natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Murray er i modsætning til visse andre IKT-­konsulenter ikke udstationeret lærer.
Mr Murray, unlike some other ICT advisors, is not a seconded teacher.
Han er en fuldt kvalificeret gymnasielærer med kandidateksamen og pædagogisk diplom.
He is a fully qualified post-primary teacher with a Masters Degree and a Higher Diploma in Education.
Undervisningsministeriet indgik en aftale midt i 2003 med forskellige parter om en lønstruktur for fastansatte lærere, der arbejdede i nationale efteruddannelsesprogrammer.
The Department of Education and Science (DES) reached an agreement in mid‑2003 with various parties on a salary structure for seconded teachers working on national in-service programmes.
For så vidt angår IKT-­konsulenter, som bliver udlånt fra deres lærerstillinger, fastslår aftalen, at de fortsat modtager deres trinvise voksende lærerløn, og at de herudover vil få udbetalt et særligt kvalifikationstillæg plus et tillæg på ca. 12 000 EUR for at arbejde som regional koordinator for et nationalt efteruddannelsesprogram.
For ICT advisors seconded from their teaching posts, the agreement specifies that they continue to receive their incremental teaching salary and that in addition, they will be paid an honours degree allowance plus an allowance of approximately EUR 12 000 for acting as a regional coordinator for a national in-service programme.
Dette beløb er nu steget til ca. 15 000 EUR.
That sum has now increased to approximately EUR 15 000.
Murray blev nægtet dette tillæg, da han ikke var udlånt, selv om han havde et fast lærerjob i et andet EU-­land (Det Forenede Kongerige, hvor han har undervist i 13 år).
Mr Murray was denied this allowance as he is not seconded, despite having a permanent teaching position in another EU country (the UK, where he taught for 13 years).
Resultatet er, at Murray får udbetalt betydelig mindre end alle hans andre kolleger rundt om i landet.
The result is that Mr Murray is paid significantly less than all his other colleagues around the country.
For så vidt angår udstationering, har undervisningsministeriet andre lærere, der modtager udstationeringstillægget, som heller ikke bliver udlånt og som alligevel fortsætter med at modtage løn, som om de var udlånt.
On the issue of secondment, the DES has other teachers in receipt of the secondment award who are not on secondment either and yet continue to receive salary as if they were on secondment.
Hvis en lærer forlader sin stilling på skolen, er læreren ikke længere udlånt, men får et »virtuelt registreringsnummer«, således at vedkommende kan fortsætte i sin stilling, som om han/hun stadig var udstationeret.
If a teacher resigns from their post at the school, then the teacher is no longer on secondment but is issued with a ‘virtual roll number’ so that they can continue in their posts as if they were still on secondment.
Dette spørgsmål har været frem og tilbage mellem Waterford center, NCTE og undervisningsministeriet, og selv om alle parter erkender, at der er tale om en anomali her, er der ikke sket fremskridt i sagen.
The issue has been back and forth between the Waterford Teachers' Centre, NCTE and DES and while all sides acknowledge that there is an anomaly here, the matter has not been progressed.
En eventuel løsning kunne være, at undervisningsministeriet udstedte et »virtuelt registreringsnummer« til John Murray, således at han ligesom andre lærere i systemet kan få de tillæg, der gives til udstationerede lærere i systemet.
A possible resolution would be that the DES would issue a ‘virtual roll number’ to John Murray, thus allowing him, like other teachers in the system, to receive the allowances as per seconded teachers in the system.
Hvis en lærer fra et andet EU-­land ansøger om en stilling som IKT-­konsulent, vil vedkommende heller ikke være berettiget til at modtage et sådant tillæg, selv om han/­hun har en fast stilling i hjemlandet.
Further to this issue, if a teacher from another EU country applies for an ICT advisory position, they will not be entitled to the benefits of such an allowance either, despite having permanent positions in their own country.
Denne ulighed bør afskaffes.
This inequality must be eliminated.
Er Kommissionen enig i, at en sådan forskelsbehandling og ulighed bør afskaffes i systemet?
Does the Commission agree that such discrimination and inequality should be abolished from the system?
Vil Kommissionen foretage en undersøgelse af undervisningsministeriets behandling af John Murrays sag og sørge for, at han behandles retfærdigt og rimeligt?
Will the Commission carry out an inquiry into the DES's handling of John Murray's case and ensure that he is treated fairly and equally?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0068/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0068/07
Om: Vejene i West Kerry
Subject: West Kerry roads
West Kerry Vejaktionsgruppe indsendte et andragende om den elendige tilstand for landevejen N86 Tralee/­Dingle i 2001.
The West Kerry Roads Action Group lodged a petition on the poor standard of the N86 Tralee/Dingle National Secondary Road in 2001.
Dette andragende (nr. 86/­2001) blev drøftet i Udvalget for Andragender i 2002.
This petition (No 86/2001) was discussed in the Petitions Committee in 2002.
Udvalget for Andragender henvendte sig til Kommissionen, der var ansvarlig for EU-støtte til infrastruktur i West Kerry.
The Petitions Committee contacted the Commission responsible for the EU funding for infrastructure in West Kerry.
Støtten blev ydet med henblik på at forbedre denne vej, og arbejdet begyndte i 2005.
Funding was received for the upgrading of this road, which commenced in 2005.
Imidlertid blev arbejdet afbrudt fra tid til anden, og visse vejstrækninger er endnu ikke færdiggjort.
However, stoppages in the work occurred from time to time and areas of the road have been left unfinished.
Selv om man modtog EU-­støtte til at udbedre N86 og der blev arbejdet på vejen, er det en kendsgerning, at dette arbejde er meget dårligt udført.
Despite the fact that EU funds were received to upgrade the N86 and work has been carried out on the road, it remains that this work has been very poorly done.
Et eksempel herpå er at finde på den nye del af Kanalvejen, hvor det øverste lag af vejen allerede er ved at erodere, da der ikke er nogen ordentlig overfladebehandling og der ofte er oversvømmelser, selv om der er en flod og en kanal på begge sider.
One example of this is on the new part of the Canal road where the top of the road is already eroding as there is no proper finish to the top and it frequently floods, even though there is a river and a canal on either side.
Der er ikke nogen ordentlig barrikade til at forhindre mennesker eller biler i at ryge ud over broen og ned i floden.
No proper barricade is in place to prevent people or cars from going over the bridge into the river.
Der er ikke flere penge til at udvide broen eller beskytte trafikanterne ordentligt.
There is no more money to widen the bridge or properly protect motorists.
For øjeblikket findes der kun et gammelt ståltrådshegn.
At present, only an old mesh wire exists.
For fire år siden lovede Kerry amtsråd at orden situationen, men hidtil er der ikke blevet gjort noget.
Four years ago Kerry County Council promised to remedy the situation but so far nothing has been done.
Vejstrækningen fra denne bro til Camp er ikke blev repareret i årevis og er stadig særdeles farlig.
The stretc.h of road from this bridge to Camp has not been upgraded in years and is still highly dangerous.
På N86 i nærheden af Annagh er der et farligt sving, og de forfærdelige forhold på grund af manglende reparation har ført til dødsulykker dér.
Also at the Annagh part of the N86, there is a bad bend, and terrible conditions from not being upgraded properly have led to the occurrence of road deaths there.
Ovennævnte gruppe er endvidere foruroliget over hastighedsgrænserne på N86.
An additional concern for this group are the speed limits on the N86.
Derryquay skole ligger ved denne vej, hvor der gælder en hastighedsgrænse på 100 km i timen, selv lige foran skolen.
Derryquay National School is located on this road, where a 100 km-per-hour speed limit exists, even directly in front of the school.
Medlemmerne af West Kerry Vejaktionsgruppe og folk i det lokale område er overbevist om, at en sådan hastighedsgrænse er overordentlig farlig og bør nedsættes til 50 km i timen foran denne skole af hensyn til børnenes sikkerhed.
It is of grave concern to the people of the West Kerry Roads Action Group and the people of the local area that such a speed limit is extremely dangerous and should be reduced to 50 km/h in front of this school for the safety of their children.
Denne nedsættelse af hastighedsgrænsen er blevet afvist af den nationale vejmyndighed.
This reduction in speed limit has been refused by the National Roads Authority.
Er Kommissionen enig i, at N86 bør repareres ordentligt og gøres fuldstændig færdig?
Does the Commission agree that the N86 should be upgraded properly and finished completely?
Er Kommissionen også enig i, at der bør gives tilladelse til en nedsættelse af hastighedsgrænsen, hvor der ligger en skole?
Does the Commission also agree that a reduction in speed limit should be authorised where a school is located?
Vil Kommissionen undersøge situationen for at sikre borgernes sikkerhed?
Will the Commission investigate the situation in order to ensure the safety of my constituents?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0069/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0069/07
En sag for nylig i Tyrkiet, der omfattede sigtelser vedrørende »forhånelse af tyrkiskhed«, sætter spørgsmålstegn ved selve arten af den tyrkiske regerings »sekularitet« og rejser endvidere alvorlige spørgsmål om, hvorvidt Tyrkiet er klar til at gå i gang med tiltrædelsesforhandlinger med EU.
A recent case in Turkey involving charges concerning ‘insulting Turkishness’ calls into question the very nature of the ‘secularity’ of the Turkish Government and poses further serious questions about Turkey’s readiness to move forward with the EU accession talks.
Ifølge artiklen sigtes to tyrkiske protestanter, Hakan Tastan og Turan Topal, for at have »forhånet tyrkiskhed« i henhold til artikel 301 i den tyrkiske straffelov.
According to the article, two Turkish Protestants, Hakan Tastan and Turan Topal, are being charged with ‘insulting Turkishness’ under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code.
Tastan og Topal er i fare for at blive idømt op til ni års fængsel.
Mr Tastan and Mr Topal are in danger of being sentenced to up to nine years in jail.
Tastan og Topal sigtes for ulovligt at have indsamlet oplysninger om folk og have »forhånet islam«.
Mr Tastan and Mr Topal are charged with illegally gathering information on people and ‘insulting Islam’.
De sigtes tillige for at have »kaldt islam en underudviklet religion og hævde, at tyrkerne aldrig bliver civiliserede, medmindre de konverterer« blandt andre ting.
They have also been accused of ‘calling Islam a backward religion and claiming that Turks would never become civilised unless they converted’ among other things.
Den omstændighed, at det er ulovligt at forhåne »tyrkiskhed« er problematisk nok i sig selv, og anvendelsen af artikel 301 har været genstand for omfattende international kritik.
The fact that it is illegal to insult ‘Turkishness’ is problematic enough in itself, and the use of Article 301 has been the subject of wide international criticism.
Hvad der gør denne sag endnu mere problematisk er, at det at »forhåne tyrkiskhed« bliver ligestillet med at »forhåne islam«.
What makes this case even more deeply problematic is the fact that ‘insulting Turkishness’ is being equated with ‘insulting Islam’.
Dette har naturligvis ikke nogen plads i et moderne sekulariseret samfund og rejser spørgsmål om, hvorvidt Tyrkiet rent faktisk er en verdslig stat.
This, of course, has no place in a modern, secularised society and raises the question of whether Turkey is indeed a secular state.
Sagen viser også klart, at religionsfrihed er meget begrænset i Tyrkiet.
The case also clearly illustrates that religious freedom is severely limited in Turkey.
Mener Kommissionen, at Tyrkiets adfærd i den pågældende sag er i modstrid med de grundlæggende værdier i Den Europæiske Union, herunder sekularisme, religionsfrihed, Københavnskriterierne osv., og i bekræftende fald, hvilke skridt vil Kommissionen tage for at behandle situationen?
Does the Commission find that Turkey’s behaviour in the case in question is at odds with the fundamental values of the European Union, including secularism, religious freedom, the Copenhagen criteria etc., and if so, what steps will the Commission take to address the situation?
(21. februar 2007)
(21 February 2007)
Kommissionen henviser det ærede medlem til sit svar på Robert Kilroy-Silks skriftlige forespørgsel nr. E-­5546/­06 EUT C … .
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to the Written Question E‑5546/06 by Mr Kilroy-Silk.
Dette svar er stadig dækkende.
That answer is still valid.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0070/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0070/07
Om: Nedslagtning af ulve
Subject: Slaughter of wolves
En række flerårige undersøgelser har vist, at det af hensyn til økobalancen er nødvendigt at beskytte ulvene og sikre deres overlevelse.
A range of multi-annual studies have demonstrated the need to conserve wolves in the interests of a balanced ecosystem.
Nedslagtning er ulovlig i nogle lande, men uforklarligt nok lovlig i andre som f.eks. også i Frankrig, hvor nedslagtning har været tilladt siden 2004.
However, stories abound of these mammals being slaughtered, which is illegal in some countries but — inexplicably — has been legalised in others, including France in 2004.
Mener Kommissionen ikke, at ulven under alle omstændigheder altid bør betragtes som en beskyttet art?
Does the Commission not feel that the wolf should always be considered a protected species?
Vil den undersøge, hvor mange ulve der i øjeblikket findes på Unionens område, og hvilke love der gælder til sikring af deres overlevelse?
Can it state how many wolves there are in the EU and what laws exist to ensure their survival?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0071/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0071/07
Om: Konkurrence i forbindelse med originale reservedele til ure
Subject: Competition in the field of original spare parts for watches and clocks
Urmagere risikerer at forsvinde fra erhvervslivet i samtlige EU-­lande, eftersom originale reservedele til ure er ved at forsvinde fra reparationsmarkedet.
Watch and clock repairers are at risk of disappearing from the economic scene in all EU countries owing to the fact that original spare parts for watches and clocks can no longer be found on the repair market.
Producenterne af mærkeure har gennem længere tid nægtet at levere sådanne reservedele til professionelle urmagere og således tvunget forbrugerne til udelukkende at henvende sig til deres distributører.
Indeed, manufacturers of brand name watches and clocks have for some time refused to supply spare parts to professional watch repairers and compelled customers to apply solely to their distributors.
Sidstnævnte for deres vedkommende sender urene til reparation hos producenterne med betydeligt spild af tid og betydeligt højere udgifter til følge.
Those distributors then send the watches and clocks back to the manufacturers for repair, which takes considerable time and costs significantly more.
Producenterne handler monopolistisk til skade for uafhængige urmagere.
Those manufacturers are operating in a monopolistic manner, to the detriment of independent repairers.
Mener Kommissionen ikke, at det uafhængige erhverv som urmager helt vil forsvinde, hvis de principper, som producenterne gennemtvinger, i sidste instans får overtaget?
Does the Commission not think that if the principles imposed by the manufacturers were to become established practice this would drive independent watch and clock repairers out of business?
Mener den ikke, at producenternes monopolistiske adfærd forvrider konkurrencen og de frie markedskræfters spil?
Does it not feel that this monopolistic behaviour by manufacturers distorts competition and the operation of the free market?
Kunne man ikke forestille sig, at de retlige bestemmelser, der gælder for sektoren for reservedele til biler, analogt hermed også kunne finde anvendelse på sektoren for ure?
Why is it that the case law governing the market in spare parts for cars could not also, by analogy, be valid for the watch and clock sector?
Mener Kommissionen endelig ikke, at det ud over at føre til urmagernes forsvinden også i alvorlig grad ville skade forbrugerne, hvis det også på området for ure lykkes »de store« at få overtaget?
Lastly, should the ‘big names’ consolidate their position in the watch and clock sector, does the Commission not feel this would, besides spelling the end for repairers, be seriously prejudicial to consumers too?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0072/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0072/07
Om: Fusion mellem Nokia og Siemens Networks
Subject: Merging of Nokia and Siemens networks
Den 13. november 2006 meddelte Kommissionen, at den ikke havde nogen indvendinger mod fusionen af sektionerne for telekommunikationsinfrastruktur i Siemens og Nokia, der producerer mobiltelefonmaster og varetager dermed forbundne tjenester.
On 13 November 2006, the Commission stated that it had no objections to the merging of the telecommunications infrastructure divisions of Siemens and Nokia, producers of mobile telephone masts and associated services.
Den kombinerede virksomhed står stærkere i den globale konkurrence og bliver tredjestørst i denne sektor.
The combined business will be more competitive on the world market and will be the third largest in the world in its field.
Hvilke følger forventes af denne fusion for borgeres og virksomheders roamingudgifter i EU?
What are the likely consequences of this merger for the roaming charges payable by private persons and businesses in the EU?
Finder Kommissionen, at de forventede synergifordele på omkring 1,5 mia. EUR opvejer den forventede nedskæring af arbejdstagerne med 9 000 ud af et samlet antal på 60 000?
Do the anticipated synergetic advantages (around EUR 1.5 billion) justify the anticipated loss of approximately 9 000 jobs out of a total of 60 000?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0073/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0073/07
af Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) og Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL)
by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) and Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL)
Om: Forvirrende spørgsmål om EU-­forfatningen foretaget af Eurobarometer, der med urette giver indtryk af, at den offentlige mening i Nederlandene er skiftet efter folkeafstemningen
Subject: Confusing question by Eurobarometer about the European Constitution, falsely giving the impression that public opinion in the Netherlands has changed since the referendum
Er Kommissionen klar over, at følgende spørgsmål om forfatningsudkastet er optaget i Eurobarometer af december 2006: »according to what you know, would you say that you are in favour or opposed to the European Constitution« (Er De for eller imod EU-­forfatningen ud fra det, De ved om den)?
Is the Commission aware that the Eurobarometer of December 2006 included the following question concerning the European Constitution: ‘According to what you know, would you say that you are in favour or opposed to the European Constitution?’
Er Kommissionen klar over, at ifølge svarene på dette spørgsmål skulle 59 % af nederlænderne nu være for forfatningstraktaten?
Is the Commission aware that, according to the answers given to this question, 59 % of people in the Netherlands are in favour of the Constitution?
Er Kommissionen klar over, at Eurobarometers opinionsundersøgelse i Nederlandene gennemføres af TNS Nipo, og at TNS Nipos ansvarlige for denne undersøgelse, Wiene Klasema, i et interview den 19.12.2006 i dagbladet NRC.NEXT udtalte: »Vi har blot stillet følgende spørgsmål: Er De for eller imod en EU-forfatning«?
Is the Commission aware that in the Netherlands surveys for Eurobarometer are carried out by TNS Nipo, and that the researcher Wiene Klasema, who performed this particular survey for TNS Nipo, said about it in an interview published in the daily newspaper NRC.NEXT on 19 December 2006: ‘We only asked: are you for or against a European Constitution’?
Er Kommissionen klar over, at det fremgår af en opinionsmåling offentliggjort den 19.12.2006 af opinionsanalyseinstituttet Peil.NL/­Maurice de Hond, at 75 % af nederlænderne på den ene side finder, at Nederlandene stadig ikke bør slutter op om EU-­forfatningen, men at 59 % på den anden side svarer »ja« til spørgsmålet: »Kan De forestille Dem, at der kommer en EU-­forfatning, som De vil stemme for?«?
Is the Commission aware that according to a survey published by the opinion pollers Peil.NL/Maurice de Hond on 19 December 2006, on the one hand 75 % of people in the Netherlands considered that the Netherlands should not change its position and give its assent to the European Constitution but on the other hand 59 % answered ‘yes’ to the question ‘Can you imagine that the EU might acquire a Constitution which you would vote in favour of?’
Finder Kommissionen det korrekt, at Eurobarometer i sit spørgsmål ikke skelner mellem på den ene side »en« EU-­forfatning, og på den anden side EU-­»forfatningen« som den, der er forelagt medlemsstaterne til ratifikation, og som allerede har været til folkeafstemning i Spanien, Frankrig, Nederlandene og Luxembourg, mens det af Maurice de Honds undersøgelse fremgår, at meningerne om disse to konstruktioner stadig adskiller sig kraftigt fra hinanden?
Does the Commission consider it correct that Eurobarometer's question failed to distinguish between ‘a’ European Constitution and ‘the’ European Constitution, meaning the Constitution submitted to the EU Member States for ratification and already put to a referendum in Spain, France, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, while the survey by Maurice de Hond indicates that opinions on these two issues still differ substantially?
Har Kommissionen kendskab til, at det nogen sinde er fremgået af en opinionsundersøgelse i Nederlandene, at enhver form for EU-­forfatning uanset dennes indhold ville blive afvist på forhånd?
Has there ever been any time when an opinion poll in the Netherlands showed that any form of European Constitution, irrespective of its content, would be rejected in advance?
Hvornår var dette tilfældet, før eller efter folkeafstemningen af 1. juni 2005?
When, either before or after the referendum on 1 June 2005, was this the case?
I benægtende fald: Er Kommissionen enig i den konklusion, at der ikke til stadighed er et flertal for »forfatningen« eller imod »en« forfatning?
If not, does the Commission agree that there has never been a majority either in favour of ‘the’ Constitution or against ‘a’ Constitution?
Hvad gør Kommissionen for uden for Nederlandene at fjerne den eventuelle misforståelse, at en ny folkeafstemning — hvilket 77 % af de adspurgte det ifølge Peil.NL ønsker — nu ville vise, at et flertal af vælgerne ville støtte en forfatning af næsten uændret indhold, og at den offentlige opinion i Nederlandene således har ændret sig kraftigt siden 2005?
What will the Commission do to eliminate any mistaken belief outside the Netherlands that a subsequent referendum — as desired by 77 % of respondents, according to Peil.NL — would now reveal that a majority of voters were in favour of a Constitution whose substance was virtually unchanged and that public opinion in the Netherlands has therefore changed radically since 2005?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-0074/07
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0074/07
Om: Nødvendigheden af — ud over standardsikkerhedssystemet ETCS/­ERTMS — også at anvende ældre systemer til tog, der kører hurtigere end 200-­250 km/t
Subject: The need to use old safety systems for trains travelling faster than 200‑250 km/h in addition to the standard safety system ETCS/ERTMS
Er Kommissionen klar over, at følgende vanskeligheder viser sig ved forsvarlig indførelse af det nye europæiske standardsikkerhedssystem for jernbaner ETCS/­ERTMS: a)
Is the Commission aware that the following complications have arisen during attempts to introduce the new standard European rail safety system ETCS/ERTMS in a genuinely effective manner: (a)