natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hvordan har Rådet koordineret medlemsstaternes holdninger til revisionskonferencens indhold?
How has the Council coordinated the positions of the Member States on the substance of the review conference?
Hvad forventer Rådet at opnå på revisionskonferencen i Durban, og hvordan vil det definere dens succes?
What does the Council expect the Durban Review Conference to achieve and how will it define its success?
Under hvilke omstændigheder vil formandskabet forslå medlemsstaterne, at de stopper deres deltagelse i processen?
Under what circumstances would the Presidency suggest to Member States that they halt their participation in the process?
(14. september 2009)
(14 September 2009)
Den Europæiske Union deltog fuldt ud i forberedelsen af revisionskonferencen og var aktivt engageret i forhandlingerne om slutdokumentet.
The European Union was fully committed to the preparation of the Review Conference and actively engaged in the negotiations on the outcome document.
I denne proces fandt der en tæt og regelmæssig samordning sted mellem EU-medlemsstaterne.
In this process there was close and regular coordination between the EU Member States.
I det slutdokument, som konferencen vedtog, er der taget hensyn til en lang række af EU's bekymringer.
In the final document adopted by the conference, many of the EU concerns were addressed.
Nogle EU-medlemsstater havde fortsat den holdning, at slutdokumentet var uacceptabelt.
For some EU members the outcome document remained unacceptable.
De EU-medlemsstater, der valgte at deltage i revisionskonferencen, understregede vigtigheden af, at der træffes foranstaltninger på nationalt plan, og henviste desuden til den relevante EU-lovgivning på området.
The EU Member States which chose to participate in the Review Conference stressed the importance of action at national level and referred also to the relevant EU legislation in this area.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1400/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1400/09
Om: Negative virkninger af salget af optøet fisk som frisk fisk
Subject: Negative effects of the sale of defrosted frozen fish as fresh fish
Fra fiskesektoren får jeg oplysninger om, at der i Europa i stigende omfang sælges optøede fiskefileter som friske fiskefileter.
I have received information from the fishing industry that defrosted frozen fish fillets are increasingly being sold as fresh fish fillets in Europe.
Dette medfører et prispres på fisk, der er fanget eller opdrættet i Europa.
This is having a depressing effect on the price of fish caught and farmed in Europe.
Salg af optøet fisk som frisk fisk synes at være i modstrid med dette mål.
The sale of defrosted frozen fish as fresh fish seems to contradict this policy.
Er Kommissionen villig til at undersøge, hvilke mængder optøet fisk der af detailhandelen tilbydes som frisk fisk uden at være mærket som optøet? —
Is the Commission prepared to carry out an investigation into the quantities of defrosted frozen fish being sold as fresh fish by the retail trade without being labelled as defrosted? —
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at de friske fisk, der fanges i EU's farvande, og de fisk, der opdrættes i EU, som følge af denne handlemåde påføres urimelig konkurrence? —
Does the Commission agree that this trading practice constitutes unfair competition for fresh fish caught in EU waters and farmed fish produced in the EU? —
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at der her er tale om vildledning af forbrugeren? —
Does the Commission agree that the consumer is being misled by this practice? —
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at når der er tale om salg af optøet fisk til forbrugeren, så skal fisken betegnes som sådan? —
Does the Commission agree that, when defrosted frozen fish is sold to the consumer, it should be labelled as such? —
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, hvilke forholdsregler den vil træffe inden for rammerne af den nye markedsordning for at bringe denne uønskede situation til ophør?
Can the Commission state what measures it proposes to take in the context of the (new) organisation of the market to put an end to this undesirable situation?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1401/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1401/09
Om: Kontrolsystem vedrørende den sorte liste
Subject: Terms of reference for inclusion on black list
I henhold til forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 EUT L 344 af 27.12.2005, s. 15. føres der en fællesskabsliste over luftfartsselskaber, som ikke opfylder de gældende sikkerhedskrav.
Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 OJ L 344, 27.12.2005, p.
Proceduren for opdatering af fællesskabslisten skal muliggøre en problemfri beslutningstagning.
15. , a Community list has been drawn up of air carriers that do not meet relevant safety requirements.
Samtidig må procedurerne ikke indskrænke luftfartsselskabernes ret til at forsvare sig.
The procedure for updating the Community list should allow for decisions to be taken swiftly.
I bilaget til nævnte forordning forklares de fælles kriterier for et eventuelt driftsforbud inden for fællesskabet.
The annex to the abovementioned regulation contains common criteria for consideration of an operating ban at Community level.
Erfaringen viser imidlertid, at der mangler et tydeligt og konkret kontrolsystem.
Experience has since shown the lack of clear and concrete terms of reference.
Hvorledes defineres sikkerhed?
How is safety defined?
Hvad er kriterierne, og i hvilken rækkefølge fremstår de?
What are the criteria, in what order of importance?
Det fremgår endvidere, at de oplysninger, beslutningen (opførelse i fællesskabslisten eller en beslutning om observation) bygger på, ikke eller i utilstrækkelig grad meddeles det pågældende luftfartsselskab, således at det bliver usædvanlig vanskeligt at forsvare sig.
Furthermore, it appears that the airlines concerned are not supplied with all the information on which the decision (for inclusion on the Community list or referral for consideration) is based, making it extremely difficult for them to defend themselves.
En klageprocedure, når det drejer sig om et resultat af SAFE-inspektionerne, findes overhovedet ikke.
There is no procedure at all for lodging a complaint against a finding on the basis of SAFA inspections.
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at manglen på et konkret og transparent kontrolsystem (key performance indicators) mildt sagt er uhensigtsmæssig?
Does the Commission agree that a lack of concrete and transparent terms of reference (key performance indicators) is, to put it mildly, undesirable?
Hvis ja, er Kommissionen villig til så hurtigt som muligt at præsentere et konkret kontrolsystem (herunder en tidsplan)?
If so, is the Commission prepared to propose concrete terms of reference (with a timetable) as soon as possible?
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at et luftfartsselskab altid har ret til at være fuldt underrettet om alle de oplysninger, der indgår i beslutningstagningen, herunder også de oplysninger, Kommissionen har indhentet hos tredjepart — dvs. medlemsstater?
Does the Commission agree that an airline always has the right to be fully supplied with all information used in taking the decision, including information obtained by the Commission from third parties (including Member States)?
Selv om jeg tidligere (ved den seneste ændring af fællesskabslisten) fik det indtryk, at man holdt hånden over diverse europæiske luftfartsselskaber, råder jeg nu over oplysninger, hvoraf det fremgår, at det ikke så meget drejer sig om luftfartsselskaberne, men frem for alt om, hvorvidt bestemte nationale luftfartsmyndigheder fungerer dårligt.
Although I had the impression earlier that, in the latest amendment of the Community list, several European airlines were being protected, I now have information showing that the issue was not so much the airlines themselves but rather whether certain national aviation authorities were operating adequately.
Dersom Kommissionen i et sådant tilfælde ikke vil indføre et »blanket ban«, er der risiko for, at der kan indledes en procedure om optagelse på den sorte liste imod et bestemt luftfartsselskab udelukkende for at udøve et pres imod en sådan myndighed.
If the Commission wants to impose a blanket ban in such a case, there is a risk that a blacklisting procedure will be brought against an individual airline solely in order to put pressure on such an authority.
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at der uden et konkret kontrolsystem og uden en fuldstændig transparent procedure — som ovenfor skitseret — vil kunne drives luftfartspolitik under betegnelsen »sikkerhed«?
Does the Commission agree that, without concrete terms of reference and without a fully transparent procedure, it would be possible for aviation policy, as outlined above, to be pursued under the guise of ‘safety’?
Hvis ja, er Kommissionen villig til at løse dette problem?
If so, is the Commission prepared to resolve this problem?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1402/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1402/09
Om: Sort liste og EASA
Subject: Black list and EASA
EASA må ikke give en sådan tilladelse, hvis luftfartsselskabet ikke opfylder sikkerhedskravene.
An authorisation will not be granted by EASA if the airline does not comply with the safety requirements.
En allerede udstedt tilladelse vil af disse grunde kunne begrænses, suspenderes eller inddrages.
On those grounds an authorisation already granted, may be restricted, suspended or withdrawn.
Artikel 9 skal træde i kraft senest den 8. april 2012.
Article 9 is due to enter into force no later than 8 April 2012.
Har Kommissionen til hensigt efter ikrafttrædelsen af artikel 9 i forordning nr. 216/2008 at håndhæve proceduren for luftfartsselskaber fra tredjelande i henhold til forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 som en særskilt måde at anbringe dem på den sorte liste på?
Does the Commission propose, after the entry into force of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, to retain the procedure under Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 as a separate route to placing third country airlines on the black list?
Hvis ja, gælder der det samme kontrolsystem for begge forordninger?
If so, will the same assessment framework (key performance indicators) apply under both regulations?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1407/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1407/09
Kommissionen har den 22. januar 2009 besvaret den parlamentariske forespørgsel om bedømmelse af ansøgninger inden for det syvende forskningsrammeprogram ( E-6544/08 ).
On 22 January 2009 the Commission published its answer to the parliamentary question on the evaluation of proposals for the 7th Research Framework Programme (E‑6544/08).
Dette giver anledning til følgende supplerende spørgsmål:
This answer prompts the following complementary question:
Kan Kommissionen garantere, at de ansvarlige ved bedømmelsen af ansøgninger har adgang til et onlinebibliotek, hvorfra de har mulighed for at konsultere international litteratur og internationale fagtidsskrifter?
Can the Commission guarantee its assessors that, in assessing applications, they will have access to an online library enabling them to consult international literature and specialised journals?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1408/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1408/09
Om: Fra fleksible arbejdsformer til uforsikret og dårligt betalt beskæftigelse på grund af den økonomiske krise
Subject: From flexible employment to uninsured and underpaid jobs as a result of the economic crisis
Ifølge oplysninger i en undersøgelse, der er blevet offentliggjort for nylig, står 1 mio. lønarbejdere i Grækenland, der arbejder i fleksible arbejdsformer, over for et problem med indkomstnedgang og manglende forsikring.
According to the recently published findings of a survey carried out in Greece, one million workers in flexible employment are having to get by with low paid and uninsured jobs.
Den foruroligende virkelighed er, at antallet af uforsikrede lønarbejdere i Grækenland er steget til 18,4 % i de seneste tre år, mens 84 % af de græske lønarbejdere, der har to job, er uforsikrede.
The number of uninsured workers has risen by an alarming 18.4 % over the last three years, while 84 % of Greeks with a second job are uninsured.
Eftersom man i den senere tid oftere og oftere kommer ud for påstande om, at situationen for lønarbejdere i fleksible arbejdsformer vil blive yderligere forringet på grund af den økonomiske krise, bedes Kommissionen oplyse følgende: 1.
Given the growing rumours of a further deterioration in the situation of those in flexible employment, because of the current economic crisis, can the Commission provide the following information: 1.
Råder den over oplysninger, der viser omfanget af den økonomiske krises virkninger på de lønarbejdere, der er beskæftiget enten uden forsikring eller i fleksible beskæftigelsesformer i EU's medlemsstater? 2.
Does it have information concerning the scale and impact of the economic crisis on those in uninsured or flexible employment in the EU Member States? 2.
Kan den komme med et tilnærmelsesvist skøn over antallet af lønarbejdere i fleksible beskæftigelsesformer, som enten vil miste deres arbejde, eller som er nødt til at beholde det, men under værre forhold, for i det mindste at sikre sig en beskeden indtægt? 3.
Can it give an estimate of the numbers in flexible employment who will either lose their jobs or be forced to accept less favourable employment conditions in order to be sure of at least a minimal income? 3.
Hvilke initiativer agter den at tage, så omkostningerne ved krisen ikke fjernes fra arbejdsgiverne og væltes over på lønarbejderne i fleksible beskæftigelsesformer, og så vi ikke ser en stor stigning i »sort«, uforsikret arbejde?
What initiatives will it take to prevent the cost of the crisis from being transferred from employers to those in flexible employment and to avoid any further swelling of the ranks undeclared and uninsured employment?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1409/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1409/09
Om: UNRWA's (mangel på) genbosættelsespolitik
Subject: UNWRA's (lack of) resettlement policy
I januar 2009 udgav the Washington Institute for Near East Policy rapporten »Fixing UNRWA: repairing the UN’s troubled system of aid to the Palestinian refugees«, som er forfattet af James Lindsay, der fungerede som juridisk chefkonsulent i UNRWA, hvor han havde ansvaret for alle UNRWA's juridiske aktiviteter.
In January 2009, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy published the report ‘Fixing UNRWA: repairing the UN’s troubled system of aid to the Palestinian refugees’ written by James Lindsay, who served as a senior legal advisor of UNRWA, where he oversaw all of UNRWA’s legal activities.
Forfatteren skriver, at UNRWA's oprindelige mål var at genbosætte flygtninge, men at denne politik vaklede på grund af indvendinger fra både flygtninge og værtslande.
The author states that UNRWA’s original objective was to resettle the refugees, but that this policy stumbled upon objections from refugees and host countries alike.
Nu er UNRWA's mål ændret til at »tilbyde tjenester og beskyttelse for dem, indtil deres præference (f.eks. at vende tilbage til Israel) er en realitet«.
Now UNRWA’s objectives have shifted to ‘providing services and protection to them until their preference (i.e. to return to Israel) is realised’.
Som UNRWA's vigtigste bidragsyder: 1.
As UNRWA’s most important funder: 1.
Er Kommissionen enig i UNRWA's ændring af sine mål? 2.
Does the Commission agree with UNRWA’s shift in objectives? 2.
Er Kommissionen villig til at undersøge, om medarbejdere fra UNRWA har frarådet »flytning fra lejrene for at fastholde flygtningenes krav om at vende tilbage til, hvad der var blevet til Israel«? 3.
Is the Commission willing to investigate whether UNRWA staff have discouraged ‘movement away from the camps in order to maintain refugees’ claim to return to what had become Israel’? 3.
Er Kommissionen villig til at kræve, at UNRWA fremmer genbosættelsesinitiativer og dermed selvopretholdelse, som mere er i tråd med UNHCR's politikker?
Is the Commission willing to demand that UNRWA promotes initiatives of resettlement and thus self-sustainment, which is more in line with UNHCR policies?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1410/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1410/09
Om: UNWRA's mikrofinansierings- og mikrovirksomhedsprogram
Subject: UNWRA's Microfinance and Microenterprise Program
I januar 2009 udgav the Washington Institute for Near East Policy rapporten »Fixing UNRWA: repairing the UN’s troubled system of aid to the Palestinian refugees«, som er forfattet af James Lindsay, der fungerede som juridisk chefkonsulent i UNRWA, hvor han havde ansvaret for alle UNRWA's juridiske aktiviteter.
In January 2009, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy published the report ‘Fixing UNRWA: repairing the UN’s troubled system of aid to the Palestinian refugees’ written by James Lindsay, who served as a senior legal advisor of UNRWA where he oversaw all of UNRWA’s legal activities.
Forfatteren kommenterer UNRWA's mikrofinansierings- og mikrovirksomhedsprogram (MMP), hvori han understreger to emner: a)
The author comments on UNRWA’s Microfinance and Microenterprise Programme (MMP) in which he points out two issues: (a)
Ved at tilbyde lån lader MMP-programmet til at være i konkurrence med lokale långivere, og dermed opstår muligheden for ulige konkurrence, da MMP-programmet er stærkt offentligt støttet. b)
By giving out loans, the MMP programme seems to be in competition with local lenders, whereby the possibility of unfair competition arises, considering the fact that the MMP programme is heavily subsidised. (b)
Størstedelen af lånene i Syrien (og måske i Jordan) gives til individer »som hverken var flygtninge eller Palæstinensere«.
The majority of loans in Syria (and perhaps in Jordan) is given out to individuals ‘who were neither refugees nor Palestinians’.
Som den vigtigste bidrager til UNRWA: 1.
As the most important contributor to UNRWA: 1.
Mener Kommissionen, at det er acceptabelt, at MMP konkurrerer med lokale långivere om at tilbyde lån? 2.
Does the Commission find it acceptable that the MMP is competing with local lenders in giving out loans? 2.
Mener Kommissionen, at det er acceptabelt, at MMP-programmet tilbyder lån til individer, som »hverken er flygtninge eller Palæstinensere«? 3.
Does the Commission find it acceptable that the MMP programme is giving out loans to individuals who are ‘neither refugees nor Palestinians’? 3.
Kan Kommissionen præcisere, hvor meget af dens finansiering der er benyttet til MMP- programmet?
Can the Commission specify how much of its funds have been used for the MMP programme?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1411/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1411/09
Om: Ældre og handicappede borgeres dødsfald under den franske hedebølge i 2003
Subject: The deaths of elderly and disabled citizens during the 2003 French heatwave
På plenarmødet den 4. februar henstillede jeg til Kommissionen at undersøge 2003-hedebølgen i Frankrig, særligt de høje dødstal og Frankrigs meget dårlige reaktion på situationen. (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getVod.do?mode=chapter&language=EN&vodDateId=20090204-21:08:49-807)
In the 4 February plenary session, I asked the European Commission to investigate the 2003 heatwave in France, particularly the high level of deaths and France's abysmal response to the situation. (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getVod.do?mode=chapter&language=EN&vodDateId=20090204-21:08:49-807)
Næsten alle dem, der døde under denne hedebølge, var enten handicappede eller ældre og på plejehjem eller -institutioner eller i aflastning, mens deres familier var på ferie.
Almost all of the people who died during this heatwave were either disabled or elderly and in nursing homes or residential care, or in respite care while their families were on holiday.
Den franske regering kaldte på intet tidspunkt familierne eller medarbejderne tilbage fra deres ferier, og den tilkaldte heller ikke hæren eller andre redningstjenester.
The French Government at no time recalled the families or recalled staff from their holidays, nor did it call in the army or any other rescue services.
Det tilladtes, at disse sårbare personer døde uge efter uge.
These vulnerable people were allowed to die week after week.
Som resultat af Frankrigs grove forsømmelighed og mangel på reaktion i forbindelse med denne katastrofe, blev der 14 000 færre folk på Frankrigs liste for sociale ydelser.
As a result of France’s gross negligence and lack of response to this disaster, there were 14 000 fewer people on France's social services register.
Kan Kommissionen oplyse mig om, om undersøgelsen af denne skandale allerede er påbegyndt og i benægtende fald, hvornår kan jeg så forvente, at undersøgelsen begynder?
Can the Commission tell me if the investigation into this scandal has already begun and if not, then when I can expect the investigation to begin?
Desuden vil jeg gerne minde Kommissionen om oprettelsen af et vigtigt dokument, Veronacharteret, en principerklæring om handicappede og andre sårbare personers rettigheder i tilfælde af en katastrofe.
Furthermore, I would like to remind the Commission of the creation of a vital document, the Verona Charter, a declaration of principles on the rights of persons with disabilities and other vulnerable persons in case of disasters.
Dette charter var et produkt af et paneuropæiske projekt (redning af handicappede i tilfælde af en katastrofe), som delvist var finansieret af Kommissionen.
This charter was the product of a pan-European project (Rescuing Disabled Persons in Case of Disaster) part-funded by the Commission.
Er Kommissionen enig i, at hvis Veronacharteret eller lignende principper havde været på plads på tidspunktet for den franske hedebølge, ville rettighederne for ældre og handicappede ikke være blevet så åbenlyst ignoreret?
Does the Commission agree that if the Verona Charter or such similar principles had been in place at the time of the French heatwave, then the rights of elderly and disabled people would not have been so blatantly ignored?
Ved at vedtage Veronacharteret kan vi sikre, at en sådan skandale og tragedie ikke kommer til at ske igen.
By endorsing the Verona Charter, we will ensure that such a scandal and tragedy will not happen again.
Hvornår vil Kommissionen fuldt ud vedtage Veronacharterets principper?
When will the Commission fully endorse the principles of the Verona Charter?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1412/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1412/09
Om: Fluor som om kosttilskud
Subject: Fluoride as a food supplement
En af mine vælgere har udtrykt bekymring over EFSA's beslutning om at tillade fluor (natriummonofluorophosphat) som kosttilskud, og derfor beder jeg på hans vegne Kommissionen om at oplyse, om en overeksponering til fluor kan udgøre en sundhedsrisiko for de mest sårbare i samfundet?
Concern has been raised by one of my constituents regarding EFSA’s decision to approve fluoride (sodium monofluorophosphate) as a food supplement, and so I ask the Commission on his behalf to state whether this could pose health risks for the most vulnerable in society of an over-exposure to fluoride?
Kan Kommissionen desuden forklare min vælger, hvorfor denne udtalelse er afgivet af EFSA i sammenhæng med direktivet om kosttilskud og ikke af Det Europæiske Lægemiddelagentur (i en ansøgning om et medicinsk produkt), da min vælger antyder, at anvendelsen af fluor kan anses for at være medicinsk?
Further to this, could the Commission also explain to my constituent why this opinion has been conducted by EFSA in conjunction with the Food Supplements Directive and not by the European Medicines Agency (in an application for a drug), as my constituent suggests that the use of fluoride could be deemed to be medicinal?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-1413/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1413/09
Om: Konfiskering af toldfrie varer 2
Subject: Confiscation of duty-free goods 2
En af mine vælgere i London vendte for nylig hjem fra en forretningsrejse i Tunesien.
One of my London constituents recently returned from a business trip in Tunisia.
Da han mellemlandede i Charles De Gaulle-lufthavnen i Paris på vej til London, blev han af en sikkerhedsvagt informeret om, at de toldfrie varer, han havde købt i den toldfrie butik i Tunesien, ikke var tilladt om bord på flyet til London og skulle konfiskeres.
On arriving at Paris Charles De Gaulle (CDG) airport for transit to London, he was informed by a security agent that the duty-free goods he had purchased in Tunis Duty Free were not permitted on board his London-bound plane and were to be confiscated.