保衛銀行

????卡梅倫的要求很簡單：在歐元區爆發債務危機之際，英國最大的挑戰就是確保倫敦金融業的盈利能力不受波及。眼下，占領倫敦運動的抗議者晚上睡在金融城的帳篷里，白天去金絲雀碼頭帶頭進行“惡棍游行”，鑒于這種背景，這種觀點并非沒有爭議。對于復雜融資大行其道的歲月，隨后的金融危機，以及其對整個經濟造成的破壞性影響，大多數英國人依然余怒未消。

????然而，卡梅倫的立場卻符合英國政治家長久以來竭盡全力為銀行謀利益的傳統。上世紀60年代，美國開始對華爾街執行嚴苛的監管制度，英國卻繼續實施輕度監管政策，并進一步放松了工作簽證要求，由此迎來了許多美國銀行和其他外國機構。這番努力大獲成功。倫敦現在擁有全球最大的跨境銀行借貸市場、外匯市場和場外（OTC）衍生品市場。金融城管理的每3美元中，就有1美元源自海外。2010年，世界經濟論壇（World Economic Forum）宣稱倫敦是全球首屈一指的金融中心。

????全球金融危機及其對借貸市場帶來的余波注定會削弱任何一個以金融作為主要出口項目的民主國家的經濟實力。針對金融城的監管業已收緊——銀行現在不得不持有更多的資本，最富裕的金融家（無論他是英國人，還是外國人）需要繳納的稅收也遠遠高于過去的水平。然而，銀行家們目前最擔心的并不是倫敦監管當局，而是布魯塞爾。肩負監管之責的英國金融服務管理局（FSA）表示，該機構大約70%的政策都受到歐盟相關方案的影響（而歐盟在進行決策時，并不會以維系倫敦的金融中心地位為準繩）。

????這個問題凸顯了歐盟當前面臨的兩難處境：如何在迥然不同的政體間實現主權共享這一理念。為了讓歐盟存活下去，德國和法國試圖施加嚴厲的緊縮措施，其中許多措施直指銀行。《歐洲市場基礎作業監理改革提案》（European Market Infrastructure Regulation）旨在壓縮倫敦衍生品市場的規模。最讓倫敦苦惱的主意莫過于金融交易稅，它的開征將顯著提升所有銀行開展業務的成本。

????歐盟委員會稱，這一稅收每年將籌集750億美元的資金。但英國財政大臣喬治?奧斯本在一次言辭激烈的演講中指出，由于歐洲超過三分之一的批發銀行市場都是在倫敦之外運作，這筆賬單80%的費用最終將由英國來承擔。

????更廣泛地說，英國強烈地感受到，歐盟的金融監管是不對稱的：“英國是在監管銀行，而歐盟是在懲罰銀行，”金融創新研究中心（Centre for the Study of Financial Innovation）主任安德魯?希爾頓博士如是說。

Defending the banks

????Cameron's claim is simple: That Britain's biggest challenge when it comes to the eurozone crisis is making sure that the profitability of London's financial sector remains intact. Yet given the backdrop -- Occupy London protestors sleeping in the City in tents and leading "villain tours" through Canary Wharf -- the point isn't uncontroversial. Most British are still angry at the reckless years of high finance, the ensuing financial crisis, and its ravaging effects across the economy.

????Yet Cameron's stand fits within a long history of British politicians bending over backward for banks. In the 1960s, after the U.S. enforced harsh regulation on Wall Street, the U.K. welcomed American banks and other foreign firms by keeping regulation light and work permit requirements relaxed. The effort was a striking success. London now has the largest global cross-border bank lending market, foreign exchange market, and over-the-counter derivatives market. One out of three dollars managed in the city is foreign. In 2010, the World Economic Forum declared London to be the world's leading financial center.

????The global financial crisis and its reverberations in lending markets were bound to weaken any democracy with finance as its strongest export. Regulations in the City have tightened—banks now have to hold more capital, and the richest financiers, whether English or foreign, have to pay a lot more in taxes. The primary present concern of the banks, however, is Brussels, not London. The FSA, Britain's financial regulatory authority, says that around 70% of its policy-making efforts are driven by European initiatives that are not geared toward preserving London as a financial center.

????The problem underscores the entire dilemma with the European Union: the idea of sharing sovereignty among very different regimes. For the European Union to survive, Germany and France want to impose tough austerity measures, in many cases targeting banks. The EMIR--the European Market Infrastructure Regulation--aims to shrink London's derivatives market. The most disturbing idea to London is a financial transaction tax, which will dramatically increase the cost of doing business for every bank.

????The European Commission says such a tax would raise $75 billion per year. But since more than a third of Europe's wholesale finance market operates out of London, England would end up footing 80% of the bill, according to a damning speech by UK Chancellor George Osborne.

????More broadly, there is a strong sense in the UK that European financial regulation is disproportionate: "England regulates its banks. Europe punishes theirs," says Dr. Andrew Hilton, director of the Centre for the Study of Financial Innovation.