natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Disse reguleres i øjeblikket af aftalen af 21. juni 1994 om vedtægten for Europaskolerne EFT L 212 af 17.8.1994. , en mellemstatslig aftale undertegnet af de høje kontraherende parter, De Europæiske Fællesskabers medlemmer og De Europæiske Fællesskaber, hvori Rådet ikke nævnes og således ikke gives nogen beføjelse på dette område.
These are currently governed by the Convention of 21 June 1994 defining the Statute of the European Schools See OJ L 212, 17.8.1994. — an intergovernmental agreement signed between the High Contracting Parties, members of the European Communities and the European Communities, which makes no mention of the Council and thus grants no power whatsoever to this Institution in this area.
I medfør af artikel 8 i ovennævnte aftale er hver enkelt medlemsstat og Kommissionen repræsenteret i Europaskolernes Øverste Råd, og det er således disse myndigheder, der har beføjelse til at besvare det ærede parlamentsmedlems spørgsmål.
Pursuant to Article 8 of the said Convention, each of the Member States and the Commission are represented on the Board of Governors of the European schools and, accordingly, these are the authorities competent to answer the Honourable Member's questions.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3280/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3280/09
Om: Foranstaltninger i direktiv 2006/12/EF for oprettelse af en plads til indsamling og transit af affald
Subject: Provisions of Directive 2006/12/EC relating to setting up a plant for the collection and transport of solid waste
Kommissionen bedes oplyse, hvordan man kan fastslå, at foranstaltningerne i ovennævnte direktiv og i særdeleshed artikel 4 om beskyttelse af områdets indbyggere og miljøet bliver overholdt.
How does the Commission ensure compliance with the provisions of the above Directive and, in particular, Article 4 concerning protection of the health of local residents and of the environment?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3281/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3281/09
Om: Gratis rejse i hele EU for handicappede
Subject: EU‑wide free travel for the disabled
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, om den har overvejet muligheden for at udstede kort, der giver modtagere af invalidepension mulighed for at rejse gratis i hele EU?
Could the Commission please clarify whether it has considered the possibility of issuing free EU‑wide travel passes to recipients of disability benefits?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3282/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3282/09
Om: Grænseoverskridende ydelser til handicappede
Subject: Cross-border disability payments
Har Kommissionen overvejet muligheden for, at handicappede, der modtager ydelser fra mere end en medlemsstat, kan modtage en samlet ydelse fra deres bopælsland?
Has the Commission considered the possibility of disability recipients who receive payments from more than one Member State receiving one consolidated payment from their country of residence?
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, om den har rådet de irske sociale myndigheder til at anvende den offentlige valutakurs i stedet for myndighedernes egen valutakurs, der ikke afspejler den økonomiske virkelighed, som modtagerne lever i?
Could the Commission please clarify whether it has advised the Irish social services department to use the public rate of exchange rather than their departmental rate of exchange, which does not reflect the economic reality in which its recipients live?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3283/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3283/09
Om: Anmodning om nærmere oplysninger om overholdelsen af fællesskabsreglerne vedrørende tildeling og tilbagekaldelse af ydede tilskud under FEDER-URBAN II til en nonprofitorganisation i den fransktalende del af Belgien
Subject: Request for clarification regarding compliance with European rules in a case involving subsidies awarded to, and subsequently withdrawn from, a non-profit-making association in French-speaking Belgium, under ERDF-URBAN II
Jeg vil gerne stille et spørgsmål vedrørende anvendelsen af et FEDER-URBAN II-tilskud i den fransktalende del af Belgien.
In 2000/2001 the task conferred on the non-profit-making association Progès , which had been selected by the municipality of La Louvière (Walloon Region) as the body responsible for implementing the ‘social economy’ aspects of the restoration of Bois-du-Lac site (URBAN II), ended in failure (inability to get the social economy activities off the ground in spite of the funding committed).
I løbet af 2000/2001, hvor opgaven for nonprofitorganisationen Progès, som var udpeget af byen La Louvière (Valloniet) til at forvalte den »socialøkonomiske« del af renoveringsprojekterne i Bois-du-Luc (URBAN II), endte i en fiasko (de socialøkonomiske aktiviteter blev ikke indledt trods de finansielle tilsagn), kritiserede byen La Louvière nonprofitorganisationens ledelse (24/07/2001) og påpegede især » urimelige udgifter, der kunne have indvirkning på foreningens solvens og dens evne til at opfylde sine forpligtelser over for tredjemænd «, og besluttede ikke at udbetale det resterende støttebeløb på 12 600 000 BEF (312 345,84 EUR) til nonprofitorganisationen.
On 24 July 2001 the municipal authorities of La Louvière questioned the way the association was run, citing in particular ‘ unreasonable expenditure which could affect the organisation's solvency and its ability to meet its liabilities towards third parties ’, and decided not to transfer the balance of BEF 12 600 000 (EUR 312 345.84) in outstanding subsidies to the association.
Kommissionen havde imidlertid udbetalt dette tilskud til byen på grundlag af udgifter, som var dokumenteret af nonprofitorganisationen, og som byens og Kommissionens økonomiafdelinger havde godkendt.
However, the Commission had awarded the subsidy to the municipality on the basis of expenditure which the association had justified and which the municipality's finance department and the Commission had budgeted for.
I 2008 gennemførte kommunalrådet i La Louvière — for at bringe kravet fra den bank, som havde åbnet en kreditlinje for nonprofitorganisationen (konkursramt som følge af tabet af støtten), ud af verden — en transaktion, hvorved banken opgav retsforfølgelsen, ikke blot af kommunen men også af nonprofitorganisationens private administratorer Det skal bemærkes, at Progès ikke var en kommunal nonprofitorganisation, idet byen ikke havde udpeget nogen administrator, og idet der under de forskellige drøftelser mellem nonprofitorganisationen Progès og byen La Louvière på intet tidspunkt var tale om, at administratorernes eventuelle fejl skulle dækkes. , mod udbetaling af et beløb på 312 345,84 EUR fra den konto, hvorpå den støtte, som byen ikke havde udbetalt til nonprofitorganisationen Progès, havde været indsat siden 2001.
In 2008, with a view to ending the court case involving it and the bank which had granted the association, now bankrupt following the loss of the subsidy, a loan, the municipal council of La Louvière agreed to a settlement under the terms of which the bank would abandon its proceedings, not only against the municipal council, but also against the association's private administrators Progès was a non-profit-making association operating independently of the municipal authorities, the city did not appoint any of the administrators and none of the agreements concluded between Progès and the municipality of La Louvière made any provision for liability in the event of errors on the part of the administrators. , in exchange for a transfer of EUR 312 345.84 into the account where the portion of the subsidy which the municipality had not transferred to Progès had remained since 2001.
Var myndighederne i La Louvière bemyndiget til at konstatere, at forvaltningen var mangelfuld, uden at orientere de europæiske myndigheder?
Did the city authorities have the right to establish management failings without informing the European authorities?
Kunne de ikke have udbetalt beløbet til nonprofitorganisationen uden at tilbagebetale det til den myndighed, som havde tildelt støtten?
Could they not have transferred the balance of the subsidy to the association, rather than returning the sum involved to the authority that awarded the subsidy in the first place?
Er der ikke tale om uretmæssig anvendelse af støtten, så snart den anvendes til andre formål end det, den er tiltænkt?
Does the fact that the subsidy was used for purposes other than those for which it was earmarked not constitute embezzlement?
Hvilke kontrolmekanismer findes der på europæisk niveau med hensyn til brugen af disse penge og den reelle gennemførelse af opgaverne?
What control mechanisms are in place at European level by means of which the use of subsidies and the actual performance of the tasks they are intended to fund can be scrutinised?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3286/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3286/09
Om: Irrelevant kommissionsformand
Subject: Irrelevant Commission President
Hvad mener kommissionsformanden om den franske præsident Sarkozys beskrivelse af ham som irrelevant og »fuldstændig fraværende« fra G20-drøftelserne?
What is the President of the Commission’s response to French President Sarkozy’s description of him as being irrelevant and ‘totally absent’ from the G20 discussions?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3287/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3287/09
Om: Menneskerettigheder og borgerlige rettigheder i Baskerlandet
Subject: Human and civil rights in the Basque county
I betragtning af: —
In view of: —
den debat, der fandt sted på plenarmødet den 27. februar 2002 om menneskerettigheder i Tyrkiet, og talerne i den forbindelse fra Europa-Parlamentets formand, rådsformanden, kommissionsformanden og de politiske gruppers repræsentanter samt formandskabets erklæringer om forbuddet mod HADEP-partiet i Tyrkiet den 14. marts 2003, —
the statements made by the Presidents of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission and the representatives of the political groups during the debate in plenary on 27 February 2002 on human rights in Turkey and the Presidency statements on the banning of the HADEP party in Turkey on 14 March 2003, —
ulovliggørelsen af det politiske parti Batasuna i Spanien i marts 2003, —
the proscription of the Batasuna political party in Spain in March 2003, —
ulovliggørelsen af Herritarren Zerrenda-listen ved valget til Europa-Parlamentet i 2004, —
the banning of the Herritarren Zerrenda list from the European Parliament elections in 2004, —
rapporten fra Martin Scheinin, FN's særordfører for fremme og beskyttelse af menneskerettigheder og grundlæggende frihedsrettigheder i kampen mod terrorisme, om de krænkelser, han konstaterede under sin mission i Spanien, —
the references in the report by Martin Scheinin, UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, to the abuses he noted in the course of his mission to Spain and —
1. agter Rådet så at gøre en indsats for, at man ved valget til Europa-Parlamentet i juni 2009 ikke forbyder nogen politiske partier i Spanien?
Does the Council intend to take action to ensure that, in the course of the European Parliament elections in June 2009, no political party is outlawed in Spain?
Hvilke foranstaltninger agter Rådet at iværksætte, så de baskiske borgeres ret til frit at stemme og lade sig vælge bliver respekteret?
What action does the Council intend to take to ensure that the right of Basque citizens to stand for election and vote freely is respected?
Har Rådet til hensigt at bede den spanske regering om at respektere Martin Scheinins anbefalinger i ovennævnte dokument fra FN?
Does the Council intend to take action to ensure that the Spanish Government complies with the recommendations made by Martin Scheinin in the abovementioned United Nations report?
Det spørgsmål, det ærede parlamentsmedlem stiller, hører ikke under Rådets kompetence.
The question raised by the Honourable Member does not come within the Council's sphere of competence.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3288/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3288/09
1. agter Kommissionen så at gøre en indsats for, at man ved valget til Europa-Parlamentet i juni 2009 ikke forbyder nogen politiske partier i Spanien?
Does the Commission intend to take action to ensure that, in the course of the European Parliament elections in June 2009, no political party is outlawed in Spain?
Hvilke foranstaltninger agter den at iværksætte, så de baskiske borgeres ret til frit at stemme og lade sig vælge bliver respekteret?
What action does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the right of Basque citizens to stand for election and vote freely is respected?
Har Kommissionen til hensigt at bede den spanske regering om at respektere Martin Scheinins anbefalinger i ovennævnte dokument fra FN?
Does the Commission intend to take action to ensure that the Spanish Government complies with the recommendations made by Martin Scheinin in the abovementioned United Nations report?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3289/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3289/09
Om: Tilladelser til at drive hestevæddemål: EF-Domstolens dom i sag C-260/04
Subject: Licences for horse-race betting operations: European Court of Justice judgment in Case C‑260/04
EF-Domstolen har stadfæstet, at Italien, med sin fornyelse af 329 tilladelser til at drive hestevæddemål uden iværksættelse af et forudgående udbud, har krænket det generelle princip om gennemsigtighed samt forpligtelsen til at sikre en tilstrækkelig grad af offentliggørelse.
The European Court of Justice has declared that, by renewing 329 licences for horse-race betting operations without any prior competitive tendering procedure, Italy infringed the general principle of transparency and failed to fulfil its obligation to ensure a sufficient degree of advertising.
Som følge af denne dom ville Den Italienske Republik senest den 31. marts 2009 ophæve tilladelserne og sørge for, at den selvstyrende statsmonopolforvaltning gennemførte en ny udvælgelsesprocedure.
Following that judgment, Italy agreed to revoke the licences in question and ensure that the autonomous agency responsible for the administration of State monopolies carried out a new selection procedure by 31 March 2009.
Denne procedure er endnu ikke blevet afsluttet.
That procedure has not yet been completed, however.
Tilladelseshaverne var tvunget til at henvende sig til forvaltningsdomstolene og klage over overtrædelsen af EU's principper om proportionalitet og berettiget forventning, og det lykkedes dem at få indstillet de foranstaltninger, der skulle ophæve tilladelserne.
The concession-holders were obliged to apply to the administrative courts to complain that Community principles of proportionality and legitimate expectation had been infringed, whereupon the measures revoking the licences were suspended.
For at overholde Domstolens dom i sag C-260/04 er det nødvendigt at beskytte de autoriserede tilladelseshaveres rolle med henblik på at sikre gennemsigtighed og offentlig kontrol i udøvelsen af væddemålsaktiviteter.
In order to ensure compliance with the European Court of Justice's judgment in Case C‑260/04, action must be taken to safeguard the role of duly licensed operators in order to guarantee transparency and public oversight of horse-race betting operations.
Mener Kommissionen således ikke, at det er hensigtsmæssigt at træffe en foranstaltning af generel eller individuel karakter, der udsætter den pågældende doms fuldbyrdelse i den tid, der er nødvendig for at sikre væddemålstjenestens kontinuitet og undgå urimelig skade for de erhvervsdrivende, der har retmæssig tilladelse?
Does the Commission agree that it would be appropriate, therefore, to adopt either a general or a specific measure to postpone the implementation of the judgment in question for the period required to ensure the continuity of bet collection and acceptance services and avoid unfairly damaging the operators who hold the service concessions in question?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3290/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3290/09
Om: Kommissionens tjenestemænd forberedes til diplomattjeneste
Subject: Commission officials in preparation for diplomatic service
Ifølge oplysninger i avisen European Voice (nr. 11, 19.-25. marts 2009) har ca. 500 tjenestemænd fra Kommissionen igennem et år fået uddannelse i de opgaver, der venter i EU's diplomati, hvis Lissabontraktaten træder i kraft.
According to a report in the newspaper, European Voice (number 11, 19-25 March 2009), some 500 Commission officials have been training for a year to carry out the duties expected of the EU's diplomatic corps if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force.
Nu er sagen imidlertid den, at den irske befolkning stemte nej ved folkeafstemningen om Lissabontraktaten sidste år.
The fact is, however, that the Irish people voted against the Lisbon Treaty in last year's referendum.
Tidligere har flertallet af nederlænderne og franskmændene stemt nej til det oprindelige forslag til en ny forfatning for EU.
Previously, a majority in the Netherlands and in France voted against the original proposal for a new EU constitution.
I lyset af dette må oplysningerne i European Voice nærmest betragtes som en hån mod de demokratiske principper, som vores vestlige samfund bygger på.
In the light of that situation, the reports in the European Voice can only be regarded as an affront to the democratic principles on which our Western society is based.
Kan Kommissionen forklare, hvorfor Kommissionens tjenestemænd bliver uddannet til at varetage arbejdsopgaver, som EU's medlemsstater endnu ikke har godkendt?
Can the Commission explain why Commission officials are in training for duties which the Member States have not yet approved?
Hvordan begrunder Kommissionen, at den blæser på den demokratiske proces?
How does the Commission justify its disregard for the democratic process?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3291/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3291/09
Om: Prøvelse af EU-lovgivning
Subject: Review of EU legislation
En almindelig formulering i Kommissionens lovgivningsforslag er, at »subsidiaritetsprincippet overholdes«.
A common formulation in Commission legislative proposals is ‘with due respect for the subsidiarity principle’.
Ifølge dette princip (artikel 5 i den gældende traktat) skal foranstaltninger på EU-plan kun træffes, når de fastsatte mål med lovgivningen ikke kan nås ved blot at træffe foranstaltninger på medlemsstatsplan.
According to this principle (Article 5 of the current Treaty), action shall be taken at EU level only where the objectives of the legislation cannot be achieved through action at Member State level alone.
Flere af de forslag til direktiver og forordninger, der på det seneste er blevet forelagt for Europa-Parlamentet, navnlig forslag med henblik på skærpet tilsyn med de finansielle markeder, har imidlertid igen rejst spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt lovgivningsinitiativer ikke også bør tages på et højere plan end EU, f.eks. i OECD og IMF.
Several of the proposals for directives and regulations recently submitted to the European Parliament, however, primarily those with a view to increasing supervision over the financial markets, have raised the question of whether legislative initiatives should not also be taken at a higher level than the EU, e.g. in the OECD and the IMF.
Vil Kommissionen redegøre for sin holdning til dette spørgsmål?
Will the Commission state its views on this subject?
Hvilke fordele og ulemper er der efter Kommissionens opfattelse ved at indføre en sådan prøvelse af al ny fællesskabslovgivning?
What, in the Commission's view, are the advantages and disadvantages of undertaking a review of all new Community legislation in this light?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3292/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3292/09
Om: Bliver EU-støtten til tobaksindustrien bragt til ophør
Subject: Cessation of EU support to the tobacco industry
Verdenssundhedsorganisationen konstaterer, at cigaretrygning og anden tobaksbrug forårsager 5,4 mio. dødsfald årligt.
The World Health Organisation reports that cigarette smoking and other tobacco use causes 5.4 million deaths every year.
Tobaksbrug er dermed en af de vigtigste dødsårsager i verden.
The use of tobacco is, therefore, one of the principal causes of death in the world.
I et forsøg på at få især unge til at holde op med at ryge indledte Kommissionen i marts 2005 HELP-kampagnen.
In an attempt to persuade young people, primarily, to give up smoking, the Commission launched the ‘Help’ campaign in March 2005.
Det virker imidlertid underligt, at EU gennem flere år parallelt med kampagnen har udbetalt store beløb i støtte til tobaksdyrkning i navnlig Italien og Grækenland.
It seems strange, however, that, in tandem with the campaign, the EU has for several years paid out large sums in support for tobacco growing, mainly in Italy and Greece.
Ifølge oplysninger i nettidsskriftet Europa-Nytt (den 10. oktober 2008) brugte EU i løbet af sidste år næsten 17 mio. EUR på at oplyse om tobakkens skadelige virkninger.
According to reports in the online journal, Europa-Nytt (10 October 2008), last year the EU spent almost 17 million euro on information about the negative effects of tobacco.
Samtidig brugte EU hele 321 mio. EUR på at finansiere tobaksdyrkning.
At the same time, the EU spent no less than EUR 321 million on funding tobacco plantations.
Hvordan begrunder Kommissionen denne inkonsekvens?
How does the Commission justify this inconsistency?
Kan Kommissionen garantere, at støtten til tobaksindustrien ophører senest i 2010 som tidligere lovet?
Can the Commission guarantee that support to the tobacco industry will cease no later than 2010, as previously pledged?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3293/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3293/09
Om: EU's mangemillionkampagne skal sikre ratificeringen af Lissabontraktaten
Subject: EU's multimillion campaign to secure ratification of Lisbon Treaty
Ifølge oplysninger i den irske avis Irish Times (den 14. marts 2009) vil Kommissionen støtte jasiden i forbindelse med folkeafstemningen om Lissabontraktaten i Irland senere i år.
Reports in the Irish Times (14 March 2009) claim that the Commission intends to become actively involved in the campaign to secure approval of the Lisbon Treaty ahead of the referendum in Ireland later this year.
Hvis oplysningerne er korrekte, rejser de flere afgørende spørgsmål.
If the reports are correct, they raise a number of important questions.
Vil Kommissionen virkelig tilstræbe saglighed og balance i de oplysninger, der kommer ud til vælgerne i Irland?
Will the Commission actually try to attain objectivity and balance in the information which reaches the voters in Ireland?
Vil Kommissionen f.eks. oplyse dem, der stemte ja ved den første folkeafstemning, om, at Lissabontraktaten vil tvinge Irland til en militær oprustning, som har til formål at skabe en militær union?
Will the Commission, for example, inform those who voted in favour in the first referendum that the Lisbon Treaty will force Ireland into a military build-up with the aim of creating a military union?
Vil Kommissionen oplyse dem, der stemte ja, om, at de nu står over for arbejdsløshed og skattestigninger, fordi indførelsen af euroen har gjort det muligt at forsømme Irlands økonomi i mange år?
Will the Commission inform those who voted in favour that they are now faced with unemployment and tax increases because the adoption of the euro has made it possible to mismanage the Irish economy for several years?
Vil der overhovedet være nogen oplysninger, som har til formål at forklare dem, der stemte ja sidste gang, at de gjorde det på forkert grundlag?
Will any information at all attempt to explain to those who voted in favour last time that they did so on erroneous grounds?
Hvordan begrunder Kommissionen, at den overhovedet blander sig i en national folkeafstemning?
How does the Commission justify getting involved in a national referendum at all?
Vil Kommissionen for eftertiden mene, at den uhindret kan bruge finansielle midler til at påvirke andre nationale holdninger til EU-spørgsmål rundt omkring i EU?
Will the Commission in future feel free to use financial resources to bring about changes in other national positions on EU affairs throughout the EU?
Kunne Kommissionen forestille sig at afsætte finansielle midler til at påvirke den politiske opinion i Tyskland og Frankrig?
Could the Commission contemplate allocating financial resources to rectify political opinion in Germany or France?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-3294/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3294/09
Om: EU's mangemillionkampagne skal garantere et ja til Lissabontraktaten
Subject: EU's multimillion campaign to guarantee approval of Lisbon Treaty