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)
实验室认证管理办法
国家计量局 铁道部
实验室认证管理办法
1987年7月30日，国家计量局、铁道部
第1条 根据中华人民共和国计量法的规定，部决定实行实验室认证（即计量认证）制度。实验室认证的目的是为了确认该实验室是否具备承担某项测试任务的能力，以确保测试立场的公正性、测试方法的科学性、测试结果的准确性。
实验室认证是一项重要的技术准备工作。在部产品质量监督检验机构各实验室取得认证的基础上，报请国家标准局质量监督局进行验收和认可，行使《铁路工业产品国家级检测中心》职权。
第2条 全路的实验室认证工作由部科技局归口，部产品质量监督检验中心（以下简称部检验中心）负责。按照中华人民共和国计量法和计量法实施细则及国家计量局的有关规定组织预审和评审。
第3条 铁道部实验室认证采取以下两种形式：
1、强制认证：
部对产品质量监督检验机构的各类永久、流动的测试实验室实行强制认证，只有取得认证合格证书的实验室，才能出具公正数据。
2、自愿认证：
根据部产品质量检验工作的实际需要，对企业、事业、科研单位中有能力从事某些测试工作的实验室实行自愿认证，通过认证的实验室，可在部检验中心的监督下从事部内某些产品检验任务。
第4条 申请认证的实验室必须按《产品质量检验机构计量认证评审内容及考核办法（暂行）》及《国家级产品质量监督检验测试中心基本条件》的有关要求进行整顿。凡属强制认证范围的实验室应填写《计量认证申请书》，报部检验中心审核后统一上报国家计量局认证办公室，新成立检验机构的实验室应在成立后三个月内申请。
属于自愿认证范围的实验室应填写《铁道部实验室认证申请书》可随时直接向部检验中心申请。
第5条 申请认证的实验室，在提交认证申请书的同时，应提供《质量管理手册》，其内容为：
1、实验室组织机构框图。
2、人员配备情况，技术负责人、技术工作人员简历表。
3、开展检验项目的标准、规程、规范。
4、主要检验设备、仪器一览表（表略）。
5、实验室的各项规章制度：
（1）各级人员的岗位责任制度；
（2）人员培训制度；
（3）检验工作质量保证制度；
（4）检验报告审查制度；
（5）事故报告分析、处理制度；
（6）测试仪器设备购置、验收、保管、维修、报废、校准及周期计量制度；
（7）检验报告及原始记录、检验标准、资料、仪器设备说明书的保管制度；
（8）抽样制度：
（9）检验样品、样机的验收、保管、领取、发送制度；
（10）检验产品图纸、资料、检验数据的保密制度；
（11）保证检验立场公正性的有关规定。
6、凡有非标准试验设备，国家计量部门无法检定，必须自检的实验室，应有有关专家对该设备是否符合有关标准的要求作出评价，并制定《检验规范》及《设备操作规程》。
第6条 部检验中心在接到申请后一个月内，应书面答复是否接受申请，并寄送认证评审内容、方法等有关文件，通知预审日期。
第7条 预审由部检验中心负责有关计量机构协助。预审的主要任务是：
1、听取实验室的详细情况介绍；
2、向实验室详细介绍实验室认证的有关规定、方法；
3、明确认证项目，确定测试内容、审查现有测试仪器、设备的测试参数、量程、测量精度以及满足申请认证项目的程度；
4、确定测试仪器、设备的溯源、计量、比对方法；
5、审查自检非标准测试设备的《检验规范》及《操作规程》；
6、审查实验室拟订的《质量管理手册》；
7、确定评审日期。
第8条 实验室认证的评审工作由从事检定工作、测试工作、产品设计、制造、使用及企业管理等方面的专家组成的评审小组承担，评审组由国家计量局认证办公室商部检验中心决定。
第9条 评审工作不受行政干预，按《铁道部实验室认证评审内容及考核方法（暂行）》即《产品质量检验机构计量认证评审内容及考核办法（暂行）》的规定，分组织机构、仪器设备、测试工作、人员、工作制度，环境条件六个方面进行考核。评审过程中允许实验室答辨。
第10条 评审结束后，评审组草拟评审意见及评审结论，征求实验室意见后，填写《铁道部实验室认证评审报告》，报部检验中心。
第11条 属强制认证范围的实验室，评审资料由部检验中心汇总，报国家计量局批准、发证，并在报纸上公布；属自愿认证范围的实验室，由部批准、发证，并在《人民铁道》报上公布。
第12条 属强制认证范围的实验室经认证后，可以承担认证项目内的检验工作，可以同国际同类实验室进行双边或多边的相互承认，可以承担产品质量争议时的仲裁检验。在此类检验中，检验数据以取得认证的实验室的测试数据为准。
凡属自愿认证范围的实验室经认证后，在部检验中心监督下取得的检验数据，与强制认证的实验室同等对待。
第13条 每次认证有效期为五年，到期重新申请，不申请者，以自动中止认证处理。
在认证有效期内，凡有测试标准，测试项目，测试方法，测试手段等方面的重大改变者，必须事先报告部检验中心，由部检验中心根据实际情况确定处置办法，否则，检验结果无效。
第14条 为了确保检验结果的准确可靠，受国家计量局的委托，部检验中心对取得认证合格证书实验室的检验工作进行监督。监督采取以下形式：
1、定期或不定期地对实验室进行复查，检查该实验室是否保持认证时的水平；
2、对于从事化学性能、物理性能指标检验的试验室，部检验中心按国家发布的标准试样进行测试，以确定其检验结果的准确程度；
3、定期或不定期地与上级计量、检定部门或国内、国际同类实验室作同工况比对等测试。
凡是不合格的实验室，必须停止不合格项目的检验工作，限期改进，三个月后复查，仍不合格者，撤回认证证书，并登报除名。
第15条 申请认证的实验室，应向国家计量局或部检验中心交纳一定的评审费。
第16条 本办法凡与国家计量局《产品质量检验机构计量认证管理办法》有矛盾者，按国家计量局的规定执行。
第17条 本办法解释权属铁道部。
第18条 本办法自公布之日起执行。
（附件略）
