【新唐人2012年3月12日讯】“茅台酒”高昂的价格和公费消费之间的关系，成为最近两会代表的新鲜话题。贵州省委书记栗战书出席两会贵州代表团的开放日时表示，官场喝用“茅台”不过是政府采购行为，也是市场行为。但据媒体爆料，“茅台酒”暗藏国家机密，酒瓶编号对应不同的政府机构。大部分“茅台酒”都流向了政府和国企，是“茅台酒”价格昂贵的重要原因。
据大陆媒体报导，“茅台”是官场酒，对一般人来说“茅台”的产销颇为神秘，无法知道真正内幕，但据内行人透露，茅台酒的生产车间与窖藏的库房都有编号，有详细规定各自对应不同的官方机构。比如，供应省部级、军队以及更高级的用酒，都出自不同编号的车间与酒窖，其中的奥秘在酒瓶上的那条红飘带的标号当中。
“权利运动”网站负责人胡军：“ 那中南海把整个北京城的空气都给污染了，那么他现在食品也要特供，酒也特供，他们要是现在成立什么文工团，那不是说女人也要给他特供。我们这个政府的建立就是为了特权阶层而服务的，这个（特供）很正常，也很自然，他就是一个利益集团，他肯定就有这些特殊的待遇，他这个独裁体制本身存在的意义就是掠夺，就是要维护既得利益集团的特权。”
对于两会上有代表要求“茅台酒”退出政府采购单，贵州省委书记栗战书表示，不要把茅台酒和公款消费必然的联系在一起，政府采购和市场销售是市场行为。栗战书的回答引发舆论不满，认为他故意混淆个人消费与公款消费的分别。
深圳当代社会观察研究所所长刘开明：“ 这个很多地方喝茅台，他都做假账做进去了，看不出来。比如说接待领导，他可以用会用费，开会的费用给他处理掉，这样的话还是三公的消费，开支要透明，要细化，要严格的管理，特别是开放媒体，和公众的监督，这样的改革才能确保三公的消费能够达到民众和纳税人的期待，否则的话，如果按照目前这种体制，依靠茅台酒和给这些商家施压，这是不可能的。”
贵州省副省长慕德贵3月6号接受媒体采访时表示，三公消费高不是“茅台”的错。他还说，三公消费和国家的管理体制是连在一起的，而国家财政的下拨情况和“跑部钱进”的体制，是造成三公消费的根本原因。
“权利运动”网站负责人胡军：“ 中国的国库，中国的财政开支，都是官员的私钱，中共官员他可以任意的去挥霍，因为他不受监督，本身他已经是一个官员私有制了。 必须有一个监督制约体系，制约的话，现在需要还政于民，公权力进行制约，必须有一个宪法程序，我们人大代表选举程序，都必须要进行改，那改的话呢，中共当局的话必须宣布共产党解散，要求中国实现大选，还政于民，这才是根本出路。”
公款吃喝、公车私用、公款旅游这“三公消费”，动用巨额公款的同时，挤占着教育、卫生、医疗、社会保障等民生支出。刘开明指出，如果“三公消费”问题不能够解决的话，民众对政府的不满和激愤不断高涨，将直接影响到整个社会的发展，挑战中共执政的合法性。
新唐人记者易如、许旻采访报导。
Maotai Liquor’s Label Hides State Secrets
How is the sky-high price of Maotai liquor related to official
misuse of public funds?
This is a new topic for deputies to discuss at the two sessions
of the Chinese Communist Party(CCP) regime.
The CCP Secretary of Guizhou province, Li Zhanshu,
Recently claimed in public that:
the official figures of the consumption of Maotai are a reflection
of the behavior of government in procurement and marketing.
However, the Maotai liquor label conceals state secrets,
say media reports.
The label of Maotai wine bottle is differently numbered
so as to serve official organs at different levels.
Reportedly, most consignments of Maotai liquor have been
supplied directly to the government and state-owned enterprises. That is an important reason for its high price.
China’s Maotai liquor was reported to be the wine of
officialdom.
For the ordinary person, Maotai’s production and marketing is
somewhat mysterious.
Insiders revealed that Maotai’s production workshop and
cellars are all numbered as supplies to specific official agencies.
For example, the supply for the provincial and ministerial level,
and the supply for the army and higher-level organs are all different products.
The secret of it can be discerned from the label on the red ribbon
around the bottle neck.
Hu Jun(Chief of website Human Rights Campaign in China)
says: “The Zhongnanhai regime has polluted the whole of Beijing.
Now the regime’s food and wine orders all come under
special procurement needs.
If they need service from an art troupe, doesn’t that mean
that all those actresses are special procurements?
The existing government is specifically set up to serve
a privileged class.
The special procurement category is no surprise,
but is a normal phenomenon.
The regime’s officials are an interest group,
guaranteed to be given these kinds of special treatment.
The autocratic system itself exists exactly for depredation.
That is, to maintain the privileges of the vested interests group."
Axing Maotai from government purchasing orders was
called for by deputies to the two sessions.
In response, Li Zhanshu, the CCP Secretary of Guizhou,
said Maotai has no necessary ties to the official use of public funds.
The government’s procurement and product sales are purely
indicators of market behavior, Li Zhanshu has claimed.
A public outcry has criticized Li’s talk in which
he is believed to have deliberately confused figures
relating to personal consumption and those relating to the
official use of public funds.
Liu Kaiming (director of Contemporary Observation Institute)
says that: “A lot of the official expenditure on Maotai liquor was hidden by falsification of accounting records.
For example, the spending of leadership figures can be
counted as the meeting’s expenditure.
But this still falls into the category of ‘three-public’ spending.
The official expenditure records should be transparent,
and follow a strict regulation, I think.
In particular, the ban on media reporting should be lifted,
and everything put under public scrutiny.
Only by carrying out such reforms, can the “three-public” spending
be controlled as desired.
Otherwise, it’s impossible to curb it only by from time to time
exerting pressure on Maotai producers."
Mu Guide, the vice governor of Guizhou Province, told
media reporters on March 6 that
Maotai liquor should not be blamed for the high level of
“three-public” spending.
The “three-public” spending is integrated to
the state administration system, said Mu.
Mu explained that, the allocation of national revenue and
the system of lobbying for official positions and
bribing are the root cause of
the “three-public” spending levels.
Hu Jun says, “China’s treasury and fiscal revenues are all
official accounting of private money.
The CCP officials can spend lavishly at their will,
since there’s no supervision over them.
It has become an officially recognized
private ownership.
There must exist a supervision and restriction mechanism,
and also power must be returned to the people.
A constitutional procedure must be set up to restrain
the abuse of public power.
The electoral procedure of the national people’s congress
should be changed.
But the prerequisite is the CCP regime’s disbanding of the party.
The only way out is to realize universal suffrage in China and
for the CCP to return power to the people."
Official spending on vehicles, hospitality and reception has
exhausted expenditure on education, health care,
medical treatment, social security and other livelihood areas.
Liu Kaiming notes that if the “three-public” spending problems
are not resolved, then the public’s discontent and anger will grow.
The situation will directly affect the development of society
as a whole. And the legitimacy of the CCP’s rule will face real challenges.
