natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
(2) Pokud se financování Společenství vztahuje na operaci spolufinancovanou se třetí zemí za podmínky reciprocity, jak je stanoveno v článku 5, nebo s regionální organizací či členským státem , je účast na příslušných smluvních postupech otevřená všem právnickým osobám oprávněným podle článku 3, jakož i všem právnickým osobám oprávněným podle pravidel takové třetí země, regionální organizace nebo členského státu .
(2) Whenever Community funding covers an operation co-financed with a third country, subject to reciprocity as defined in Article 5, or with a regional organisation, or a Member State, participation in the appropriate contractual procedures shall be open to all legal persons who are eligible according to Article 3 as well as to all legal persons who are eligible under the rules of such a third country , regional organisation or Member State .
(3) Pravidla způsobilosti uvedená v tomto článku se nevztahují na odborníky navrhované účastníky výběrového řízení účastnícími se zadávání veřejných zakázek.
(3) The eligibility rules in this article do not apply to the experts proposed by tenderers taking part in the award of procurement contracts.
(1) K urychlení boje s chudobou posilováním místních kapacit, trhů a nákupů je třeba brát zvláštní zřetel na možnost zadávání zakázek v místech a regionech partnerských zemí.
(1) In order to accelerate the eradication of poverty through the promotion of local capacities, markets and purchases, special consideration shall be given to local and regional procurement in partner countries.
(2) Účastníci, jejichž nabídky byly vybrány, musí dodržovat mezinárodně dohodnuté základní normy na ochranu zaměstnanců a životního prostředí, např. základní pracovní normy MOP, úmluvy o svobodě sdružování a kolektivním vyjednávání, o odstranění nucené a povinné práce, o odstranění diskriminace v zaměstnání a povolání a o zákazu dětské práce.
(2) Tenderers who have been awarded contracts shall respect internationally agreed core labour standards, e.g. the ILO core labour standards, conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining, elimination of forced and compulsory labour, elimination of discrimination with respect to employment and occupation, and abolition of child labour.
(3) Přístup rozvojových zemí k vnější pomoci Společenství se usnadňuje veškerými prostředky technické pomoci, které jsou považovány za vhodné.
(3) Access by developing countries to Community external assistance shall be enabled by all technical assistance deemed appropriate.
VYSVĚTLUJÍ PROHLÁŠENÍ
Explanatory statement
Preliminary remark
Preliminary remark
On 26 April 2004, the Commission presented to the European Parliament and to the Council a proposal for a regulation on the access to Community external assistance, designed to further untie Community aid in areas covered by tendering procedures for goods and services for the purpose of external aid.
On 26 April 2004, the Commission presented to the European Parliament and to the Council a proposal for a regulation on the access to Community external assistance, designed to further untie Community aid in areas covered by tendering procedures for goods and services for the purpose of external aid.
The Commission's intention was to introduce, by means of one single horizontal regulation (under the codecision procedure), the necessary modifications to the access to Community aid in the existing 26 thematic and geographical Community instruments in the field of Community external assistance.
The Commission's intention was to introduce, by means of one single horizontal regulation (under the codecision procedure), the necessary modifications to the access to Community aid in the existing 26 thematic and geographical Community instruments in the field of Community external assistance.
On 29 April 2005, the Council notified the European Parliament of its decision to split the Commission's initial proposal and on 18 May 2005 Parliament received a proposal for a regulation of the Council, applying the consultation procedure to the 10 Community instruments listed in the Annex, which have been established under the consultation procedure.
On 29 April 2005, the Council notified the European Parliament of its decision to split the Commission's initial proposal and on 18 May 2005 Parliament received a proposal for a regulation of the Council, applying the consultation procedure to the 10 Community instruments listed in the Annex, which have been established under the consultation procedure.
Parliament, although insisting as a matter of principle that the codecision procedure should be applied whenever this is legally and technically possible, accepts in this particular case the Council's decision to split the regulation on legal grounds (regulations which have been established under the consultation procedure, should also be modified using the appropriate procedure), but clearly states that this acceptance can not be interpreted as a precedent for any future proposals for legislative texts submitted to it.
Parliament, although insisting as a matter of principle that the codecision procedure should be applied whenever this is legally and technically possible, accepts in this particular case the Council's decision to split the regulation on legal grounds (regulations which have been established under the consultation procedure, should also be modified using the appropriate procedure), but clearly states that this acceptance can not be interpreted as a precedent for any future proposals for legislative texts submitted to it.
This horizontal regulation establishes the access of suppliers to all development assistance programmes financed from the EU budget.
This horizontal regulation establishes the access of suppliers to all development assistance programmes financed from the EU budget.
It provides for the eligibility of persons and goods under instruments, laying down criteria and derogations.
It provides for the eligibility of persons and goods under instruments, laying down criteria and derogations.
Untying has gained particular momentum at the EU level.
Untying has gained particular momentum at the EU level.
Following the Monterrey Consensus, the European Commission initiated a proposal for the further untying of EC programmes and making progress towards full untying of Member States' bilateral aid.
Following the Monterrey Consensus, the European Commission initiated a proposal for the further untying of EC programmes and making progress towards full untying of Member States' bilateral aid.
As the largest donor bloc, providing over 50% of world aid, this initiative can have great impact on the donor community.
As the largest donor bloc, providing over 50% of world aid, this initiative can have great impact on the donor community.
It is estimated that around 49% of European bilateral aid remains tied or partially tied.
It is estimated that around 49% of European bilateral aid remains tied or partially tied.
Fully untying this aid alone could make it $2-3 billion more effective.
Fully untying this aid alone could make it $2-3 billion more effective.
In: "An independent study on the further untying of European aid", July 2004
In: "An independent study on the further untying of European aid", July 2004
Both the Council (Conclusions of the GAERC of 20.5.2003) and the European Parliament (the 2003 Fernández Martín report ( A5-190/2003 ) have called for a regulation on the untying of aid going beyond the 2001 OECD/DAC "Recommendation on Untying Official Development Assistance to the Least Developed Countries".
Both the Council (Conclusions of the GAERC of 20.5.2003) and the European Parliament (the 2003 Fernández Martín report ( A5-190/2003 ) have called for a regulation on the untying of aid going beyond the 2001 OECD/DAC "Recommendation on Untying Official Development Assistance to the Least Developed Countries".
With this proposal, the Union is also heeding the recommendation of the DAC in its 2002 Peer review of the EU's development policy: “The proposal to consider untying EU ODA without distinction between the LLDCs and other developing countries is welcomed, as is the inclusion of food aid and transportation.
With this proposal, the Union is also heeding the recommendation of the DAC in its 2002 Peer review of the EU's development policy: “The proposal to consider untying EU ODA without distinction between the LLDCs and other developing countries is welcomed, as is the inclusion of food aid and transportation.
It will be necessary for the EC to set out a time frame for implementation, as well as maintain elements of its present approach that benefit developing countries (e.g. price preferences framework with ACP countries) in ways that are fully consistent with the principles, understandings, and agreements of the DAC Recommendation.”
It will be necessary for the EC to set out a time frame for implementation, as well as maintain elements of its present approach that benefit developing countries (e.g. price preferences framework with ACP countries) in ways that are fully consistent with the principles, understandings, and agreements of the DAC Recommendation.”
Scope of the proposed regulation
Scope of the proposed regulation
Recital 1 states that "the untying of aid is not an aim in itself, but should be used as a tool to cross-fertilise other elements in the fight against poverty such as ownership, regional integration and capacity building”.
Recital 1 states that "the untying of aid is not an aim in itself, but should be used as a tool to cross-fertilise other elements in the fight against poverty such as ownership, regional integration and capacity building”.
These objectives correspond to the goals for untying aid set out in the 2001 OECD/DAC recommendation.
These objectives correspond to the goals for untying aid set out in the 2001 OECD/DAC recommendation.
Unfortunately, the reduction of transaction costs seems to have been the sole yardstick for determining whether and how certain instruments of development aid should be untied.
Unfortunately, the reduction of transaction costs seems to have been the sole yardstick for determining whether and how certain instruments of development aid should be untied.
The question of untying aid and the specific modalities for each instrument must be approached from a developmental point of view: the instruments to be untied and the modalities for untying must be determined in function of their contribution to the attainment of the main goals of development assistance: poverty reduction through the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, empowerment of local communities in the beneficiary countries, so that they can assume full ownership of their own development process (inter alia through local capacity building), regional integration as a means of smoother integration into the world economy.
The question of untying aid and the specific modalities for each instrument must be approached from a developmental point of view: the instruments to be untied and the modalities for untying must be determined in function of their contribution to the attainment of the main goals of development assistance: poverty reduction through the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, empowerment of local communities in the beneficiary countries, so that they can assume full ownership of their own development process (inter alia through local capacity building), regional integration as a means of smoother integration into the world economy.
If untying aid is not considered and regulated in this context, there is a risk that it may become counterproductive and hinder the attainment of the development objectives it intends to foster.
If untying aid is not considered and regulated in this context, there is a risk that it may become counterproductive and hinder the attainment of the development objectives it intends to foster.
It is in this sense that the proposed regulation poses a number of problems.
It is in this sense that the proposed regulation poses a number of problems.
The opening of the participation in the award of contracts to industrialized countries and countries in transition on the sole basis of economic and financial criteria, without any non-financial conditions attached to it, may generate detrimental consequences for the EU, as the result may be that contracts are adjudicated to countries that draw their competitive advantage from the social dumping they practice.
The opening of the participation in the award of contracts to industrialized countries and countries in transition on the sole basis of economic and financial criteria, without any non-financial conditions attached to it, may generate detrimental consequences for the EU, as the result may be that contracts are adjudicated to countries that draw their competitive advantage from the social dumping they practice.
This would mean that the EU throws overboard, in the context of development cooperation, a number of core values (social, environmental, sustainable development) that it applies internally and in the framework of the Cotonou agreement.
This would mean that the EU throws overboard, in the context of development cooperation, a number of core values (social, environmental, sustainable development) that it applies internally and in the framework of the Cotonou agreement.
The regulation should link the participation in an invitation to tender to the bidder's formal adherence to a set of minimal standards (Conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining, elimination of forced and compulsory labour, elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, and abolition of child labour).
The regulation should link the participation in an invitation to tender to the bidder's formal adherence to a set of minimal standards (Conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining, elimination of forced and compulsory labour, elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, and abolition of child labour).
These criteria should be applied as a condition for the purchase of any goods and services.
These criteria should be applied as a condition for the purchase of any goods and services.
Companies based in or operating from countries that have not formally adhered to these international conventions should be excluded from participating in tenders.
Companies based in or operating from countries that have not formally adhered to these international conventions should be excluded from participating in tenders.
Reciprocity with third countries (Article 5)
Reciprocity with third countries (Article 5)
The regulation does not impose on the third countries it proposes to allow to compete for tenders for EU external assistance (particularly the transition countries) any reciprocity for the opening of the markets for procurement of goods and services to the beneficiary countries of this external assistance.
The regulation does not impose on the third countries it proposes to allow to compete for tenders for EU external assistance (particularly the transition countries) any reciprocity for the opening of the markets for procurement of goods and services to the beneficiary countries of this external assistance.
This conditionality should also be introduced.
This conditionality should also be introduced.
The notion of reciprocity, as specified in paragraph (2) is too vague and needs specification (indicators making it possible to measure "consistency" and "proportionality" of the aid provided by a donor, and its "quantitative and qualitative nature").
The notion of reciprocity, as specified in paragraph (2) is too vague and needs specification (indicators making it possible to measure "consistency" and "proportionality" of the aid provided by a donor, and its "quantitative and qualitative nature").
This could be done by setting up joint bilateral technical committees with experts from the EU and the other donor country.
This could be done by setting up joint bilateral technical committees with experts from the EU and the other donor country.
It is noted that the regulation ignores the Council's May 2003 conclusion that, with regard to developing countries, untying of aid should take place "under the following conditions: highest possible involvement of the beneficiary country, taking into account in particular the need to ensure the development of national and/or regional capacities".
It is noted that the regulation ignores the Council's May 2003 conclusion that, with regard to developing countries, untying of aid should take place "under the following conditions: highest possible involvement of the beneficiary country, taking into account in particular the need to ensure the development of national and/or regional capacities".
In its resolution A5-190/2003 , Parliament has repeated this Council recommendation, specifying that the provisions on untying aid must "be linked to a clear preference for local an regional cooperation, prioritising – in ranking order – suppliers from the recipient country, neighbouring developing countries, and other developing countries”.
In its resolution A5-190/2003 , Parliament has repeated this Council recommendation, specifying that the provisions on untying aid must "be linked to a clear preference for local an regional cooperation, prioritising – in ranking order – suppliers from the recipient country, neighbouring developing countries, and other developing countries”.
Without the introduction into the regulation of such explicit preference system, this objective will in all likelihood not be attained, given that local and regional actors find themselves in a disadvantageous competitive position as a result of the technological, economic, institutional and structural constraints under which they have to operate.
Without the introduction into the regulation of such explicit preference system, this objective will in all likelihood not be attained, given that local and regional actors find themselves in a disadvantageous competitive position as a result of the technological, economic, institutional and structural constraints under which they have to operate.
In order to ensure compliance with the developmental objectives, , the regulation should contain by a paragraph exempting from its application actions with the objective of supporting the efforts of the beneficiary countries to improve their own food production at regional, national, local and family level, as well as actions aiming at improving the availability and accessibility to the public of foodstuffs and basic services, consistent with local habits and production and trading systems, and fully integrated into the beneficiary's development policy.
In order to ensure compliance with the developmental objectives, , the regulation should contain by a paragraph exempting from its application actions with the objective of supporting the efforts of the beneficiary countries to improve their own food production at regional, national, local and family level, as well as actions aiming at improving the availability and accessibility to the public of foodstuffs and basic services, consistent with local habits and production and trading systems, and fully integrated into the beneficiary's development policy.
To these actions the preferences called for by the European Parliament (see previous point) should apply.
To these actions the preferences called for by the European Parliament (see previous point) should apply.
Návrh nařízení Rady o přístupu k vnější pomoci Společenství
Proposal for a Council regulation on access to Community External Assistance
článek 181a Smlouvy o ES
Article 181a EC
Základ v jedancím řádu
Basis in Rules of Procedure
DEVE 7.6.2005
DEVE 7.6.2005
BUDG 7.6.2005
BUDG 7.6.2005
AFET 7.6.2005
AFET 7.6.2005
BUDG 8.7.2005
BUDG 8.7.2005
INTA 13.6.2005
INTA 13.6.2005
AFET 28.6.2005
AFET 28.6.2005
Michael Gahler 6.6.2005
Michael Gahler 6.6.2005
Alessandro Battilocchio, Margrietus van den Berg, Danutė Budreikaitė, Thierry Cornillet, Michael Gahler, Filip Andrzej Kaczmarek, Glenys Kinnock, Ģirts Valdis Kristovskis, Maria Martens, Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez, Luisa Morgantini, Toomas Savi, Pierre Schapira, Frithjof Schmidt, Feleknas Uca, Anna Záborská, Jan Zahradil and Mauro Zani.
Alessandro Battilocchio, Margrietus van den Berg, Danutė Budreikaitė, Thierry Cornillet, Michael Gahler, Filip Andrzej Kaczmarek, Glenys Kinnock, Ģirts Valdis Kristovskis, Maria Martens, Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez, Luisa Morgantini, Toomas Savi, Pierre Schapira, Frithjof Schmidt, Feleknas Uca, Anna Záborská, Jan Zahradil and Mauro Zani.
k návrhu nařízení Evropského parlamentu a Rady o zavedení řízení o evropském platebním rozkazu
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council creating a European order for payment procedure
Výbor pro právní otázky
Committee on Legal Affairs
PE 357.815v02-00
PE 357.815v02-00
Symboly procedur
Symbols for procedures
* Konzultace většina hlasů odevzdána
* Consultation procedure majority of the votes cast
**I Spolupráce (první čtení) většina hlasů odevzdána
**I Cooperation procedure (first reading) majority of the votes cast
**II Spolupráce (druhé čtení) většina hlasů odevzdána, schválit společné stanovisko většiny členů Parlamentu, odmítnout nebo novelizovat společné stanovisko
**II Cooperation procedure (second reading) majority of the votes cast, to approve the common position majority of Parliament’s component Members, to reject or amend the common position
***I Procedura spolurozhodování (první čtení) většina hlasů odevzdána
***I Codecision procedure (first reading) majority of the votes cast
***II Procedura spolurozhodování (druhé čtení) většina hlasů odevzdána, schválit společné stanovisko většiny členů Parlamentu, odmítnout nebo novelizovat společné stanovisko
***II Codecision procedure (second reading) majority of the votes cast, to approve the common position majority of Parliament’s component Members, to reject or amend the common position
***III Procedura spolurozhodování (třetí čtení) většina hlasů odevzdána, schválit společný text
***III Codecision procedure (third reading) majority of the votes cast, to approve the joint text
(Typ procedury závisí na právním základě navrženém Komisí)
(The type of procedure depends on the legal basis proposed by the Commission)
Novelizace legislativního textu
Amendments to a legislative text
Ve změnách (novelizaci) provedených Parlamentem je změněný text zvýrazněn tučně a kurzívou .
In amendments by Parliament, amended text is highlighted in bold italics .
Zvýraznění normální kurzívou je znamením pro příslušná oddělení a ukazuje ty části legislativního textu, pro které se navrhuje korekce, aby se tak usnadnila příprava finálního textu (např. zřejmé chyby nebo vynechání v dané jazykové verzi).
Highlighting in normal italics is an indication for the relevant departments showing parts of the legislative text for which a correction is proposed, to assist preparation of the final text (for instance, obvious errors or omissions in a given language version).
Tyto naznačené korekce jsou předmětem dohody oddělení, kterých se to týká.
These suggested corrections are subject to the agreement of the departments concerned.
NÁVRH LEGISLATIVNÍHO USNESENÍ EVROPSKÉHO PARLAMENTU
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION.....................................5
VYSVĚTLUJÍCÍ PROHLÁŠENÍ
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT..............................................................................................17
STANOVISKO VÝBORU PRO OBČANSKÉ SVOBODY, SPRAVEDLNOST A VNITŘNÍ VĚCI
OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 18
(Procedura spolurozhodování: první čtení)
(Codecision procedure: first reading)
– s ohledem na návrh Komise předložený Evropskému parlamentu a Radě ( KOM(2004)0173 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0173 )
– s ohledem na zprávu Výboru pro právní záležitosti a stanovisko Výboru pro občanské svobody, spravedlnost a vnitřní věci ( A6‑0240/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0240/2005 ),