国家烟草专卖局


国家烟草专卖局文件
国烟科[2003]387号

国家烟草专卖局关于加强对转基因烟草监控的通知


各省、自治区、直辖市及大连、深圳市烟草专卖局（公司），各省级工业公司，郑州烟草研究院，青州烟草研究所：
　　为确保烟叶及其制品中不含有转基因成分，维护我国出口烟叶及其制品的质量和信誉，在继续严格执行《烟草基因工程研究及其应用管理办法》（国烟法[1998]168号）的基础上，国家烟草专卖局（中国烟草总公司）（以下简称“国家局（总公司）”）决定进一步加强对转基因烟草的监控。现将有关要求明确如下：
　　一、各省级烟草专卖局（公司）和工业公司要高度重视预防转基因烟叶释放工作。要把杜绝烟叶中混有转基因烟叶当做重合同、守信用，维护中国烟草质量信誉的大事来抓，切实加强对该项工作的领导和督查；要组织力量，制定行之有效的具体措施，狠抓落实。
　　二、各省级烟叶管理部门要制定具体措施，加大对良种繁育基地种子的繁育、加工和供应的监管力度，加强对烟草种子供应和农民用种情况的监督管理。种子经营单位必须确保种子质量；各有关分、县公司要实行烟草种子发放、使用情况的户籍化管理，建立严格的种子发放、使用检查制度和详细的种子发放、使用档案。有关工作必须责任到人，落实到户。
　　三、坚决杜绝劣杂品种、私自繁育品种、未经审定品种、不明来源品种或可能的转基因品种的种植。省级烟草品种审评委员会要对烟草种子严格把关；转基因品种烟草的研究要严格按照国家和行业的有关管理规定进行。凡未经国家局（总公司）批准，严禁转基因品种烟草在田间试验、示范和释放。否则，国家局（总公司）将严肃追究有关单位主要负责人的责任。
　　四、各级烟叶生产经营单位要建立责任追究制度，实行责任人负责制，确保使用有生产经营认证证书的良种繁育基地或种子公司的烟草优良种子。因种植自留种、劣杂品种、未经审定品种或来历不明种子而出现转基因问题的，烟草种子经营单位、有关烟草公司都要承担相应的经济责任，国家局（总公司）将严肃追究其主要负责人的责任。
　　五、各烟叶产区要根据当地的实际情况制定行之有效的具体措施，不断完善工作制度、生产技术规程和监控方法，严格管理，不留死角，并加强与中烟进出口集团各有关成员企业的衔接和沟通。要从烟叶生产、收购、调运到打叶复烤、供货建立起一整套科学、严格的规章制度，确保国内使用和出口的烟叶及相关产品中没有转基因成分，特别要严防出口烟叶及相关产品（包括烟梗、碎烟片以及委托外方加工再造烟叶的烟梗、烟沫等原料）和生产出口卷烟用的烟叶及相关产品有转基因成分。
　　六、各级烟叶公司要采取有效措施，严禁在烟叶种植过程中使用可诱发烟叶转基因检测结果呈假阳性的农药、化肥等相关产品。各卷烟生产企业在卷烟生产过程中严禁使用可诱发烟叶转基因检测结果呈假阳性的产品或技术。
　　七、各打叶复烤加工企业要按照防止烟草转基因释放的总体要求，制定严格、周密的打叶复烤烟叶加工规程，包括对加工的烟叶登记造册，详细记录烟叶的产地、等级、质量等情况，按规定留样备查，及时对相关的生产设备进行严格清洗等。严禁打叶复烤加工企业加工来历不明且未进行转基因成分检测的烟叶。
　　八、国家局（总公司）责成中国烟草进出口烟叶检测站不定期地对烟草种子、鲜（干）烟叶、片烟和卷烟进行转基因成分的抽查，特别要对部分重点烟叶产区进行监督抽检，各有关单位应积极配合有关工作。
　　九、自本《通知》印发之日起，出口烟叶及相关产品实行送检制。各货源供应单位要按中国烟草进出口集团公司的要求送中国烟草进出口烟叶检测站进行转基因成分检测，经该站检测确认没有转基因成分并出具检验证明后方可交货（有关的检测费用由供货方支付）；中烟进出口集团各有关成员单位在接收出口烟叶及相关产品前，须查验供货方提交的由中国烟草进出口烟叶检测站出具的转基因成分检验合格证明。若供货方不能出具此证明，则任何单位不得接收。
　　十、出口卷烟的目标市场系转基因敏感地区的，对用于生产出口卷烟的各种原料（包括烟叶、烟梗、烟沫、膨胀烟丝、再造烟叶等），要进行转基因成分检验，以确认所用原料没有转基因成分（检测费用由卷烟生产企业支付）。出口卷烟生产企业必须建立详细的原料使用档案，加强对含有转基因成分原料的预防管理，并在出口卷烟交货前送中国烟草进出口烟叶检测站进行卷烟中转基因成分检测（检测费用由卷烟生产企业支付），确认没有转基因成分后，由中国烟草进出口烟叶检测站出具检验合格证明。中国烟草进出口集团公司所属各经营卷烟进出口业务的公司，在接收出口卷烟前，须查验供货方提交的由中国烟草进出口烟叶检测站出具的转基因成分检验合格证明。若供货方不能出具此证明，则任何单位不得接收。
　　十一、凡发现出口烟叶及相关产品或出口卷烟中有转基因成分，有关单位须立即报国家局（总公司），同时供货方要无条件接受退货，由此造成的一切经济损失全部由供货方承担。
　　十二、再造烟叶与膨胀烟丝生产企业可参照对打叶复烤加工企业的有关要求制定严格的加工规程，建立完善的加工过程档案，确保产品没有转基因成分。
　　各相关单位可根据本《通知》精神，结合实际情况制定具体措施，以保证我国烟草贸易的顺利进行。

二00三年七月八日
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)