natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Dette gælder blandt andet de tre skoler i Bruxelles, der, skønt de oprindeligt var beregnet til 7300 elever, skal optage 8600 , selv hvis de afviser nogle af eleverne og henviser dem til skoler i nærheden af deres bopæl.
Thus, the three Brussels schools will now have to handle 8600 pupils instead of the expected 7300 , while, in addition, some pupils have been refused by the schools nearest to their homes.
Problemet er det samme, hvad vuggestuer og børnehaver angår.
In addition, similar problems are occurring with the creches and nurseries.
Er der planer om endnu i år at åbne en midlertidig skole til optagelse af elevoverskuddet for at undgå en overbelastning af de tre eksisterende skoler i Bruxelles? 2.
whether there are plans to open — even this year — an extra school on a provisional basis in order to prevent overcrowding at the three existing schools in Brussels? 2.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3259/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3259/05
Føler Kommissionen sig overbevist om, at de dispositioner, der i øjeblikket er truffet med hensyn til den interkalibreringsproces, hvormed formålet er at fastlægge EU-omspændende vandkvalitetsstandarder, vil resultere i vidtspændende og konsekvente vandkvalitetsstandarder og på denne måde skabe lige vilkår for alle de berørte erhvervssektorer?
Is the Commission satisfied that the current arrangements for the ‘intercalibration’ process, intended to establish Europe‑wide standards for water quality, will deliver comprehensive and consistent standards for water quality and so provide a level playing field for all the industries affected?
Foretager Kommissionen sig noget for at sikre, at EU-finansierede programmer til styring af oversvømmelsesrisici er fuldt forenelige med kravene i vandrammedirektivet?
Is the Commission taking steps to ensure that EU-funded flood-risk management programmes are fully compatible with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3260/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3260/05
I en nylig undersøgelse offentliggjort i Journal of Epidemiological and Community Health 2005, 59, bekræftes tidligere forskningsresultater, som viser, at der er en forbindelse mellem kræft hos børn og emissioner fra industrianlæg, navnlig affaldsforbrændingsanlæg.
A recent study (Journal of Epidemiol Community Health 2005; 59) has confirmed previous findings of links between childhood cancers and emissions from industrial sites and, in particular, from locations where waste is incinerated.
Undersøgelsen henviser imidlertid kun til dødsfald registreret i Det Forenede Kongerige forud for 1980.
It does, however, refer only to deaths recorded in the UK prior to 1980.
Hvilke EU-krav er der siden indført med henblik på at begrænse emissionerne af kulilte, PM10-partikler, flygtige organiske forbindelser, nitrogenoxider, benzen, dioxiner, 1.3-butadien og benzopyren?
What EU requirements have since been introduced with a view to reducing emissions of carbon monoxide, PM10 particles, VOCs, oxides of nitrogen, benzene, dioxins, 1.3-butadiane and benzapyrene?
Hvilken vurdering har Kommissionen kunnet foretage af begrænsningen i sådanne emissioner fra affaldsforbrændingsanlæg i perioden efter 1980'erne?
What assessment has the Commission been able to make of the reduction of such emissions from waste incinerators in the period since the 1980s?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3261/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3261/05
Vil Kommissionen oplyse, hvor høj den gennemsnitlige inflation har været i eurozone-medlemsstater siden indførelsen af eurosedler og -mønter, og hvor høj den gennemsnitlige inflation har været i andre EU-15- og EØS-medlemsstater i samme periode?
Will the Commission indicate the average level of inflation in eurozone Member States since the adoption of euro notes and coins and the average level of inflation in other EU‑15 and EEA Member States over the same period?
Hvor høj har inflationen været i USA i samme periode?
What was the level of inflation in the USA over the same period?
Hvor høj var inflationen i EU- og EØS-medlemsstaterne i en tilsvarende periode forud for indførelsen af euroen i 1999?
What levels of inflation were experienced in the EU and EEA Member States over a similar period prior to the 1999 introduction of the euro?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3262/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3262/05
Om: Handel med det nordlige Cypern
Subject: Trade with Northern Cyprus
Hvor stor er ifølge Kommissionens skøn den potentielle værdi af den handel, der kunne blive tale om mellem det nordlige Cypern og resten af EU, hvis der kan etableres direkte handelsforbindelser?
What is the Commission’s estimate of the potential value of trade that may be available between Northern Cyprus and the rest of the EU if direct trade links can be established?
Hvor stor har værdien af handelen med de to dele på hver side af den grønne linje på Cypern været i de seneste seks måneder (eller i den periode, for hvilke der foreligger tal), og hvilke typer varer har der fortrinsvis været tale om?
What was the value of trade in each direction across the Green Line on Cyprus during the past six months (or period for which figures are available), and what were the principal types of goods concerned?
Hvor stor en del af de tyrkisk-cypriotiske varer, der handles med over den grønne linje, eksporteres i øjeblikket til lande uden for Cypern, og hvor stor en del eksporteres til EU-medlemsstater?
What proportion of Turkish Cypriot goods traded across the Green Line is currently being exported to countries outside Cyprus and, in particular, what proportion is exported to EU Member States?
Hvilke formelle og uformelle krav anvender de græsk-cypriotiske myndigheder fortsat med det resultat, at der sker begrænsninger i den potentielle handel fra det nordlige Cypern over den grønne linje?
What requirements, formal and informal, continue to be applied by the Greek Cypriot authorities which result in the restriction of potential trade from Northern Cyprus across the Green Line?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3263/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3263/05
Sukkerroeproducenter i Det Forenede Kongerige hævder, at kvotereglerne med deres trussel om nedsættelse af individuelle kvoter, hvis ikke disse opfyldes helt i to på hinanden følgende år, har fået producenterne til at overproducere sukkerroer af frygt for at miste deres kvoter, selv om en eventuel overskydende produktion må afsættes til urentable priser.
Sugar beet farmers in the UK claim that the operation of quota rules, with the threat that individual quotas will be cut if they are not met in full in two consecutive years, has led farmers to overproduce beet for fear of losing quota, despite any surpluses having to be sold at uneconomic rates.
Det ville lette overgangen til den nye ordning, hvis kvotereglerne justeredes gennem indførelse af et større element af fleksibilitet og tilladelse til at overføre overskydende produktion fra ét år til det næste — et ikke urimeligt arrangement i betragtning af, at sukker kan oplagres uden alt for store vanskeligheder eller udgifter.
Transition to the new regime would be eased if quota rules were adjusted by the introduction of a greater element of flexibility and authorisation for a surplus to be carried over from one year to another — a not unreasonable arrangement, given that sugar can be stored without undue difficulty or expense.
Er dette spørgsmål et EU-anliggende eller et medlemsstatsanliggende?
Is this a matter for EU or Member State determination?
Hvorledes vil Kommissionen se på dette forslag, hvis spørgsmålet er et EU-anliggende?
If the former, what consideration will the Commission give to this proposal?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3264/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3264/05
Om: Reform af sukkerordningen
Subject: Reform of the sugar regime
Er der nogen objektiv årsag til, at Kommissionen specifikt har anbefalet en sænkning i støtteniveauet på 39 % snarere end f.eks. én procent over eller under dette niveau?
Was there any objective reason why the Commission should determine its very specific (39 %) recommendation for the level of subsidy cuts rather than, say, a level 1 % higher or lower?
Er det foreslåede niveau blot et rimeligt bedste gæt med det formål at forene de forskellige målsætninger med reformpakken?
Is the level proposed simply a reasonable ‘best guess’ aimed at reconciling the various objectives of the reform package?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3265/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3265/05
Om: Sukkerordningen — produktion af C-sukker
Subject: Sugar regime — ‘C’ sugar production
Hvem vil vinde og hvem tabe som følge af forslaget om at tillade medlemsstaterne at fortsætte med at producere C-sukker uden for kvoten?
Who will benefit, and who will lose, from the proposal to permit Member States to continue over-quota production (‘C’ sugar)?
Hvorfor har Kommissionen foreslået, at der bør gives tilladelse til at lade denne ordning fortsætte?
Why is the Commission proposing that this arrangement should be allowed to continue?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3266/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3266/05
af Corien Wortmann-Kool (PPE-DE)
by Corien Wortmann-Kool (PPE‑DE)
Om: Forordning 261/2004 om kompensation og bistand til luftfartspassagerer ved boardingafvisning og ved aflysning eller lange forsinkelser
Subject: Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights
Den 17. februar 2004 trådte forordning 261/2004 EUT L 46 af 17.2.2004, s. 1. i kraft.
Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 OJ L 46, 17.2.2004, p.
Siden indførelsen af denne forordning har der i mange medlemsstater været mange klager over gennemførelsen af den.
1 . has been in force since 17 February 2005, since which time a great deal of complaints have been made in various Member States about its implementation.
I Nederlandene forløber gennemførelsen heller ikke uden problemer.
In the Netherlands, too, the implementation of this regulation has not been without problems.
Forbrugerorganisationen har åbnet en særlig klageinstans, der hver uge modtager omkring 300 klager fra forbrugere, der ofte drejer sig om luftfartsselskabernes afvisning af at udbetale kompensation.
The Consumentenbond, a Dutch consumer association, has opened a special complaints counter, which receives approximately 300 complaints a week from consumers, many relating to the refusal of airlines to offer compensation.
I forordningens artikel 16 fastlægges det, at hver medlemsstat udpeger et organ, der har ansvaret for håndhævelse af forordningen og træffer de nødvendige foranstaltninger til at sikre, at passagerernes rettigheder overholdes.
Article 16 of the regulation states that each Member State must designate a body responsible for the enforcement of the regulation that must take measures to ensure that passengers’ rights are respected.
I Nederlandene har tilsynstjenesten i Transportministeriet hidtil haft denne opgave.
In the Netherlands, this responsibility has to date been designated to the Inspection Service of the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management.
Denne instans forsømmer imidlertid at gribe konkret ind over for luftfartsselskaberne i større målestok.
However, this body generally refuses to take specific action against airlines.
I korrespondancen til passagererne oplyser tilsynstjenesten, at den ikke skal gribe regulerende ind på grundlag af individuelle klager.
In its correspondence with passengers, the Inspection Service states that it will not intervene on the basis of an individual complaint.
Dette til skade for passagererne, der i mange tilfælde ikke kan regne med den lovmæssigt fastsatte kompensation.
This means that many passengers are being disadvantaged and are often unable to claim the compensation to which they are legally entitled.
Kan Kommissionen generelt oplyse, hvorledes det går med gennemførelsen af forordning 261/2004?
Can the Commission indicate in general terms what the position is regarding the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004?
Kan Kommissionen mere specifikt give oplysninger om situationen, for så vidt angår gennemførelsen i Nederlandene?
Can the Commission outline the situation regarding implementation more specifically in the case of the Netherlands?
Mener Kommissionen, at de instanser, medlemsstaterne udpeger, også skal gribe ind på grundlag af individuelle klager?
Does the Commission consider that the body designated by Member States should intervene on the basis of individual complaints?
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, hvilke foranstaltninger den har til hensigt at træffe for at sikre, at de kompetente instanser handler i overensstemmelse med de lovmæssige bestemmelser i forordningen, således at passagerernes rettigheder respekteres?
Can the Commission indicate what steps it intends to take to ensure that the relevant body acts in line with the legal requirements laid down in the regulation in order that passengers’ rights are respected?
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, hvilke instanser de forskellige medlemsstater har udpeget til at varetage gennemførelsen?
Can the Commission indicate which bodies have been made responsible for implementation by the different Member States?
Har Kommissionen til hensigt at gribe ind over for Nederlandene på dette punkt?
Does the Commission intend to take action against the Netherlands on this point?
Er Kommissionen ikke enig i, at det nederlandske Transportministeriums inspektionstjeneste ikke er den mest nærliggende tjeneste til at gennemføre bestemmelserne i artikel 16 i forordning 261/2004, da forbrugernes rettigheder beskyttes bedre af en instans, der mere generelt beskæftiger sig med dette og har erfaring hermed?
Does the Commission agree that the Inspection Service of the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management is not the most appropriate body to carry out the requirements laid down in Article 16 of the regulation, given that a body more usually responsible for such matters and with more experience in the area would be better equipped to safeguard consumers’ rights?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3267/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3267/05
Om: Kommissionsformand José Manuel Barrosos udtalelser om arbejdet i EU uden en forfatning og om perspektiverne efter at vælgerne i to medlemsstater har forkastet forfatningen
Subject: Statements made by President Barroso on the workings of the EU without a constitution and the outlook for the future following the rejection of the Constitution by voters in two Member States
Er det korrekt, at kommissionsformand José Manuel Barroso den 1. september under et besøg i Polen udtalte, at ingen vigtige kommissionsafgørelser er blevet blokeret siden udvidelsen sidste år?
Is it true that on 1 September 2005, while on a visit to Poland, President Barroso said that ‘no significant Commission decisions have been blocked since enlargement last year’?
Er Kommissionen i bekræftende fald enig i, at EU efter udvidelsen til 25 medlemsstater ikke er blevet ude af stand til at fungere på grund af mangelen på en EU-forfatning og dermed også kan fungere videre på grundlag af den ufuldstændige Nice-traktat?
If so, does the Commission share the view that, after enlargement to 25 Member States, the EU has not become unworkable as a result of the failure of the European Constitution and that, therefore, the EU can continue to operate on the basis of the imperfect Treaty of Nice?
Er Kommissionen desuden på grundlag af denne udtalelse enig i, at det tilsyneladende ikke er nødvendigt at ophæve vetoretten og erstatte den med afgørelser baseret på (kvalificeret eller andre former for) flertal?
On the basis of this statement, does the Commission also share the view that there is no apparent need to replace decisions made on the basis of the right of veto with decisions made on the basis of a majority (qualified or otherwise)?
Hvorledes vil den i benægtende fald forklare, at EU ikke fungerer væsentligt anderledes på grundlag af de gældende traktater nu end i den foregående periode, inden udvidelsen med ti nye medlemsstater?
If not, how does the Commission explain that, under the existing treaties, the EU does not essentially operate any differently now than in the period leading up to enlargement and the accession of 10 new Member States?
Mener Kommissionen i betragtning af det i spørgsmål 1 anførte, at den forfatning, der blev forkastet i Nederlandene og Frankrig nu er et forældet dokument?
Given the development in thinking referred to in question 1, is the Commission of the opinion that the European Constitution, rejected in France and the Netherlands, has become an outdated document?
Er Kommissionen i bekræftende fald rede til at undersøge, på hvilke områder EU-engagementer, der har vist sig vanskelige, kan ophæves?
If so, is the Commission prepared to investigate in what areas EU interference perceived as unhelpful can be removed?
Mener Kommissionen med politisk vilje og lederskab, at befolkningerne i medlemsstaterne automatisk følger selvbevidste ledere?
By ‘political will and leadership’, does the Commission mean that people in the Member States automatically follow self-confident leaders?
Hvorledes finder Kommissionen i løbet af dette pusterum ud af, hvad vælgerne virkelig ønsker, for så vidt angår politik og beslutningstagningsstruktur i EU?
In this period of reflection, how is the Commission to ascertain what voters really want in terms of policy and the decision-making structure of the EU?
Har Kommissionen til hensigt, også uden indførelse af den forkastede EU-forfatning, at sigte mod fremskridt på områder som tidlig høring af de nationale parlamenter om nye lovgivningsinitiativer, grupper af borgeres ret til at kræve folkeafstemning og åbne møder i Rådet?
Does the Commission intend, even in the absence of the rejected European Constitution, to make progress in future in the area of the timely consultation of national parliaments on proposed new EU legislation, the right of a group of citizens to call a referendum and the principle of holding Council meetings in public?
Kilde: »EU Observer«, 1. september 2005 (http://euobserver.com)
Source: EU Observer, 1 September 2005 (http://euobserver.com/?aid=19759&sid=9).
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3268/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3268/05
Om: Udtalelser fra Carla del Ponte
Subject: Statements made by Carla del Ponte
Chefanklager Carla del Ponte sagde i sin tale på den årlige kongres i afdelingen for politiske anliggender den 1. september 2005 i Bern bl.a.: »Nu må Kroatien omsider øge sine bestræbelser på at opspore og arrestere Ante Gotovina.
In an address given to the Annual Conference of the Political Affairs Division on 1 September 2005 in Berne, Chief Prosecutor Carla del Ponte stated, amongst other things, ‘Croatia must finally step up its efforts to locate and arrest Ante Gotovina.
It is obvious that Croatia will do even less to locate him the moment accession talks start with the EU.«)
It is obvious that Croatia will do even less to locate him the moment accession talks start with the EU.’
Vil Rådet redegøre for sin holdning til disse udtalelser?
Can the Council give its opinion on these statements?
ICTY's chefanklager Carla del Ponte rapporterede den 3. oktober 2005 til Rådet, at Kroatien samarbejdede fuldt ud med tribunalet.
ICTY Chief Prosecutor Mrs Carla del Ponte reported to the Council on 3 October 2005 that Croatia was cooperating fully with the Tribunal.
Rådet konkluderede, at Kroatien havde opfyldt den sidste betingelse for indledning af tiltrædelsesforhandlinger, og at forhandlingerne derfor burde indledes hurtigst muligt.
The Council concluded that Croatia had met the outstanding condition for the start of accession negotiations and that negotiations should therefore begin as soon as possible.
Forhandlingerne blev faktisk indledt samme dag.
In fact negotiations were launched on the same day.
Rådet bekræftede, at et vedvarende fuldstændigt samarbejde med ICTY til enhver tid vil være en betingelse for, at der gøres fremskridt under tiltrædelsesprocessen.
The Council confirmed that maintaining full cooperation with the ICTY would remain a requirement for progress throughout the accession process.
Det opfordrede Kommissionen til fortsat at overvåge dette nøje på grundlag af regelmæssige rapporter fra ICTY samt at aflægge rapport til Rådet, hvis samarbejdet ikke fortsættes i fuldt omfang.
It invited the Commission to continue to monitor this closely, on the basis of regular reports from the ICTY, and to report to the Council if full cooperation was not maintained.
Det var også enigt om, at mindre end fuldt samarbejde med ICTY på et hvilket som helst tidspunkt ville få konsekvenser for hele forhandlingsprocessen og eventuelt kunne medføre suspension af forhandlingerne.
It also agreed that less than full cooperation with the ICTY at any stage would affect the overall progress of negotiations and could possibly trigger the suspension of negotiations.
Derfor udtrykte Rådet den 12. december 2005 tilfredshed med anholdelsen af Ante Gotovina den 7. december og roste ICTY og de kroatiske og spanske myndigheder for deres indsats for at få denne anholdelse bragt i stand.
For these reasons, on 12 December 2005, the Council welcomed the arrest of Ante Gotovina on 7 December and congratulated the ICTY, Croatia and the Spanish authorities for their work in bringing it about.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3269/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3269/05
Vil Kommissionen redegøre for sin holdning til disse udtalelser?
Can the Commission give its opinion on these statements?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3270/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3270/05
Om: Den kroatiske politichef Ranko Ostojić
Subject: Croatian police chief Ranko Ostojić
I det kroatiske tidsskrift »Nacional« kunne man den 27.4.2004 at læse følgende: Ranko Ostojić, tidligere øverste chef for politiet under Račan-regeringen, som blev udskiftet efter det seneste parlamentsvalg, fik et nyt job ved domstolen i Haag på anbefaling af chefen for domstolens kontor i Zagreb, Thomas Osori.
On 27 April 2004, the Croatian newspaper Nacional wrote that Ranko Ostojić, former police chief under the Račan Government, who had been dismissed after recent parliamentary elections, had been given a new job at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague at the recommendation of the head of the Tribunal’s office in Zagreb, Thomas Osori.
Mens han var politichef røbede han ikke sandheden om Gotovina for domstolen, men forklarede i stedet — for at» indynde« sig hos anklageren — at politiet kunne arrestere Gotovina, men at det blev forhindret af den kroatiske efterretningstjeneste og »Pantovčak« (den kroatiske præsident, Mesić' hovedsæde.
The report states that, instead of telling the truth about Gotovina during his time as police chief, Ostojić had said — in order to find favour with the prosecutor — that the police could arrest Gotovina but that it was being prevented from doing so by the Croatian secret service and by ‘Pantovčak’ (the seat of President Mesić of Croatia).
Er det ikke mærkværdigt, at en mand, som har stået i spidsen for den kroatiske stats sikkerhedstjeneste, uden videre får arbejde ved en international institution, som undertiden har optrådt direkte fjendtligt over for Kroatien?"
The report asks whether it is not strange that a man who had been in charge of the Croatian state security services should gain immediate employment at an international institution that had often shown itself to be hostile to Croatia.
Har Rådet kendskab til disse oplysninger?
Is the Council aware of this information?
Et internationalt tribunals ansættelsespolitik falder ikke ind under Rådets kompetenceområde.
The Council has no role in the employment policy of an international tribunal.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3271/05
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3271/05
Mens han var politichef røbede han ikke sandheden om Gotovina for domstolen, men forklarede i stedet — for at »indynde« sig hos anklageren — at politiet kunne arrestere Gotovina, men at det blev forhindret af den kroatiske efterretningstjeneste og »Pantovčak« (den kroatiske præsident, Mesić' hovedsæde.
The report states that, instead of telling the truth about Gotovina during his time as police chief, Ostojić had said — in order to find favour with the prosecutor — that the police could arrest Gotovina but that it was being prevented from doing so by the Croatian secret service and by ‘Pantovčak’ (the seat of President Mesić of Croatia).