第一份財富與資產報告顯示，平均白人家庭約有22萬1000英鎊，加勒比海黑人家庭約有7萬 6000英鎊，孟加拉裔家庭2萬1000英鎊，非洲黑人家庭則是1萬5000英鎊。
歐瑪汗分析，黑人與南亞人財產少的原因，除了他們大都從事低薪低保障的勞動工作，無法獲得社會福利；他們也很少繼承房子或資產。
另一個原因是少數族裔擁有房地產的比例偏低，非洲黑人約28%是有屋階級，比例最低，孟加拉約38%，加勒比海黑人49%，白人則高達72%。
雪菲爾大學教授多林（Danny Dorling），在所著的「不公正：為何社會不公平持續存在」（Injustice: Why Social Inequality Persists）一書指出，倫敦是西方國家中，貧富差距最嚴重的城市。
他指出，倫敦1/10最有錢的人，平均財富達93萬 3563英鎊，較最貧窮的1/10市民的3420英鎊，幾乎達 273倍。
多林說，財富落差也造成社會階級分隔，如同印度的種姓制度，在倫敦，民眾只和與自己收入相當的人往來，不和與自己收入懸殊的人交往，「倫敦財富不平均的情況是自社會精英擁有奴隸制度以來首見」。
物質主義盛行使貧窮家庭父母面臨巨大壓力，他們擔心子女沒有和同學或朋友一樣的球鞋及電子用品，在同儕團體矮人一截，即使負債也會想辦法滿足子女的需要，以免遭「品牌霸凌」（brand bulling）。
一位14歲的青少年告訴研究人員，不管你有沒有錢，都要裝得你有錢，你可能住在垃圾桶裡，但只要你有 iPod、黑莓機，你就可以被接受。
社會學家以今年8月初從倫敦爆發的暴力事件為例，那些參與放火打劫商家的暴徒，搶的物品都是平常買不起的手機、電視和電子用品，還有不少人搶球鞋及酒，藉此滿足虛榮心。
倫敦政經學院教授貝爾（Brian Bell）指出，倫敦金融業支付員工高薪，是造成貧富差距擴大的主因。
他在調查研究時發現，1998年金融業員工的平均薪資為15萬1000英鎊，是全國平均薪資的7.5倍，到了 2008年平均薪資提高到31萬4000英鎊，則是全國平均薪資的10倍。
貝爾說，金融業從業人員的待遇一向優渥，但改變的關鍵是紅利的發放。
金融危機爆發前，業績好的金融業員工或高級主管可以領到數百萬英鎊的紅利，他們將這些獎金投資房地產，炒樓的結果造成一般薪資民眾買不起房子，財富愈趨集中在少數人，惡性循環，貧富差距加劇。
英國聯合政府為解決預算赤字問題，延續工黨前政府提出對年薪超過15萬英鎊的高收入者，課徵50%所得稅，主張讓高收入者付出更多，但受到反彈，成效也被質疑。
多位學者都認為，貧富差距是根深柢固的嚴重社會問題，原因盤根錯結，非一夕可以解決，但政府如果放任不處理，將會有更多動搖社會秩序的憾事發生。
倫敦政經學院接受英國政府委託，進行長達16個月的調查，2010年公布「英國經濟不平等解剖報告」（An Anatomy of Economic Inequality in the UK）。報告指出，2007到2008年，英國的收入不平等創下自第二次世界大戰以來最嚴重紀錄，收入在全國前10%的家庭，年收入至少85萬3000英 鎊（約新台幣4000萬元），而收入最低的10%，年收入僅8800英鎊，貧富的差距近100倍。
如果將企業執行長、銀行家等高收入的族群也計算進去，貧富的差距就更大，這些金融界高收入者約占總人口的1%，全家年收入至少260萬英鎊。
報告指出，和其他工業國家相比，英國貧富差距的情況最為嚴重，出生在那一個社會階級的家庭，幾乎就決定了這個小孩日後的命運，貧窮家庭出生的小孩，法受到良好的教育，畢業後也找不到好的工作，惡性循環的結果，就是人生長期居於劣勢。
相反的，出生在貴族及富裕家庭的小孩，可以上私立學校，接受優質教育，就業也因為家世良好而有更好的機會，他們不需要為房產憂心，因為父母早就為他們安排好，這種含金湯匙出生的人，壽命也比那些窮人來得長。
研究人員進一步調查家庭的財富，全國前10%的高收入者，到退休時（約55到64歲），連同房地產與退休資產，財富達220萬英鎊，但收入在底層10%的家庭，只有8000英鎊，兩者天差地別 。
英國研究種族平等的智庫「The Runnymede Trust 」政策研究主任歐瑪汗（Omar Khan）指出，英國少數族裔的財富普遍低於白人。根據就業與養老金部門的報告，60%的黑人及南亞人家庭沒有任何儲蓄，33%的白人家庭則都有儲蓄。
2009年英國第一份財富與資產報告顯示，平均白人家庭約有22萬1000英鎊，加勒比海黑人家庭約有7萬 6000英鎊，孟加拉裔家庭2萬1000英鎊，非洲黑人家庭則是1萬5000英鎊。
歐瑪汗分析，黑人與南亞人財產少的原因，除了他們大都從事低薪低保障的勞動工作，無法獲得社會福利；他們也很少繼承房子或資產。
另一個原因是少數族裔擁有房地產的比例偏低，非洲黑人約28%是有屋階級，比例最低，孟加拉約38%，加勒比海黑人49%，白人則高達72%。
雪菲爾大學教授多林（Danny Dorling），在所著的「不公正：為何社會不公平持續存在」（Injustice: Why Social Inequality Persists）一書指出，倫敦是西方國家中，貧富差距最嚴重的城市。
他指出，倫敦1/10最有錢的人，平均財富達93萬 3563英鎊，較最貧窮的1/10市民的3420英鎊，幾乎達 273倍。
多林說，財富落差也造成社會階級分隔，如同印度的種姓制度，在倫敦，民眾只和與自己收入相當的人往來，不和與自己收入懸殊的人交往，「倫敦財富不平均的情況是自社會精英擁有奴隸制度以來首見」。
物質主義盛行使貧窮家庭父母面臨巨大壓力，他們擔心子女沒有和同學或朋友一樣的球鞋及電子用品，在同儕團體矮人一截，即使負債也會想辦法滿足子女的需要，以免遭「品牌霸凌」（brand bulling）。
一位14歲的青少年告訴研究人員，不管你有沒有錢，都要裝得你有錢，你可能住在垃圾桶裡，但只要你有 iPod、黑莓機，你就可以被接受。
社會學家以今年8月初從倫敦爆發的暴力事件為例，那些參與放火打劫商家的暴徒，搶的物品都是平常買不起的手機、電視和電子用品，還有不少人搶球鞋及酒，藉此滿足虛榮心。
倫敦政經學院教授貝爾（Brian Bell）指出，倫敦金融業支付員工高薪，是造成貧富差距擴大的主因。
他在調查研究時發現，1998年金融業員工的平均薪資為15萬1000英鎊，是全國平均薪資的7.5倍，到了 2008年平均薪資提高到31萬4000英鎊，則是全國平均薪資的10倍。
貝爾說，金融業從業人員的待遇一向優渥，但改變的關鍵是紅利的發放。
金融危機爆發前，業績好的金融業員工或高級主管可以領到數百萬英鎊的紅利，他們將這些獎金投資房地產，炒樓的結果造成一般薪資民眾買不起房子，財富愈趨集中在少數人，惡性循環，貧富差距加劇。
英國聯合政府為解決預算赤字問題，延續工黨前政府提出對年薪超過15萬英鎊的高收入者，課徵50%所得稅，主張讓高收入者付出更多，但受到反彈，成效也被質疑。
多位學者都認為，貧富差距是根深柢固的嚴重社會問題，原因盤根錯結，非一夕可以解決，但政府如果放任不處理，將會有更多動搖社會秩序的憾事發生。
Rising energy bills causing fuel poverty deaths
Cannot play media. You do not have the correct version of the flash player. Download the correct version
Charlene Franklin talks to Simon Gompertz about fuel poverty: "There have been times when I wouldn't eat two or three times in the week"
Thousands of people die each year from illnesses linked to fuel poverty, according to an independent report.
Professor John Hills has called for a new definition of the problem, which focuses on people with low incomes driven into poverty by high fuel bills.
His report found that in 2004, fuel-poor households faced a shortfall of £256 to heat their homes and avoid poverty, but in 2009 it was £402.
Recent bill increases may make the problem worse this year, he warned.
Fuel poverty gap
The government commissioned Prof Hills to examine how serious a problem fuel poverty is and how it should be measured.
He argues that fuel poverty poses serious public health and environmental issues.
His report is the first to measure the shortfall that some households face in heating their homes, which he calls the fuel poverty gap.
Further increases in bills since then are likely to have widened this gap, he warned.
DeathsThe report argued this shortfall had serious implications for health.
There are 27,000 extra deaths in the UK each winter compared to other times of year, according to figures from the Office of National Statistics. The report found most of this was due to cold weather.
That figure is one of the highest in Europe and worse than Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Norway and France.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
Prof John HillsThere are people dying, maybe more people die each year than on the roads”
Prof Hills drew on a seperate independent report - the Marmot review - which found that about one-fifth of these additional winter deaths occurred in the coldest quarter of homes, with further evidence suggesting a link between fuel poverty and cold homes.
And an expert meeting of the World Health Organization suggested that about half of winter deaths are due to cold indoor rather than cold outdoor temperatures.
This meant, the Hills report concluded, that an estimated 2,700 people die each year because of health conditions, such as respiratory infections or cardiovascular problems, linked to fuel poverty.
"It's a very serious problem," said Prof Hills. "There are people dying, maybe more people dying each year than die on the roads, it's a problem of hardship for low-income families who are having to pay out more when they've got hard-to-heat houses and it's a problem for countering climate change."
Low-income households are unable to invest in energy efficiency measures, hindering efforts both to reduce their bills and to lower UK carbon emissions.
Changing definitionHowever, Prof Hills found that the way we define fuel poverty may need to change.
By the old definition, a household was defined as being in fuel poverty if 10% of its income was spent on fuel each year.
The latest figures from the Department of Energy and Climate change suggested four million English households fitted into this category in 2009, in a sharp increase from 1.2 million in 2003.
Estimates from the Centre for Sustainable Energy suggest that number has risen to 5.5 million for England and an estimate of 6.6 million for the UK.
But Prof Hills suggests the current definition did not focus tightly enough on fuel poverty.
Instead, he suggested people be defined as fuel-poor only if their bills were relatively high and if paying those bills would push them below the poverty line.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
Derek Lickorish Fuel Poverty Advisory GroupInsulating the homes of the poor is the only long term and sustainable solution”
That would mean that in 2009, fewer people were classed as fuel-poor - 2.7 million in England.
However, the problem appears less variable, with roughly the same number categorised as fuel poor in 2003, more than double the estimate for that period on the current definition.
Government measuresThe government says it is already taking measures to tackle the issue.
It has recently announced the Warm Homes Discount on energy bills, which includes reductions of about £120 to the poorest pensioners in addition to winter fuel payments.
Energy suppliers are also obliged to offer free or reduced packages on home insulation to some high-risk groups, using money recouped from a charge on energy bills.
However, some government measures, such as the Warm Front Scheme designed to help insulate low-income homes, are due to end next year.
Derek Lickorish, chair of the Government's Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (FPAG), called the figures for the number of deaths due to fuel poverty a "disgrace".
"Insulating the homes of the fuel poor is the only long-term and sustainable solution to solving this problem, but they will need financial help to make this happen and this takes time. Urgent action must start today," he said.
An opposition debate on fuel bills is due to take place on Wednesday.
2011年10月17日星期一
the London Beer Flood
| Brimming with Beer |
2011年10月16日星期日
記一些寫英國的好書
記一些寫英國的好書
英國(時代-生活)/ Edwardian Architecture /Victorian Archi...
趙國材《劍河煙雨》台北：台灣新生報，第一集/第二集：1974；第三/四/五集：1978。
周榆瑞《英倫走筆》台北：聯合報，1976，454頁
收入自1965/1/25 至1976/5/20共90篇
游復熙 季光容《這些英國人》台北：純文學，1978
儲安平《英倫采風》台北：商務轉印大陸時期作品 他後來又有《英人 法人 中國人》 1948 是論英國人的四篇 待讀
朱自清《倫敦雜記》（重慶: 開明書局）1943年
陳之藩《劍河倒影》台北: 遠東圖書公司1983
English hours 英國風情 蒲隆譯 北京三聯 2001及其他 English hours 23 editions當時hc案：「如果是greyhound已不翻譯成「灰狗」（grey為古字，意思為bitch（母狗）），而是靈（犬＋更）狗。」【後補入「根據」：Dictionary of Britain by Adrian Room, OUP, ……Greyhounds are not necessary grey in colour: 'grey' comes from an old word for 'bitch'. p.121—】
[英]西蒙‧特拉斯勒 著《劍橋插圖英國戲劇史》(The Cambridge Illustrated History of British Theatre) 濟南：山東畫報出版社，2006
---
或許最簡便的英國簡史入門
The Oxford illustrated history of Britain
---
The Oxford illustrated history of English literatu...
----
《英國行政法》(王名揚)
《英國莊園生活－ 1150-1400年農民生活狀況研究》
Mr. Bennett gives a picture of the daily and yearly round of the English peasant in the Middle Ages. he explains the feudal system which linked the poor man to the soil and to the service of the lord and the church in a...
More about this book
( 英）貝內特（Bennett, H S）著《英國莊園生活－ 1150-1400年農民生活狀況研究》（ Life on the English Manor: A Study of Peasant Conditions 1150-1400
by H S Bennett ）龍秀清等譯，上海人民出版社， 2005
這本書保留原著的索引，這相當難得。認真的讀者可以從中學到許多英
.
不過，有些索引與內文對應之問題，譬如說， winnowing 揚穀，只有約略之對應；又，不知何故刪掉少數條目。譬如說， Pierce the Ploughman's Crede --此條在內文中翻譯為《透視梨把式的信條》，不知所云。
其實，它是英國中古文學中最著名的詩篇，還有翻譯本：
manor
manor (house) noun [C]
a large old house in the country with land belonging to it
━━ n. 【英史】領地, 荘園; （地主などの）大邸宅; 領主の邸宅; 〔英話〕 （警察の）管轄区.UK SLANG the area in which a person works or which they are responsible for
lord of the manor （the ～） 領主. manor house 荘園領主の邸宅.
Sir William More (1520-1600), when he found time to spare from his numerous other posts, which included 'Her Majesty's Deputy Master of the Swans', was the 'Treasurer of the Lottery in Surrey'. The Loseley Manuscripts are a unique archive of the More-Molyneux family who have for centuries lived in beautiful Tudor manor house Loseley Park. The manuscripts contain a unique record of life in Tudor and Stuart England and include More's description of the lottery:
"A verie rich Lotterie ... without any blancks."
serf━━ n. 【史】農奴; こき使われる者.
vassal ━━ n. （封建時代の）家臣; 従者, 奴隷.
What to Get the Person who has Everything
There are only a few shopping days left until Christmas, and the question on many peoples' minds is "What do I get the person who seems to have everything?". How about a Manorial title? The days of the feudal system are long gone - at least in Europe where it flourished in the Middle Ages. The hierarchy of serfs, vassals, and lords of the manor, collapsed back in the 17th century. But remnants remain - especially in Britain. Old feudal titles are frequently bought and sold there for fun. However, this apparently harmless trade has led to a bizarre and bitter dispute. A clash between a modern day Lord of the Manor and his unruly serfs.
勾選
| 英國近代經濟史 / 柯特(W. H. B. Court)著; 周憲文譯 Ying kuo chin tai ching chi shih |
| 台北市 : 台灣銀行, 民66[1977] |
| |
| |
  |
| 館藏地 | 索書號 | 條碼 | 狀態 說明 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 總圖2F人社資料區 | 552.41 4124 [鄰近架位館藏] | 1218755 | 可流通 |
| 總圖2F人社資料區 | 552.41 4124 | 1847348 | 可流通 |
----
小女遊學英倫(陳淑玲 ) 台北: 天下遠見出版股份有限公司出版社 1996
這是父母和二位女兒在英國一年的紀錄--- 1990年代台灣奓談教育改革 所以提供完全另類的參考 作者一家有計畫地遊英倫 告訴讀者英國4月-9月的應時的花.......
"一位母親，利用隨夫出差的時間，陪伴兩個女兒在英國遊學，一年後又重返台灣教育體系。母親深刻觀察的用心透過真切細膩的筆觸，翔實記錄了兩姊妹遊學過程以 及返台後的適應情形。注重開放式教學的英國公立學校，在教育理念、學校制度、教學方式、學生對待以及與家長的互動各方面，對教育改革的有志者，提供了相當 多的啟發與反思空間。"
徐鍾珮《多少英倫舊事》文星 196? /時報文化，1985
從香港到劍橋－英國留學攻略
作者十三歲赴英國讀中學，現為劍橋大學學生。他將七年的留學生活記錄下來：從一個普通的香港男孩，一步一步努力，學習語言，融入當地文化，積極爭取，逐漸成長，最終獲得認同與榮譽。書中沒有一點炫耀，只是非常平實地將留學的經驗敘述出來，目的是讓後來者有所借鏡。
書內每章都附有「本章啟示」，分享他選中學、準備工夫、選科、考大學及考試與面試的心得，讓讀者知道赴英留學的注意事項。這是最實用的「溫馨提示」，讀 者可從中得到很多赴英留學必須注意的具體事項，免走彎路，獲得成功。書內更附有《週末泰晤士報》私立中學排名榜、《泰晤士報》大學排名榜、作者投考大學個 人陳述短文(Personal Statement)等，相當實用。
作者簡介
王君舜
現為劍橋大學二年級經濟學系學生。他小學畢業於九龍禮賢學校，在喇沙書院完成中一後，便赴英國跳讀中三，就讀著名的私立寄宿中學沙特豪斯 (Charterhouse)。七年的留學生涯，王君舜累積了不少有關英國教育制度的經驗和留英學生生活的體驗。他對於選中學、準備工夫、選科、考大學及 考試與面試之成功要訣等有著不少心得，也曾多次代表學校在香港安排家長招待會，對家長及學生就赴英留學的種種疑問作了深入的分析和探討。
王君舜現為劍橋大學香港及中國事務會主席，也是沙特豪斯舊生會中國代表。
2011年10月14日星期五
Occupy the London Stock Exchange
Tuesday 11 October 2011
Occupy the London Stock Exchange
Keep up to date at http://occupylondon.org.uk/
On October 15th we will be Occupying the London Stock Exchange. At the same time thousands continue to occupy Wall Street and hundreds of cities from Paris and Madrid to Buenos Aires and Caracas are staging actions and occupations together for a global day of action.
By reclaiming space in the face of the economic systems that have caused terrible injustices across the world, we can open up and engage our communities into public discussions. These assemblies will allow people to voice their ideas for how we can work towards a better future and help us create concrete demands to be met. A future free from austerity within a context of growing inequality, unemployment, tax injustice and a political elite who ignores its citizens. So it’s time for citizens to represent themselves. To work together to resist the government’s plans and to do this in solidarity with the hundreds of thousands of others around the world on the same day.
The problems we face in the UK echoes across the world. We are linked by the same root causes, so we cannot solve these problems in isolation. October 15th will be a global day of action calling for global change.
‘O-15: Unite for Global Change’ has been called by the ‘indignants’ movement in Spain, where thousands camped out in the squares for weeks, building massive popular pressure on the government. It inspired the current Wall Street occupation in New York, providing a space for the majority to resist the wishes of the greedy minority.
Join us at the London Stock Exchange to reclaim space and take part in workshops on topics ranging from Debt and The Spanish Indignants Movement to Fuel Poverty and Climate Justice. Contribute in the Open Assemblies and chant songs of solidarity with Samba bands. Exact times and locations to be announced soon.
OccupyLSX Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/o
Twitter: @OccupyLSX (www.twitter.com/OccupyLSX)
hashtags #OccupyLSX #OccupyLondon
〔中央社〕在美國如火如荼進行的占領華爾街運動，15日將跨過大西洋進軍英國倫敦，名為「占領倫敦交易所」的倫敦版，臉書上已有1萬3000人響應，人數並持續增加。
占領倫敦交易所（Occupy the London Stock Exchange）活動，10天前在臉書（Facebook）開始發動，號召支持者15日中午在倫敦交易所附近的聖保羅大教堂前集合，再展開遊行，但具體路線目前仍未確定。
參加活動策劃的柯文（Naomi Colvin）接受中央社記者訪問時說，參與策劃的人來自不同背景，大家都關切金融服務業在英國及全世界扮演的角色，例如2008年爆發的金融危機，以及多家金融機構嚴重經營不善，同時政府負債也因此增加。
對於目前保守黨與自由民主黨聯合政府為防止金融危機再爆發所採取的措施，柯文說，民眾也有很多疑慮，因為政府可能無法保護99%的一般民眾，大家要藉由抗議活動，讓政府也聽到民眾的心聲，並為人民謀福祉，而不是被遊說團體、有權勢的捐款人和他們在金融城的朋友左右。
15日不滿貪婪金融業的民眾將占領倫敦交易所，拿回對金融體系的主導權，並表達如何讓未來更美好的建議，包括減少社會不公平現象、降低失業率、稅賦公平以及政府菁英不應忽視人民福利與需要。
隨著響應的人數增加，柯文表示，占領倫敦交易所活動會依參與者的意願決定後續的行動與方向，目前沒有設定結束的日期。
主辦單位呼籲大家呼朋引伴一起參與，由於倫敦天氣日漸轉冷並偶而飄雨，也提醒參與者帶防水布、帳篷、睡袋、紙箱、食物、飲水及保暖的衣物到現場。
7000多名支持者在臉書留言，表達對占領倫敦證交所行動的支持，很多人忙著製作標語和海報，要藉這個活動展現人民的力量。
占領倫敦交易所（Occupy the London Stock Exchange）活動，10天前在臉書（Facebook）開始發動，號召支持者15日中午在倫敦交易所附近的聖保羅大教堂前集合，再展開遊行，但具體路線目前仍未確定。
參加活動策劃的柯文（Naomi Colvin）接受中央社記者訪問時說，參與策劃的人來自不同背景，大家都關切金融服務業在英國及全世界扮演的角色，例如2008年爆發的金融危機，以及多家金融機構嚴重經營不善，同時政府負債也因此增加。
對於目前保守黨與自由民主黨聯合政府為防止金融危機再爆發所採取的措施，柯文說，民眾也有很多疑慮，因為政府可能無法保護99%的一般民眾，大家要藉由抗議活動，讓政府也聽到民眾的心聲，並為人民謀福祉，而不是被遊說團體、有權勢的捐款人和他們在金融城的朋友左右。
15日不滿貪婪金融業的民眾將占領倫敦交易所，拿回對金融體系的主導權，並表達如何讓未來更美好的建議，包括減少社會不公平現象、降低失業率、稅賦公平以及政府菁英不應忽視人民福利與需要。
隨著響應的人數增加，柯文表示，占領倫敦交易所活動會依參與者的意願決定後續的行動與方向，目前沒有設定結束的日期。
主辦單位呼籲大家呼朋引伴一起參與，由於倫敦天氣日漸轉冷並偶而飄雨，也提醒參與者帶防水布、帳篷、睡袋、紙箱、食物、飲水及保暖的衣物到現場。
7000多名支持者在臉書留言，表達對占領倫敦證交所行動的支持，很多人忙著製作標語和海報，要藉這個活動展現人民的力量。
退休者的壞消息/前景
PITY the world’s savers. Economists and other busybodies chide them for not spending more, thereby stimulating the economy. Meanwhile their pension schemes are steadily being made less generous, a process that will require them to save more, not less, if they want to enjoy a comfortable retirement. Britons now retiring on private pensions will receive an income 30% less than those who left work three years ago (see Buttonwood). When savers try to find a home for their money, they face daily headlines about bank bailouts, sovereign-debt crises and the possibility of another recession.
***
***
Buttonwood
A trillion here, $500 billion there
The huge shortfalls in pension plans
Oct 15th 2011 | from the print edition
THE pension hole just keeps getting bigger. The assets owned by pension schemes have generally been falling in price while their liabilities have been relentlessly rising. One of the culprits is quantitative easing (QE), a tactic devised by central banks to revive the economy.
The numbers can boggle the mind. Mercer, a consultancy, reckons the hole in final-salary corporate plans in America was $512 billion at the end of September, the highest figure since the second world war. The average corporate pension plan had a funding ratio (the proportion of liabilities covered by assets) of just 72%, down from 81% at the end of 2010. In Britain the Pension Protection Fund reported this week that the aggregate deficit of the schemes it insures stood at £196 billion ($309 billion) at the end of September; the average funding ratio was 83%.
Those numbers look tiddly beside the public-sector pension deficits. In 2009 Joshua Rauh of the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University and Robert Novy-Marx, then at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, estimated that the deficit of American state and local-government pension plans was $3.1 trillion. Mr Rauh reckons that the deficit is now $4.4 trillion. In other words, a cool $1.3 trillion has been added in two years.
These figures will not be accepted by everyone. Many states still discount their pension liabilities by the assumed rate of return on their assets, often around 8%. But this is a highly dubious assumption. Government bodies still have to pay the pensions, regardless of whether they achieve those returns or not.
Instead, some Warren Buffett-like principles ought to apply. If a promise to pay someone money in the future isn’t a debt, what is it? And if a debt shouldn’t be recorded at cost, how should it be recorded? A company might borrow $50m in the bond markets to build a factory, after all, but it cannot record the debt on its balance-sheet at less than $50m on the ground that it expects to earn a higher return from the factory than its cost of borrowing.
A public-sector employer could replace its pension plan by buying a promise of equivalent value in the markets and handing over the proceeds to its employees. Since pension promises are legally (and sometimes constitutionally) protected in many states, the equivalent promise is a government bond. That is why the government-bond yield is the appropriate measure for discounting public liabilities, as Messrs Rauh and Novy-Marx assert.
The Bank of England recognises this issue. Its employees are guaranteed an inflation-linked pension so it meets that promise by buying inflation-linked bonds. The current cost is 55% of payroll, far more than most employers put aside. Other employers are paying less into their funds and taking a gamble that the equity market will deliver the rest. In effect, they are handing a guarantee of future stockmarket performance to their employees; something that would be very expensive to buy.
Oddly enough, the Bank of England has played its part in escalating the costs of other British pension schemes. The aim of QE is to lower bond yields. This raises the liabilities of pension funds (since it takes more money to deliver the same pension). The Pensions Corporation, an insurer, reckons the first round of QE increased the British pension hole by £74 billion. Regulations require that this hole be closed within ten years, costing companies £7.4 billion a year, money that could have gone into building factories and employing new workers. The National Association of Pension Funds has called for an emergency meeting with the regulator; the hope is that the contribution rules can be eased a bit.
These same issues apply to those on private and defined-contribution pensions. Struggling asset markets mean they build up a smaller pension pot; low bond yields mean the annuity income from that pot is lower. The result, according to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers, a consultancy, is that Britons retiring today will end up with a pension income 30% lower than those retiring three years ago.
Workers approaching retirement should be saving more, not less, as a result of low rates. First, they will need to build up a larger pot to generate their desired income in retirement. Second, filling that pot will require more capital because investment returns will be lower.
It may be that, in aggregate, these side-effects of QE are outweighed by the relief brought to borrowers from lower rates. All the same it is an unfortunate piece of collateral damage, something the authorities have so far failed to address.
2011年10月13日星期四
All's Fair in London
By EMMA CRICHTON-MILLER
![[COVER]](http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/EW-AL625A_COVER_G_20111013213113.jpg)
Tony Kyriacou/Rex Features
Tony Kyriacou/Rex Features A visitor admires Nigel Cooke's 'No Holidays' (2011) at Frieze Art Fair.
Artists, collectors, critics, curators and dealers have descended on London through Sunday to take part in the seventh annual Frieze Art Fair (www.friezeartfair.com), a key marketplace for contemporary art globally, with 173 galleries from 33 countries, showcasing more than 1,000 artists. Frieze's success has inspired an autumn art jamboree throughout the city, stimulating satellite fairs, auction sales and shows in other galleries.
Started in 2003 by Frieze Magazine editors Matthew Slotover and Amanda Sharp to sell contemporary art to a growing cohort of international collectors, fair participants are vetted by a committee of their peers to attract blue-chip galleries, as well as a high-spending, contemporary-art-loving audience. "We provide a focused contemporary art fair—that is our appeal," Ms. Sharp says.
Almost since its inception, Frieze stole contemporary thunder from those old ladies of the art market—Tefaf in Maastricht, strongest in Old Masters and antiques, and Art Basel, which spans both modern and contemporary. The appeal of Frieze, says art consultant Tanya Gertik, is "the energy and the buzz. It's very sociable."
Courtesy of Cristina Grajales Gallery, New York
Sebastian Errazuriz's 'Porcupine Cabinet' (2011) on show at PAD.
Since Frieze first opened, international art fairs, alongside their cousins—the biennials—have proliferated: Art Basel spawned Art Basel Miami Beach, which then generated Design Miami and, in turn, Design Miami Basel, set up to achieve the same market intensification for contemporary design that the mother fair had achieved for art. Older fairs, like Art Chicago and the Grosvenor House Art & Antiques Fair, have ceded some priority to newer fairs, such as Art Hong Kong and Masterpiece London.
But some collectors find the blockbuster model overwhelming, preferring a more intimate environment. "The minute a fair gets too large, the enjoyment goes out of it," Ms. Gertik says. Bernard Hartogs, a collector of art and design, adds: "I don't go to Frieze. It's too big." This is one reason why Frieze Week has also, quietly, become PAD week.
It was in 2007 that DesignArt first opened in Hanover Square, with just 19 galleries. Hoping to benefit from the seasonal delirium, French antique dealer Patrick Perrin and modern- and contemporary-art specialist Stéphane Custot, the founders of the successful Pavillon des Arts et du Design in Paris, launched a complementary fair to Frieze, offering one-off and limited-edition contemporary design mixed in with classic European modern design. A year later, the fair was offered Berkeley Square, a prime location, and the charmingly Continental mix of decorative arts, with modern and contemporary design, began to gel. By 2009, the duo felt confident enough to introduce modern art to the mix, experimenting in London with the formula pioneered in Paris. The renamed Pavilion of Art & Design London would invite galleries who specialized in fine art, decorative art or design that post-dated 1860—made after the advent of industrial mass manufacture, but without the contemporary art that is so well served in Regent's Park.
Running through Sunday, PAD (www.padlondon.net), is small and selective, with only 58 galleries. The genial mix of art, design and fine craft—Cristina Grajales's stand this week offers two striking cabinets by Christophe Côme and Sebastian Errazuriz, while Jousse Entreprise has a classic Jean Royère sofa—promotes a way of living with art as much as the buying of it.
Gérard Faggionato of Faggionato Fine Arts in London, says PAD "is comfortable, and people come back two or three times during the week."
Like Frieze, PAD doesn't issue an overall statement of sales, arguing that since sales often aren't concluded until months after the event, such statistics are misleading. Instead, it points you to the quality of the exhibits. Andrew Duncanson from Modernity has rare pieces by Alvar Aalto; Todd Merrill, an outstanding 3.5-meter sculpture of a dandelion (circa 1960) by Harry Bertoia; and Bernard Jacobson, some magnificent Robert Motherwell canvases. "The material is very good," Julian Treager, a collector of fine art, design and jewelry says. "Last year, I bought a vintage Cartier necklace from the 1970s. The year before, some pieces by Studio Job from Carpenters Workshop Gallery."
For the past five years, these two very different fairs have flourished in a finely balanced symbiosis. Next year, however, things are set to change when Frieze launches Frieze Masters, a second fair that will partly encroach on PAD's territory by exhibiting works of art from antiquity through 2000. Frieze Masters will occupy a marquee specially designed by New York art-space specialist Annabelle Selldorf, on the other side of Regent's Park from the contemporary fair, with its own program of events. Ms. Sharp explains that they are "bringing a contemporary approach to historical art—we will bring this art to new audiences." This initiative has been inspired by her recognition that "the past is present in every decision contemporary artists make. This is an opportunity to explore those connections more imaginatively." Meanwhile, in May, Frieze hopes to recreate its London achievement in New York, with a contemporary fair on Randall's Island Park, overlooking the East River.
PAD, however, remains unintimidated. Full of confidence in their concept, and with a line-up of loyal galleries, PAD too is launching a New York edition, Nov. 11-13. As Frieze and PAD continue in full swing, there is competitive tension in the air.
Mr. Perrin hopes his prime location, in Berkeley Square, will keep his modern dealers away from Frieze Masters. "If you bring the right collectors in front of the right booths, the dealers will trust you," he says, adding that "Frieze had no interest in modern painting. The people from contemporary art have almost no interest in the past."
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)
Can you afford to heat your home? Are you in fuel poverty? Do any of your friends or family members suffer as a result of rising energy costs? Send us your stories using the form below.