Risks and challenges of the EU expansion
周大勇 (Zhou,Dayong)

I. Introduction
For several years now the European Union is discussing a possible enlargement, because several European countries have applied for membership in the EU. These are especially the former socialist countries in Eastern Europe, that have clearly turned towards the west since the collapse of the iron curtain. These countries are Bulgaria, the Baltic countries Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic, the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Hungary.

In addition Turkey, Cyprus and Malta are trying for quite some time already to join the EU. These application are not to be accepted without any further deliberation because they do bring along some risks and the consequences are hard to distinguish therefore these countries are not very expected joining the European Union in the near future and will therefore not be included in the following evaluation.
II. Risks and challenges
If we wants to evaluate the risks and challenges of an upcoming enlargement of the EU, we should first take into account experiences gained during previous expansion which were to some extent comparable. Here the southern expansion from 1986 should be mentioned where two economically pathetic countries sought admission to the then European Community. The admission procedure of these two candidates, being Spain and Portugal, were lengthy and considered very problem bearing. Especially the amount of produce that would add to the already existing agricultural over-production of the Community was seen to be a problem since it would increase the load on the European budget.

But seen from a global economical perspective the joining of Spain and Portugal was overall positive for the EC and the two countries, although Spain struggled with a further rise of unemployment and disparities within the Community were further amplified.

The disparities within the Union will most certainly increase when it comes to an eastern expansion, but the agricultural problem will not be an issue, because the candidates have not got their focus on agriculture, already because of their communist heritage which focused on industry rather than on agriculture or the tertiary sector.

In case of the approaching expansion towards Eastern Europe the Union will have to resolve several problems, the most severe being without any doubt the financial one that will go along with the extension, estimated to be ?5 - ?6 billion annually, just for the technologically underdeveloped agriculture in the new member states.

The financial problem will also lead to a temporary discontent among the population of the existing members, since the financial load on the countries will cause budget cuts because the new members will undoubtedly belong to the payees rather than the payers. Especially the Mediterranean members, for instance Italy, Spain etc. fear cuts in their subsidies particularly the agricultural ones, and agriculture is already making up the biggest part of the EU′s budget.

Of course it is also to be questioned whether with the joining of economically weak countries the economies of the "richer" members are not weakened.

What should be taken into consideration as well is the impact the joining will have on the population of the candidates, especially considering the rights they will gain when they are citizens of the European community. They do then have the right to settle and work anywhere within the community, this could lead to a large amount of people pouring into the old member countries trying to seek work there and make their living. And since most of the European countries are already struggling with high unemployment the high rates could be pushed up further and the discontent among the population could worsen, especially against the background of Neo-Nazis in Germany and other countries such as Britain or Italy. Off course this would only be a temporary problem, which would solve itself over time as the new members develop economically, but still this could prove to be a major issue.

Of course their comes also a minor problem along with the expansion, this problem being even more languages than the twelve, already being used, in which EU communications would have to be carried out adding to the already huge administrative body of the European Union and also causing further costs of the EU.
But because the expansion represents a political necessity one should also take into account the positive aspects caused by such a historic event. With the expansion the continent would take a huge step towards the ethnic integration within Europe, different cultures would be facing each other and could also profit from each other. Also the global competitiveness of the EU against the USA and Asia would improve and another step towards global peace would be undertaken.
III. Changes in administration
It is obvious that an expansion potentially including ten countries would not be feasible without fundamental institutional reforms.

For instance with the existing structure of the Union which allocates most of the power to the European Council, where each member state has one vote, it would be imaginable that smaller members would have a majority over the larger members. Except for Poland, which is by population comparable to Spain and would consequently be a large member, all other candidates are relatively small in size an population.

Another point is that with more than twenty members the decision finding and making process needs to be completely reconsidered, so it represents the actual size of the member countries in terms of population rather than giving each member a veto and especially one single vote. The existing voting and weighting system is also already making the decision finding process a painfully and lengthy one, another ten different opinions added to this would make it virtually impossible to come to an agreement that at least partially satisfies all members and is therefore being supported and not vetoed against.

A changed "legislature" would also keep the democratic thought that the entire EU is based on alive and not vanish it like the existing system.

What should also be pointed out is the fact that an increase in members could lead to new coalitions within the Union and also increase competition among the individual countries. There are even critics that fear that an eastern expansion could lead to a shift in power towards the reunified Germany, since the potential new members are already heavily bound and leaning towards Germany.

What should also be considered is a change in European agricultural policy, which should actually be reformed already. The system of milk quotas, subsidies etc. which subsidises an over-production in many areas, just not to infuriate the farmers, because smaller farms would not be able to survive without the subsidies and the entire face of the European primary sector would change is completely outdated. This system could definitely no longer be kept up with even more farmers to support.
IV. Successful without absorbing the new members?
It is obvious that this question needs to be answered with a clear no. The existing members of the EU are already being absorbed by it and they have all chosen this faith. The goals of the European Union do state the loss of sovereignty in the areas of economic and currency politics, the latter one already realized, also in the political areas of social politics, education, research, consumer protection, health and also environmental issues. Now one could argue how many of these goals need to be realized in order for the EU to be successful, from the British point of view for example the cooperation in economic issues and the creation of the single market have already been enough, considering their opinion towards the Maastricht treaty.

If one would see it from the British point of view the EU could be successful without absorbing the new members, but since most other countries would like to see the above mentioned goals implied and would like to realize the dream of de Gaulle, Adenauer and others of "the United States of Europe", the new members would surrender a huge part of their sovereignty and consequently would be absorbed by the EU, especially considering that they will join in a couple of years at the earliest when European integration will hopefully have advanced beyond the point it is today.
Another point one could consider is what would happen if the European integration would further advance up to the point of the United States of Europe without any new countries joining. This would create another superpower alongside the USA and the then non-members would live in the shadow of the EU or whatever its name would be by that time and also be absorbed by the enormous power, in any terms, of their big neighbour just like the Caribbean, Canada and Mexico, even the entire Americas are by the USA. So the conclusion drawn by this could be that the central and eastern European countries would be better off in any case if they joined the EU even if they had to surrender much of their sovereignty.
Sources:

(1) http://www.europa.eu.int/ (March 17th, 2001)
(2) http://idw.tu-clausthal.de/public/zeige_pm.html?pmid=26445 (April 5th, 2001)
(3) Informationen zur politischen Bildung: Europäische Union (BpB, 1995)
(4) Microsoft Encarta 98
(5) Mittel- und Osteuropa auf dem Weg in die Europäische Union (Werner Weidenfeld, Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, 1996)
(6) http://www.e-politik.de/beitrag.cfm?Beitrag_ID=559 (April 1st, 2001)

辽宁省本溪市人民政府


本溪市国有债权监督管理办法

（2002年9月5日　本溪市人民政府令第91号公布）


第一章 总则

第一条 为加强国有债权监督管理，盘活存量资金，减少国有债权损失，促进地区经济发展，根据国家和省有关规定，结合我市实际，制定本办法。

第二条 本办法适用于我市国家机关、事业单位、国有独资企业在各类经济活动中发生的债权和各级政府在国有控股、参股企业中按股权比例应享有的部分债权的管理。

第三条 市财政局是全市国有债权管理的行政主管部门。

各级财政部门负责本级财政预算范围内的国有债权管理工作，其所属的国有债权管理机构负责日常管理工作。

公安、监察、经贸、税务、工商、金融等部门应依照各自职责，配合做好国有债权监督管理工作。

第四条 各级政府应当根据国有债权追索工作需要，保证追索工作必需经费；对在国有债权追索工作中做出贡献的单位和个人，应当给予奖励。

国有债权追索工作所需经费及奖励费用，应从债权回收资金和物资变现收入中列支。具体办法和标准由市财政部门制定。

第五条 国有债权的监督管理坚持分类监管、定期预警、跟踪追索的原则。

第二章 国有债权财务报告和预警

第六条 实行国有债权的年度报告制度。

各单位应按照财政部门的要求，在编制年度财务决算报告的同时，编制国有债权财务报告（其中对2年以上的国有债权要按债务人填写明细表）和有关国有债权情况的文字说明，对各项国有债权逐一分析、核对、分类统计，报本级财政部门。

第七条 实行国有债权预警制度。

财政部门应对各单位的国有债权年度财务报告进行汇总分析，并按照下列规定采取预警措施：

（一）对2年以内国有债权下达预警追索通知；

（二）对未申报核销、认证，可能超过诉讼时效的国有债权和已经超过2年仍未回收的国有债权，下达预警诉讼通知；

（三）对3年以上不良国有债权，下达预警债权移交通知，要求各单位限期申报核销并将国有债权移交国有债权监督管理机构。

第三章 国有债权接管

第八条 国有债权接管实行“账销债留”原则。

经各级财政部门批准核销的国有债权，由同级国有债权监督管理机构接管。

第九条 各单位应按照国有债权监督管理机构的要求提供债权资料。对未按要求提供债权资料的，国有债权监督管理机构不予审核，各级财政部门不予批准核销。

第十条 对经批准核销的国有债权，各单位应在规定的时限内进行账务处理，保证批件齐全、账账相符、账表相符。

第十一条 国有债权监督管理机构接管国有债权时，应与原国有债权单位办理交接手续。

第四章 国有债权追索

第十二条 国有债权追索应坚持以回收货币资金为主、物资抵顶为辅、降低追索成本的原则。

第十三条 原国有债权单位应配合国有债权监督管理机构进行追索。

第十四条 国有债权管理机构接管国有债权后，要组织专人，采取下列方式予以追索：

（一）与债务单位或个人（以下简称债务人）签订还款协议，并按协议约定催办；

（二）经与债务人协商，可采取债权转股权或债权转投资，并依据《中华人民共和国公司法》等法律、法规的有关规定，履行相关手续；

（三）可采取债权转让方式组织追索，债权转让时必须依法签订协议，办理公证；

（四）采取委托方式；

（五）提起法律诉讼。

第十五条 债务人以物抵债方式偿还债务的，必须经国有债权监督管理机构同意，并依法办理相关的产权转让等手续。

第十六条 接管的国有债权有下列情形之一的，国有债权监督管理机构可不予追索：

（一）因不可抗力造成国有债权灭失的；

（二）债务单位依法破产的；

（三）债务自然人死亡的；

（四）因其它原因经确认无法追索的。

第五章 国有债权回收物资的管理

第十七条 各级财政部门应当加强回收物资的管理，制定国有债权回收物资的接收、保管、处理工作制度。

第十八条 国有债权抵债物资处理可采取调拨、抵顶债务、政府捐赠、委托拍卖、竞价出售、议价处理等方式进行。

抵顶债务、政府捐赠按抵顶债权原值计算；委托拍卖、竞价出售、议价处理以评估价值确定底价。

第六章 国有债权财务管理

第十九条 国有债权监督管理机构应制定和完善国有债权财务管理制度。

第二十条 国有债权追索收入扣除按规定提取的追索费用及奖励费用后，全部上缴财政，专户存储。

第二十一条 国有债权追索回收的资金、物资、股权归政府所有，全部纳入地方财政预算外资金管理。

任何单位和个人均不得侵占、挪用债权追索回收物资和资金。

第七章 法律责任

第二十二条 国有债权单位违反本办法，有下列行为之一的，由财政部门责令改正，并处以10000元以上30000元以下罚款：

（一）国有债权原始资料和法律手续缺失，造成债权无法追索的；

（二）收到预警通知书后，不追索、不起诉、不申报移交，造成国有债权损失的；

（三）阻挠、拒绝提供国有债权相关凭证、资料的。

第二十三条 违反本办法，有下列情形之一的，由财政部门责令上缴，并处以10000元以上30000元以下罚款：

（一）国有债权移交后，未经国有债权监督管理机构委托，原债权单位擅自清理回收的物资和资金，隐瞒不报、侵占、挪用的；

（二）受委托单位清理回收的物资、资金，隐瞒不报、侵占、挪用的；

（三）财政部门审批核销国有债权事项期间，回收的物资和资金，隐瞒不报的；

（四）申报核销虚假国有债权的。

第二十四条 在追索过程中发现属于原债权单位有关人员为谋取个人利益形成的债权，国有债权管理机构要向有关司法机关、监察部门移送案件，除依法依纪予以处理外，并向当事人追索债务。

国有债权管理机构追索国有债权过程中，对发现涉嫌违法犯罪的，公安机关应当配备专职人员，依法予以查处。

第二十五条 违反本办法，涉及其他法律、法规的，由相关主管部门按照有关法律、法规处理；构成犯罪的，依法追究刑事责任。

第二十六条 当事人对行政处罚决定不服的，可依法申请行政复议或提起行政诉讼。

第二十七条 国有债权监督管理工作人员玩忽职守、滥用职权、徇私舞弊的，由所在单位或上级主管部门给予行政处分，构成犯罪的，依法追究刑事责任。

第八章 附则

第二十八条 本办法自发布之日起施行。