崩塌的遺產：為何英國基礎設施在 2026 年陷入失靈

 

崩塌的遺產：為何英國基礎設施在 2026 年陷入失靈

2026 年初，一場橫跨肯特郡與薩塞克斯郡的「結凍與解凍」事件，導致數千名英國公民失去自來水供應。在一個曾引領工業革命的國家，民眾竟然被迫排隊領取瓶裝水來煮飯和洗漱。這場危機深刻提醒著我們：現代世界建立在基礎設施之上，而英國正處於「透支時間」的狀態。

一、 腐朽中的遺產

現代英國生活的舒適感是由前幾代人創造的。維多利亞時代留下了我們視為理所當然的水庫、鐵路和下水道系統。然而，這份遺產並非永恆。根據國家審計署的數據，依目前的投資速度，更換英國老舊的供水系統需要 700 年。我們正依賴著那些根本無法應對 21 世紀氣候變遷的維多利亞時代老舊水管。

二、 大停滯時代

忽視建設的數據令人震驚：

• 水利： 自 1992 年以來，英國未曾興建過任何新水庫。

• 能源： 自 1995 年以來，未曾投產新的核電廠，導致工業能源成本創下歷史新高。

• 交通： 自 2003 年以來未興建過新的高速公路，而倫敦地鐵則面臨長期過熱的風險。

三、 從第一世界滑向第三世界？

當新加坡等國家透過強力的國家主導建設從「第三世界跨入第一世界」時，英國似乎正朝著相反的方向滑坡。問題不在於缺乏能力，而在於人為設置的重重法規限制以及國家雄心的喪失。

四、 維多利亞時代的教訓

1858 年，倫敦面臨「大惡臭」。在短短六年內，維多利亞時代的人就建造了 1,300 英里的新下水道。今天，儘管我們擁有更先進的技術，卻連維持現狀都顯得吃力。要解決這一問題，英國必須削減抑制發展的官僚主義，重新找回為後代子孫建設的動力。

---

The Crumbling Inheritance: Why Britain’s Infrastructure is Failing in 2026

 

The Crumbling Inheritance: Why Britain’s Infrastructure is Failing in 2026

In early 2026, a "freeze and thaw" event across Kent and Sussex left thousands of British citizens without running water. In a nation that once pioneered the industrial world, people were forced to queue for bottled water just to cook and wash. This crisis serves as a stark reminder that the modern world rests on infrastructure—and Britain is currently living on borrowed time.

1. A Legacy in Decay

The comfort of modern British life was built by previous generations. The Victorian era gave us the reservoirs, railways, and sewage systems we take for granted. However, this inheritance is not eternal. According to the National Audit Office, at current investment rates, it would take 700 years to replace the UK’s ageing water system. We are relying on Victorian pipes that simply cannot handle 21st-century climate shifts.

2. The Great Stagnation

The statistics of neglect are staggering:

• Water: No new reservoir has been built in the UK since 1992.

• Energy: No new nuclear power station has been commissioned since 1995, leading to record-high industrial energy costs.

• Transport: No new motorway has been built since 2003, while the London Underground risks chronic overheating.

3. From First World to Third?

While nations like Singapore transitioned from the "third world to the first" through forceful state-led construction, Britain appears to be slipping in the opposite direction. The issue is not a lack of capability, but a self-imposed web of regulations and a loss of national ambition.

4. The Victorian Lesson

In 1858, London faced the "Great Stink." Within just six years, the Victorians built 1,300 miles of new sewers. Today, despite having far more advanced technology, we struggle to maintain what they built. To fix this, Britain must slash the bureaucracy that stifles development and rediscover the drive to build for future generations.

---

建設者與收稅者：新加坡與英國住房政策的哲學之爭

 

建設者與收稅者：新加坡與英國住房政策的哲學之爭

在全球房地產市場中，新加坡與英國代表了政府干預的兩個極端。這兩個國家的案例展示了政府哲學如何決定中產階級的穩定性。新加坡利用其權力將公民與土地緊密結合；而英國的方法則日益將住房變成一種「榨取」財富的工具，而非遮風避雨的居所。

一、 新加坡：作為「錨點」的政府

在新加坡，政府秉持著「有產民主制」是社會穩定基石的哲學。透過建屋發展局 (HDB)，政府在公民的生活中扮演著「長久陪伴」的角色。

• 國家執行力： 政府擁有 90% 的土地並直接進行建設。他們不只是「規劃」，而是「執行」。

• 金融鎖定： 透過中央公積金 (CPF)，國家強制儲蓄並僅限用於住房，確保公民在經濟上與國家的成長捆綁在一起。

• 社會穩定： 擁有 90% 的住房自有率，政府的成功與公民的資產直接掛鉤。政府輸不起，因為政府本身就是開發商。

二、 英國：作為「榨取者」的政府

相比之下，英國的住房政策已轉向一種優先考慮稅收與監管，而非實際建設的模型。英國政府更像是一個透過稅務和複雜程序來「收路費」的守門人。

• 官僚榨取： 英國政府不直接蓋房，而是建立了一個由「規劃許可」和「第 106 條協議」組成的收費站。這將風險推給了開發商，而國家則從中收取費用，並從反對開發的選民（NIMBY）手中賺取政治資本。

• 資金抽離： 對高薪畢業生徵收高額稅率，且缺乏專門的購房儲蓄機制，使年輕人幾乎不可能湊齊首期。這形成了一個「租金陷阱」，資金從勞動階級流向地主階級與國庫。

• 依賴外資： 英國市場依賴從國際投資者（包括新加坡人）手中「收割」資金來補貼國內的社會住房，導致本地買家在自己的城市中被排擠。

三、 結果：穩定與波動的對決

新加坡的「國家主義」體現在強力建設——政府確保房屋的存在。英國的「國家主義」則體現在重重阻礙——政府確保建築過程極其昂貴，導致只有少數人能生存。如果英國繼續優先考慮短期稅收與監管複雜性，而非長期的建設目標，它將面臨優秀青年人才外流的風險。

---

The Builder vs. The Gatekeeper: Two Philosophies of Housing

 

The Builder vs. The Gatekeeper: Two Philosophies of Housing

The contrast between Singapore and the UK is not merely one of geography, but of intent. Is the government a long-term partner in nation-building, or a short-term collector of rents and taxes?

1. Singapore: The Government as an "Anchor"

In Singapore, the state operates with the philosophy that a "property-owning democracy" is the foundation of social stability. Through the Housing and Development Board (HDB), the government is "here to stay" in the life of the citizen.

• State Execution: The government owns 90% of the land and builds directly. They don't just plan; they execute.

• Financial Locking: By using the Central Provident Fund (CPF), the state forces savings that can only be used for housing, ensuring that citizens are financially committed to the nation’s growth.

• Social Stability: With 90% homeownership, the government’s success is directly tied to the citizen’s equity. They cannot afford for the system to fail because the state is the developer.

2. The United Kingdom: The Government as an "Extractor"

In contrast, Britain’s housing policy has shifted toward a model that prioritizes revenue and regulation over actual construction. Critics argue the UK government acts as a "gatekeeper" that reaps money through taxation and complexity.

• Bureaucratic Extraction: Instead of building, the UK government creates a "toll booth" of planning permissions and Section 106 requirements. This forces risk onto developers while the state collects fees and political capital from NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) voters.

• Capital Siphon: High tax rates on high-earning graduates and the lack of a dedicated housing savings vehicle make it nearly impossible for the young to save. This creates a "rent-trap" where capital is siphoned from the working class to the land-owning class and the treasury.

• Foreign Liquidity Dependence: The UK market relies on "reaping" money from international investors (including Singaporeans) to fund domestic social housing, leaving local buyers priced out of their own cities.

3. The Result: Stability vs. Volatility

Singapore’s "statism" results in forcefulness—a government that ensures homes exist. The UK’s "statism" results in obstructiveness—a government that ensures the process of building is so expensive that only a few can survive. If the UK continues to prioritize short-term tax revenue and regulatory complexity over the long-term goal of building, it risks a "brain drain" of its most talented youth.

---

2026 製造業轉型點：在政策戰略與成本壓力間取得平衡

 

2026 製造業轉型點：在政策戰略與成本壓力間取得平衡

在 2026 年快速變遷的環境中，製造業領導者發現，「內部效率」已不足以保證成功。根據 Make UK 與 PwC 的最新高階主管調查，產業重心正轉向宏觀層面的協調——特別是透過正式的工業戰略 (Industrial Strategy) 來克服日益增加的系統性限制。

一、 政策限制：工業戰略的必要性

2026 年增長的最大瓶頸被認為是缺乏清晰且穩定的工業戰略。沒有政府提供的路線圖，企業難以投入長期的資本投資。

• 解決方案： 提供具針對性的部門計劃，為投資「工業 4.0」和綠色技術提供所需的穩定性。

• 影響： 戰略透明度能讓私人投資與公共基礎設施之間實現更好的同步。

二、 財務限制：成本的臨界點

製造商正正面臨勞動力與能源成本雙重增長的壓力，這已達到關鍵水平。

• 勞動力成本： 近九成製造商預計僱傭成本將上升，這主要受立法變更和國民保險調整的推動。

• 能源波動： 高昂的能源價格仍是持續的威脅，常迫使公司將研發資金轉向支付基礎公用事業費用。

三、 競爭力限制：製造中心的吸引力

關於英國作為首選製造基地的地位，預警信號正不斷增加。當成本超過一定閾值時，「投資外逃」將成為現實風險。

• 風險因素： 項目推遲或取消，以及生產線向更具成本競爭力的海外地區遷移。

• 緩解措施： 政府對能源密集型產業的支持以及僱傭法的穩定，被視為必要的「安全閥」。

四、 創新機遇：數位化與新市場

儘管壓力巨大，2026 年的「增長驅動力」依然明確。製造商正專注於：

• 數位轉型： 利用人工智慧 (AI) 和物聯網 (IoT)，透過自動化來抵銷高昂的人力成本。

• 市場擴張： 轉向新的地理區域，並開發「綠色」產品線以滿足全球需求的轉變。

核心洞察： 儘管該產業保持謹慎樂觀，但從「動能」轉化為「永續增長」的關鍵，完全取決於政策能否快速跟上生產現場的現實。

---

The 2026 Manufacturing Pivot: Balancing Policy Strategy and Cost Pressures

 

The 2026 Manufacturing Pivot: Balancing Policy Strategy and Cost Pressures

Modern manufacturing is currently caught between two powerful forces: the optimistic pull of digital innovation and the heavy anchor of rising operational costs. To navigate this, businesses are moving away from isolated problem-solving toward a more integrated, strategic approach.

1. The Policy Constraint: The Need for an Industrial Strategy

The single greatest bottleneck for growth in 2026 is identified as the lack of a clear, stable Industrial Strategy. Without a roadmap from the government, businesses struggle to commit to long-term capital investments.

• The Solution: Targeted sector plans that provide the stability needed to invest in "Industry 4.0" and green technologies.

• The Impact: Strategic clarity allows for better synchronization between private investment and public infrastructure.

2. The Financial Constraint: The Tipping Point of Costs

Manufacturers are facing a "dual-pressure" system where both Employment and Energy costs are reaching critical levels.

• Labor Costs: Nearly 90% of manufacturers expect employment costs to rise, driven by legislative changes and National Insurance adjustments.

• Energy Volatility: High energy prices remain a persistent threat, often forcing companies to divert funds away from R&D and into basic utility payments.

3. The Competitiveness Constraint: Attractiveness as a Hub

There are growing warning signals regarding the UK’s status as a premier manufacturing destination. When costs exceed a certain threshold, "Investment Flight" becomes a real risk.

• Risk Factors: Delayed or cancelled projects and the relocation of production lines to more cost-competitive overseas regions.

• Mitigation: Government support for energy-intensive sectors and stability in employment law are seen as essential "safety valves."

4. The Innovation Opportunity: Digital and New Markets

Despite the pressures, the "Growth Drivers" for 2026 are clear. Manufacturers are focusing on:

• Digital Transformation: Using AI and IoT to offset high labor costs through automation.

• Market Expansion: Pivoting to new geographical regions and developing "green" product lines to meet shifting global demand.

Key Insight: While the sector remains cautiously optimistic, the transition from "momentum" to "sustainable growth" depends entirely on how quickly policy can catch up with the reality of the shop floor.

---

增長的悖論：應對 2026 年經濟與勞動力限制

 

增長的悖論：應對 2026 年經濟與勞動力限制

邁入 2026 年，製造業展現出一個悖論：雖然目前的產出保持正成長，但一系列「宏觀限制」正開始壓抑長期發展。根據 2025 年末《製造業展望》報告，我們可以識別出企業無論規模大小都將面臨的具體障礙，以及潛在的巨大投資機會。

一、 需求與出口限制

儘管 2025 年底訂單有所增長，但預計 2026 年初將出現顯著的「出口下滑」。這對於依賴國際市場的製造商來說，構成了一種波動性限制。

• 風險： 在全球需求放緩之際，過度依賴國內需求。

• 機會： 加強本土供應鏈，以抵銷預期的出口萎縮。

二、 勞動力與招聘限制

目前最緊迫的「軟性限制」可能是招聘意願的劇烈下降。受未來成本和預算變動的不確定性影響，製造商對於擴大員工規模持遲疑態度。

• 勞動力停滯： 缺乏新人才限制了企業在訂單充足時擴大生產規模的能力。

• 信心下滑： 企業信心已連續兩個季度疲軟，導致在招聘上採取防禦性姿態。

三、 投資強度限制

數據顯示，目前的投資強度僅佔 GDP 的 17%。若要保持競爭力，研究指出必須提升至 22% 以達到 OECD 國家的水平。

• 生產力差距： 若未能跟上全球投資水平，在創新與技術方面的長期競爭力將面臨風險。

• 6,700 億英鎊的槓桿： 每年僅需增加 0.5% 的投資，即可在未來十年為該產業釋放數千億資金，支持生產力與高科技製造。

四、 展望：導航疲軟的 2026 年

隨著 2025 年產出增長預期僅為 0.5%，且 2026 年可能出現收縮，主要的限制因素在於不確定性。製造商必須從被動生存轉向主動投資於能提升生產力的技術，以填補增長缺口。

---