【英语财经】奥斯本为何拉中国投资核电站项目？ China should not be the answer to Britain’s nuclear problems

There is, it seems, no limit to the lengths to which George Osborne, the UK chancellor, is prepared to go to please China. The most recent example is the latest chapter in the saga of the proposed Hinkley Point nuclear power plant in south-west England. Mr Osborne, on a visit to Beijing, has offered the Chinese ￡2bn of government guarantees in return for their investment in the much delayed project.

The terms of the agreement have not been published but under normal definitions that means that the Chinese investment capital will be fully protected. The deal is not yet completed and there is a sense of desperation in Whitehall: the government wants to have it signed before President Xi Jinping’s visit to the UK next month.

But before we rush to sign, there should be public disclosure of the full offer to the Chinese on Hinkley Point, and what other deals have been made at the same time. We are told, for example, that the Chinese will also build, own and operate another new nuclear station at Bradwell in Essex, south-east England. Will they, for example, be required to meet all existing UK nuclear safety and labour standards or will the new stations be largely built in China using local labour and assembled in the UK?

Another pressing issue that should be clarified is whether the chancellor has seen and read internal reports from EDF and Areva, the two state-owned French nuclear firms, on what has gone wrong with the construction of the two “EPR” European pressurised reactors (the reactor design that will be used at Hinkley) in France and Finland. Both projects are billions over budget and years behind schedule. Once he has read the reports, he should make sure they are published. If they are not to be made public, we should be told why not.

There is still work to be done on researching whether Hinkley Point, at its current price of ￡24bn, is the only or the cheapest way of meeting the UK’s energy needs and emissions targets in the period after 2023, when it is scheduled to open. Energy prices have fallen sharply since that price was agreed.

Civil servants have given Mr Osborne their advice on these points.Will he agree to publish it, in full? This is a key issue which should be investigated by the National Audit Office and the public accounts committee, whether or not the immediate deal goes ahead. We saw recently in the case of the failed charity Kids Company — in which Downing Street overruled a recommendation by the civil service and ministers to redirect funds to other children’s charities — that civil service advice is not given lightly. When ministers override this advice, they should be required to explain exactly why they are doing so.

The mystery in all this, given Mr Osborne’s apparent confidence in nuclear technology, is why he is asking for Chinese money at all. EDF, it seems, will not itself invest more than half the necessary money in its own project at Hinkley Point, despite the high price and extensive guarantees it has been offered. All the parties seem to want someone else to take the risk.

If Mr Osborne is really happy with the plans for the power plant, why does he not invest directly using the UK’s government’s ability to borrow long-term money at very low rates? This would reduce the costs and bring down the bills facing British consumers over the next 35 years. It is, however, also possible that his confidence about the Hinkley project is just a performance.

Whatever the truth behind the government’s public nuclear policy, its grovelling behaviour towards China on this and other issues is extraordinary. China is the world’s second-largest economy and a great power in every sense. Its leaders are among the world’s most effective negotiators, and should be respected, not patronised. To engage them in a failing project is not the way to build a strategic long-term relationship.

The writer is a visiting professor at King’s College London. He writes an FT.com blog readthroughFinancial Times

There should be public disclosure of the full offer to the Chinese on Hinkley Point power station

英国财政大臣乔治?奥斯本(George Osborne)在向中国示好这件事上似乎是不遗余力的。最近的例子是筹划中的英格兰西南部欣克利角(Hinkley Point)核电站计划出现最新进展。在访问北京期间，奥斯本提出，如果中国投资这个延期许久的项目，英国将为他们的投资提供20亿英镑的政府担保。

该协议的条款尚未公布，但根据常识，这意味着中国投入的资本将享受充分保护。这笔交易尚未完成，但白厅（Whitehall，指英国政府——译者注）似乎已拼了命了：它希望在下个月中国国家主席习近平访英前签完这项协议。

但是，先别急着签字，英国政府应向公众披露我们在欣克利角核电站项目上给中方的完整条件以及同时还达成了哪些其他交易。例如，我们被告知，中国企业还将建设、拥有并运营位于英格兰东南部埃塞克斯郡布拉德韦尔(Bradwell)的另一座新核电站。它们会（比如说）被要求满足英国核能方面所有现行的安全及劳工标准，还是说新的核电站大部分将在中国、使用当地劳动力建造，然后在英国组装？

另一个应澄清的紧迫问题是，奥斯本是否已经看到并读过两家法国国有核能企业——法国电力(EDF)与阿海珐(Areva)——关于法国和芬兰的两座欧洲压水式反应堆（欣克利角核电站也将使用这种反应堆设计）在建设过程中出了什么问题的内部报告。这两个项目都超出预算数十亿，而且完工时间比计划晚了许多年。他一读完这些报告，就应该确保将它们公开。如果政府不打算将这些报告公开，那么它应给出理由。

在研究当前造价为240亿英镑的欣克利角核电站是不是满足英国能源需求及2023年（核电站计划开工的时间）后减排目标的唯一或最经济方式方面，仍有许多工作要做。目前的能源价格比该造价敲定时下跌了不少。

英国政府行政人员就这些问题向奥斯本提出了他们的建议。他会同意将这些建议全部公开吗？这是一个关键问题，英国国家审计署(National Audit Office)与公共账目委员会(Public Accounts Committee)应对此进行调查——无论即将签署的协议是否继续推进。最近，我们从倒闭的慈善机构Kids Company的案例中看出，政府行政人员的建议不是随便瞎提的（Kids Company倒闭前，行政人员和大臣们曾建议唐宁街将计划拨给它的资金改拨给其他儿童慈善机构，但唐宁街没有听从）。当大臣们决定不采纳这一建议时，应要求他们解释为什么。

鉴于奥斯本貌似对核技术很有信心，这一切令人不解之处在于，他到底为何要寻求中国的投资。法国电力似乎不会在它自己的欣克利角核电项目中投入工程所需一半以上的资金，尽管英国出价很高，还提供了完善的担保。各方似乎都想要让别人来承担风险。

如果奥斯本真的很满意该核电站计划，他为何不利用英国政府以极低利率借入长期资金的能力直接进行投资呢？这将削减成本，降低英国用电户未来35年的电费账单。不过，也有可能他对欣克利角项目的信心只是装出来的。

无论英国政府的公共核能政策背后的真相是什么，它在这个问题以及其他议题上对中国卑躬屈膝的表现都令人惊愕。中国是世界第二大经济体，而且在任何意义上都是一个强国。中国领导人是世界上最会谈判的谈判者之一，他们应该受到尊重，而非恩赐。让中国企业参与一个失败中的项目并非建立长期战略关系的恰当方式。

本文作者是伦敦大学国王学院(King’s College London)访问教授。他为FT.com撰写博客

译者/陈隆祥