natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hovedparten af denne post er uønsket, om end skadevirkningerne af kommercielle kataloger og »særlige tilbud« fra banker og andre finansielle institutioner primært er af miljømæssig karakter, da der fældes uhyre mange træer for at kunne trykke reklamesager, der gerne smides direkte i skraldespanden, ligesom der sendes kolossale mængder kulstofgasser ud i atmosfæren, når de hundreder af millioner, hvis ikke milliarder, af årlige forsendelser skal transporteres ud til husstandene.
Most of it is unwanted, although in the case of commercial catalogues and ‘special offers’ from banks and other financial institutions the principal damage is environmental, with enormous numbers of trees cut down to print material that is often thrown straight in the bin, as well as large amounts of carbon gases released into the atmosphere to allow the transportation of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of items a year.
En andel af disse postomdelte tryksager er ulovlige eller skjulte svindelnumre, som i flere tilfælde udgør en overtrædelse af de nationale regler.
A proportion of this type of mailshot takes the form of criminal or other types of ‘scam’ which may or may not infringe national regulations.
I begyndelsen af juli 2011 lavede BBC-programmet Panorama en grundig undersøgelse af dette emne, herunder konsekvenserne for nogle af de ældre og sårbare mennesker, som bliver ofre for disse svindelnumre.
At the beginning of July 2011, the BBC investigative programme Panorama looked into this issue in some detail, including the effects on the lives of some of those old and vulnerable people taken in by such scams.
I Det Forenede Kongerige er Royal Mail, som har fået hård konkurrence i de mere rentable byområder, blevet mere og mere afhængig af adresseløse forsendelser for at kunne generere de indtægter, der er nødvendige for at opfylde virksomhedens forsyningspligt.
In the UK, the Royal Mail, damaged by the opening of competition to its more profitable urban distribution routes, is increasingly dependent on junk mail to generate the revenue necessary to fulfil its universal service obligations.
Panorama afslørede, at en betydelig del af denne post, herunder »svindelpost«, stammer fra udlandet, men distribueres via et nederlandsk clearingselskab, som medvirker til at skjule postens egentlige oprindelsesland, inden den leveres til folks dørtrin i Det Forenede Kongerige.
Panorama revealed that a significant proportion of such mail, including ‘scam mail’, originates abroad but is distributed via a Dutch clearing company, which effectively helps to disguise the true origin of the mail before it is delivered to people’s doorsteps in the UK.
Det samme mønster kan meget vel findes i andre medlemsstater.
It may well be the case that this pattern is common in other Member States.
Når postens egentlige oprindelsesland holdes skjult, narres modtageren at tro, at »tilbuddet« stammer fra Det Forenede Kongerige — og dermed er omfattet af lovgivningen i Det Forenede Kongerige — og det gør det ydermere vanskeligt for de retshåndhævende myndigheder, som arbejder målrettet for at identificere og fjerne denne post, at nå deres legitime mål.
Not only does this mean that the recipient is fooled into believing that the ‘offer’ has originated in the UK — and will, therefore, be subject to UK law — but this camouflaging of the true international origin of mail makes it more difficult for law enforcement officials dedicated to identifying and removing such mail to achieve their legitimate objectives.
Mener Kommissionen, at der bør gennemføres en betydelig stramning af lovgivningen på dette område?
Does the Commission believe that there needs to be a significant tightening of regulation in this area?
Stort set alle verdens regeringer har tilsluttet sig Verdenspostforeningen, som har fastlagt regler for den internationale postomdeling.
Almost all the world’s governments are signatories to the Universal Postal Union, which lays down rules covering international mail deliveries.
Har EU nu selv tilsluttet sig Verdenspostforeningen, og er det Kommissionens opfattelse, at det at skjule en postforsendelses reelle oprindelsesland er i overensstemmelse med Verdenspostforeningens grundlæggende principper?
Is the EU now itself a party to the UPU, and is it the Commission’s understanding that the disguising of the true international origin of any type of mail is consistent with the UPU’s founding principles?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-008236/2011
Question for written answer E-008236/2011
Om: Oligopolistisk kontrol over filmdistributionen i EU
Subject: Oligopolistic control over film distribution within the EU
Filmproducenterne påstår ikke, at der indgås formelle aftaler mellem distributørerne og biografejerne, men at der foreligger en indforstået aftale om, at biografejerne ved at afvise en lidet lovende film risikerer ikke at få ret til at vise den næste kassesucces med Tom Cruise og Matt Damon.
The claim is not that any formal deals are made between distributors and cinema owners, but that there exists an unspoken understanding that refusal to take up an unpromising film may lead to difficulties in acquiring the right to show the next Tom Cruise or Matt Damon blockbuster.
Kommissionen så nærmere på spørgsmålet for nogle år tilbage, men skulle efter sigende være blevet så overbevist af de argumenter, der blev fremført af den hær af dygtige jurister, som American Motion Pictures Association under ledelse af Jack Valenti havde stablet på benene, at den besluttede at ignorere de europæiske filmskaberes protester og dermed lod sagen ligge.
Some years ago, the Commission looked at this issue, but was reported to have been so impressed by the arguments presented by the array of legal talent assembled by the American Motion Pictures Association under the leadership of Jack Valenti that it decided to ignore the protests of European film-makers, and thus let things be.
I mellemtiden er den europæiske filmindustri fortsat skrumpet ind, mens de amerikansk »kidult«-film i stigende grad gør krav på entreindtægterne verden over.
Meanwhile, the European film industry has continued to decline, with American ‘kidult’ movies increasingly dominating the share of box-office takings around the world.
Man kunne be‑ eller afkræfte de europæiske klager over distributionspraksissen inden for EU og eliminere enhver mulighed for overtrædelse af konkurrencereglerne ved at stille det lovkrav, at enhver film, der licenseres til at blive vist i alle EU‑medlemsstater, bør stilles til rådighed for enhver licenseret biograf, der ønsker at vise den, og dermed afskære de store distributørers utilsigtede indflydelse.
The truth, or otherwise, of European complaints over distribution practices within the EU could be established, and any possibility of de facto competition infringements eliminated, by making it a legal requirement that any film licensed to be shown in any EU Member State should be made available to any licensed cinema wishing to show it, thus removing the possibility of any untoward leverage by the major distributors.
Vil Kommissionen overveje at indføre en sådan foranstaltning og i benægtende fald forklare hvorfor?
Will the Commission consider introducing such a measure, and, if not, give its reasons for not doing so?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-008237/2011
Question for written answer E-008237/2011
Om: Forskelle mellem ECB's og Kommissionens syn på kapitalkrav til bankerne
Subject: Reported differences between the ECB and the Commission over capital-adequacy requirements for banks
Direktøren for Bank of England har for nylig udtrykt bekymring over konsekvenserne af Kommissionens forslag om en »fuldstændig harmonisering« af kapitalkravene.
The Governor of the Bank of England has recently expressed concern over the implications of the Commission’s proposals for ‘maximum harmonisation’ over capital-adequacy requirements.
Han synes at være bekymret over, at disse forslag vil forhindre bankmyndighederne i at indføre kapitalkrav, der går ud over Basel III-kravene, som skal træde i kraft senest i 2016.
His concern appears to be that these proposals will prevent the banking authorities from imposing additional capital-adequacy criteria above and beyond the Basel III requirements due to come into force by 2016.
Der er desuden forlydender om, at ECB støtter Bank of England snarere end Kommissionen i dette spørgsmål.
There are also reports that the ECB sides with the Bank of England on this issue rather than the Commission.
Direktørens bekymringer underbygges af det nylige behov for at stressteste bankerne i EU og det faktum, at den reelle risiko for statsbankerot udgør en systemisk trussel mod det europæiske banksystem.
The recent need for stress-testing of EU banks and the systemic threat to the European banking system posed by the real possibility of sovereign defaults serves to underline the legitimacy of the Governor’s concerns.
Han er kendt som en fortaler for en tilbagevenden til en Glass-Steagall-adskillelse af detail- og investeringsbankydelser og har ligesom sin stedfortræder, Andy Haldane, udtrykt bekymring over den ukontrollerede stigning i handelen med derivater, som allerede overstiger værdien af verdens samlede BNP.
He is known to favour a return to a Glass-Steagall separation of retail and investment banking, and, like his deputy Andy Haldane, has expressed concern over uncontrolled growth in derivatives trading, which already comfortably exceeds the value of the world’s entire GDP.
Kan Kommissionen præcisere, hvad den mener med »fuldstændig harmonisering« i denne forbindelse?
Can the Commission clarify what it means by ‘maximum harmonisation’ in this context?
Betyder det konkret, at ECB vil blive afskåret fra at indføre yderligere kapitalkrav, eller at kun Bank of England og andre nationale bankmyndigheder uden for euroområdet er afskåret fra det, medmindre sådanne krav allerede er blevet indført af ECB?
Specifically, does it mean that the ECB would be prevented from imposing additional capital requirements, or only the Bank of England and other national non-Eurozone banking authorities so long as the ECB hasn’t imposed them first?
Mener Kommissionen, at den nylige krise i euroområdet gør det nødvendigt at fremskynde Basel III-kapitalkravene, selv om det indebærer en regulering af lønniveauerne i de banker, der er delvist statsejede eller på anden måde er afhængige af offentlig støtte, eller som ikke har klaret EU's stresstest?
Finally, does the Commission believe that the recent crisis in the Eurozone shows the need to accelerate the Basel III capital-adequacy requirements, even if this involves controlling remuneration levels in banks partly-owned or otherwise dependent on state support or which have failed the EU’s stress tests?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-008238/2011
Question for written answer E-008238/2011
Om: Angivelige brud på kapitalens frie bevægelighed i Det Forenede Kongerige og det juridiske grundlag for kontroller i tilfælde af nationale katastrofesituationer
Subject: Purported violations of free movement of capital in the UK and the legal basis for controls in cases of national emergency
Selvom banker og andre finansinstitutioner er i stand til dagligt at overføre billioner af EUR ind og ud af EU, skabte den tidligere kulturminister David Mellor omfattende omtale i pressen sidste sommer, da han skrev en artikel, der omtalte de besværligheder, han havde haft hos de britiske toldmyndigheder, da han forsøgte at forlade landet for at tage på ferie med tusind pund i kontanter.
Although banks and other financial institutions are able to transfer trillions of euros in and out of the EU on a daily basis, the former Culture Secretary David Mellor generated considerable press coverage last summer when he wrote an article detailing the difficulties he had had at UK customs when trying to leave the country for a holiday with a thousand pounds in cash.
Til hans udtalte irritation fik han fortalt, at reglerne var blevet ændret, og at toldkontrollen nu kunne undersøge enhver, der medbragte mere end tusind pund i kontanter.
To his evident annoyance, he was told that the rules had been changed, and that customs officers could now question anyone carrying more than a thousand pounds in cash.
Personer, der medbragte en sådan sum, kunne også blive forlangt at påvise, at pengene ikke skulle hvidvaskes, med mulighed for beslaglæggelse ved manglende overholdelse.
Those carrying such a sum could also be required to demonstrate that the money was not being laundered, on pain of asset seizure in the event of non-compliance.
Som han påpegede, er tusind pund i kontanter ikke en overdrevet sum for en familie på fire, der skal på ferie, og han var tydeligt generet af den påtrængende udspørgen, som han blev udsat for.
As he pointed out, a thousand pounds in cash is not an excessive amount for a family of four to take away on holiday, and he was clearly irked by the intrusiveness of the questioning to which he was subjected.
Ud fra læsernes reaktion havde han tydeligvis afdækket et vigtigt punkt.
From the response of readers, it appeared he had struck a chord.
Det er stadig ikke besvaret, hvorfor reglerne er blevet ændret, og hvorfor et sådant forhør ikke er forbeholdt dem, som foretager flere rejser og ved forskellige lejligheder påvises at medbringe en betydelig mængde kontanter.
It remains an open question as to why the rules were changed and why such questioning is not restricted to those who make multiple journeys and are found to be carrying a significant amount of cash on different occasions.
Kommissionen har tidligere anlagt sag mod den britiske regering angående pålagte restriktioner for den mængde alkohol, som kan indføres af rejsende, selv når det var tydeligt, at en væsentlig del af dem indførte meget store mængder, der ikke udelukkende var til personlig brug.
The Commission has taken legal action against the British Government in the past over restrictions imposed on the amount of alcohol that can be brought in by travellers, even when it was clear that a significant number of them were bringing in very large quantities that were not purely for personal use.
Mener Kommissionen, at de nye politikker rejser juridiske dilemmaer, og har Kommissionen søgt afklaring hos de britiske toldmyndigheder angående spørgsmål i forbindelse med gennemførelsen?
Does the Commission believe that the new policy raises legal difficulties, and has the Commission sought clarification from the UK customs authorities over details of its implementation?
I den anden ende af skalaen rapporteres det, at velhavende personer og virksomheder i Grækenland pga. en forventning om en græsk nulstilling eller udelukkelse af euroområdet har ført store mængder penge ud af landet via banksystemet i en størrelsesorden, der truer den græske banksektors solvens.
At the other extreme, it is reported that in Greece, wealthy individuals and companies have been transferring large quantities of money out of the country through the banking system in anticipation of Greek default or expulsion from the Eurozone of an order of magnitude that threatens the solvency of the Greek banking sector.
Kan Kommissionen bekræfte, at TEUF tillader, at nationale myndigheder pålægger kapitalkontrol i tilfælde af denne type, og desuden oplyse, om der er tidsbegrænsninger på foranstaltninger, som er udformet til at beskytte en medlemsstats økonomi?
Can the Commission confirm that the TFEU permits capital controls to be imposed by national authorities in cases of this kind, and also confirm whether there are any time limits on measures that are designed to protect the economy of a Member State?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-008239/2011
Question for written answer E-008239/2011
Om: »Omkostningsbaseret« kontra »efterspørgselsbaseret« og følgerne af forskellen i rentepolitik mellem den amerikanske centralbank, Federal Reserve, og Bank of England på den ene side og Den Europæiske Centralbank på den anden
Subject: ‘Cost-push’ vs ‘demand-pull’ and the implications of the divergence in interest rate policy between the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England on the one hand and the ECB on the other
Der er i dag en fortsat debat mellem økonomer om årsagerne til inflation på trods af de monetaristiske forklaringers dominans over de seneste 30 år.
Debates among economists over the cause of inflation continue to this day, despite the dominance of monetarist explanations over the past three decades.
For folkene i »omkostningslejren« fører stigningerne i produktionsfaktorernes omkostninger såsom lønninger og råvarer direkte til inflation.
For those in the ‘cost-push’ camp, increases in the cost of factors of production such as wages or raw materials lead directly to inflation.
De klassiske monetaristers forklaringer lyder på den anden side på, at inflation udelukkende er et monetært fænomen, og at inflation skyldes en stigning i mængden af penge i cirkulation, hvor dette ikke afvejes af en tilsvarende stigning i mængden af varer og tjenester.
Classical monetarist explanations, on the other hand, hold that inflation is purely a monetary phenomenon, that inflation is caused by an increase in the volume of money in circulation where this is not matched by a corresponding increase in the volume of goods and services.
I denne optik kan stigninger i prisen på individuelle råvarer aldrig i sig selv være årsag til inflation, men er næsten altid udtryk for en løsere monetær politik på nationalt eller internationalt niveau.
On this reading, increases in the price of individual commodities can never in themselves be the cause of inflation, but are almost invariably expressions of looser monetary policy at a national or international level.
Selvom begge sider anerkender den forvridende effekt af producent- eller forsyningskarteller såsom OPEC, er en stigning i prisen på en råvare såsom olie eller kobber for monetarister ikke en slags »udefra kommende« chok, men er nødvendigvis relateret til pengeforsyningen, selvom det er et faktum, at pengeforsyningen i små eller mellemstore lande sandsynligvis ikke har nogen mærkbar virkning på prisen på råvarer, der handles internationalt, såsom olie, og derfor for disse lande kan virke som et udefra kommende fænomen, som de ikke har meget kontrol over.
Though both sides can acknowledge the distorting effects of producer or supply cartels like OPEC, for monetarists a rise in the price of a commodity like oil or copper is not some kind of ‘exogenous’ shock, but will necessarily be related to the supply of money, even if it is true that the money supply of smaller or medium-sized countries is unlikely to have any appreciable effect on the price of internationally-traded commodities like oil, and may, thus, appear to those countries as exogenous phenomena over which they have little control.
Disse tilsyneladende teoretiske forskelle har opnået en ny betydning, for så vidt som de ser ud til at ligge til grund for forskellige tilgange til rentepolitik mellem Federal Reserve Bank og Bank of England på den ene side og Den Europæiske Centralbank på den anden.
These apparently theoretical differences have acquired a new significance insofar as they appear to underlie divergent approaches in interest rate policy between the Fed and the Bank of England on the one hand and the ECB on the other.
Den velrenommerede direktør for Bank of England, Mervyn King, har for nylig udtalt, at en løsere monetær politik er en fornuftig reaktion på en væsentlig stigning i råvarepriserne, og dette gentages af repræsentanter for Federal Reserve Bank og mange demokrater i kongressen, der støtter en ekspansiv monetær politik.
The much respected governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, has recently suggested that a looser monetary policy is a reasonable response to a significant rise in commodity prices, and this is echoed by Fed officials and many Democrats in Congress who support expansionist monetary policies.
ECB synes derimod at indtage det monetaristiske synspunkt, at en gradvis stigning i renterne i hele euroområdet er nødvendig for at dæmpe inflationen, uanset niveauet af verdens råvarepriser.
The ECB, conversely, appears to take the monetarist view that a gradual rise in interest rates throughout the Eurozone is necessary to contain inflation, regardless of the level of world commodity prices.
Selv dem, der er på vagt over for stigende rentesatser i det aktuelle klima, indser, at der skal findes en fin balance mellem på den ene side at bevare det økonomiske opsving og på den anden valutaens troværdighed.
Even those who are wary of increasing interest rates in the current climate realise that there is a delicate balance to be struck between maintaining economic recovery on the one hand and the credibility of the currency on the other.
Mener Kommission, at Bank of England og Federal Reserve Bank fejlagtigt ser stigninger i råvarepriser som »udefra kommende«, og tilslutter ECB sig formelt en »omkostningsbaseret« eller en »efterspørgselsbaseret« inflationsteori?
Does the Commission believe that the Bank of England and the Fed are wrong to see commodity price increases as ‘exogenous’, and does the ECB formally subscribe to a ‘cost-push’ or a ‘demand-pull’ theory of inflation?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-008240/2011
Question for written answer E-008240/2011
Om: Fleksibilitet i forbindelse med metoder til slagtning af dyr i EU
Subject: Flexibility apropos of animal slaughter methods used within the EU
For nogle få år siden blev der i britisk tv vist et program med en norditaliensk landbruger, der holdt sine dyr på åbne græsningsarealer før slagtning.
A few years ago on British television, a programme was aired that showed a north Italian smallholder who kept his animals on open grazing land prior to slaughter.
Han ønskede at bruge kødet fra en af sine grise til sin egen familie, og derfor bad han, som han plejede, en lokal, kvalificeret jæger om en morgen at komme til hans mark, hvor jægeren langsomt tog sigte og dræbte grisen med et rent skud, da den græssede stille og roligt.
He wanted to use the meat from one of his pigs for his own family, so, as was his custom, he asked a local, qualified, hunter to come to his field one morning, where he slowly took aim and killed the pig with a clean shot as it was gently grazing.
Dyret havde en god alder, og døden indtraf øjeblikkeligt.
The animal was a good age and death was instantaneous.
Som det er normalt i Italien, blev hele dyret derefter parteret og brugt, og noget af kødet blev spist af landbrugerens familie i løbet af de efterfølgende dage, mens andre dele enten blev hængt eller nedkølet og spist i løbet af de næste seks måneder.
As is normal in Italy, the whole animal was then stripped and used, with some of the meat being eaten by the farmer's family over the coming days while other parts of the carcass were either hung or refrigerated to be eaten over the next six months.
Hele processen var på enhver måde eksemplarisk.
The whole process was in every sense exemplary.
EU's bestemmelser er med til at sikre, at størstedelen af dyr, der slagtes inden for EU, ikke slagtes på denne måde, men i stedet slagtes på store slagterier.
EU regulations help to ensure that the vast majority of animals slaughtered within the EU are not slaughtered in this way, but are, instead, slaughtered in large abattoirs.
Dette har ført til bekymringer over både det faktum, at dyr ofte skal rejse over store afstande mellem landbruget og slagteriet, og over den frygt, som dyr oplever på slagtestedet, når de lugter blod og hører skrigene fra andre dyr, der lider nød.
This has led to concerns over both the fact that animals are often required to travel significant distances between farm and abattoir, and the fear experienced by the animals at the place of slaughter as they smell blood and hear the cries of other animals in distress.