natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Under normale omstændigheder burde sådanne betingelser kun anvendes i et begrænset omfang i de tilfælde, hvor de begrænser arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed.
Normally such conditions should apply on a limited basis where they restrict the free movement of workers.
Selv i tilfælde hvor sådanne sprogmæssige krav kan retfærdiggøres, ville det så ikke være mere passende at gøre det muligt for virksomheder og arbejdstagere at indgå en arbejdskontrakt for så derefter at give arbejderne mulighed for at erhverve de nødvendige sproglige færdigheder frem for på forhånd at lave en bestemmelse, der ikke er helt klar?
Even where such linguistic requirements could be justified, would it not be more appropriate to allow the companies and workers to conclude employment contracts and subsequently give workers the necessary opportunities to acquire language proficiency, rather than make in advance a stipulation that is not fully clear.
Mener Kommissionen ikke, at kravet om attesterede sproglige færdigheder for jobsøgere er en hindring, der afskrækker statsborgere i en medlemsstat at søge arbejde på lige fod?
Are language certificate requirements for jobseekers not effectively a barrier deterring Member State nationals from even applying for the jobs concerned?
Er det tilladt at kræve færdigheder i det pågældende sprog i flagstaten, når direktiv 2008/106/EF om minimumsuddannelsesniveauet for søfartserhverv angiver, at de skal være i stand til at kommunikere på de hovedsprog, der tales af passagerne om bord, og som i mange tilfælde kan være forskelligt fra flagstatens sprog?
Is it admissible to require proficiency in the language of the flag state, given that Directive 2008/106/EC on the training of seafarers stipulates that they must be able to communicate in the principal languages of the passengers on board, which may in many cases be different from the language of the flag state?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003528/2011
Question for written answer E-003528/2011
Om: Gennemførelse af direktivet om traditionelle plantelægemidler (2004/24/EF)
Subject: Implementation of the directive on traditional herbal medicinal products
I meddelelsen fra 2008 om rapporten om de erfaringer, der var indhøstet med anvendelsen af bestemmelserne i kapitel A i direktiv 2001/83/EF som ændret ved direktiv 2004/24/EF på de særlige retningslinjer, der finder anvendelse på traditionelle plantelægemidler, oplyste Kommissionen, at medlemsstaterne pr. 30. juni 2007 kun havde fremsendt 110 ansøgninger om forenklet registrering.
In its 2008 communication concerning the report on the experience acquired as a result of the application of the provisions of Chapter 2a of Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended by Directive 2004/24/EC, on specific provisions applicable to traditional herbal medicinal products, the Commission stated that as of 30 June 2007 only 110 applications for simplified registration had been made in the Member States.
Den præciserede ligeledes, at disse ansøgninger var meget forskelligt fordelt, da nogle lande havde registreret over 20 på denne dato, mens der i de fleste lande var meget få eller slet ingen registrerede ansøgninger.
It also stated that the number of applications was very unevenly distributed: although in some Member States more than 20 applications had been made, in most the number was extremely low or zero.
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, hvordan dette tal har udviklet sig i mellemtiden?
Could the Commission say how the situation has developed in the meantime?
Er Kommissionen ikke bekymret over det ringe antal ansøgninger fra medlemsstaterne om forenklet registrering?
Is the Commission concerned that so few simplified registration applications have been submitted in Member States?
Kan den oplyse om, hvordan den forklarer det?
How does it explain this state of affairs?
Ifølge udvalget for plantelægemidler, der blev nedsat i 2004, vil en fuldstændig anvendelse af direktivet desuden kræve, at der offentliggøres omkring 200‑300 monografier, der skal ajourføres regelmæssigt, mens der i 2008 kun var vedtaget 22 monografier.
Furthermore, according to the Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC), which was set up in 2004, although 22 monographs had been approved by 2008, in order for the directive to be implemented in fullsome 200‑300 monographs need to be published and periodically updated.
Som Kommissionen understreger i sit dokument, kræver det store ressourcer.
As the Commission emphasised in its communication, this calls for substantial funding.
Udvalget for plantelægemidler har imidlertid oplyst, at det ikke råder over de nødvendige ressourcer til gennemførelse af dets arbejde.
The HMPC has made clear that it does not have adequate resources with which to carry out its work.
Kan Kommissionen oplyse, om den har afsat disse supplerende ressourcer siden offentliggørelsen af denne meddelelse?
Can the Commission say whether the HMPC has been provided with additional funding since the communication was published?
I benægtende fald bedes den oplyse, hvilke løsninger, der overvejes i denne forbindelse?
If not, can it say how this problem is to be resolved?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003529/2011
Question for written answer E-003529/2011
Om: Nuklear kontaminering
Subject: Nuclear contamination
Torsdag den 24. marts var mængden af radioaktivt jod i vandet i vandhanerne i Tokyo igen faldet til under den lovlige grænse tilladt for spædbørn, mens det dagen før overskred denne grænse.
On Thursday, 24 March 2011, the level of radioactive iodine in tap water in Tokyo fell back below the legal threshold for babies, after exceeding that threshold the previous day.
Mens flere fødevarer også er blevet kontamineret, hvad ved man så om de miljø- og sundhedsmæssige konsekvenser i Europa, hvis der er nogen?
What information do we have on the environmental and health consequences, if any, of that contamination for Europe?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003530/2011
Question for written answer E-003530/2011
Om: Råd for nuklear sikkerhed på europæisk plan
Subject: Nuclear safety council at European level
Da nogle af de nye medlemsstater i øjeblikket udvikler nukleare programmer, finder Kommissionen det så hensigtsmæssigt, at der oprettes et råd for international nuklear sikkerhed under ledelse af de store internationale agenturer på europæisk plan?
Given that several of the new Member States are currently developing nuclear programmes, does the Commission consider it would be worthwhile to create at European level a nuclear safety and security council under the aegis of the major international agencies?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003531/2011
Question for written answer E-003531/2011
Om: Råd for nuklear sikkerhed
Subject: Nuclear safety and security council
Katastrofen i Fukushima har åbnet debatten mellem folkevalgte og miljøorganisationer om atomkraft.
The Fukushima disaster has opened a debate between politicians and environmental associations on the place of nuclear energy.
Men i Frankrig kommer 76 % af elektriciteten fra atomkraft, og det forventes, at efterspørgslen vil fordobles frem til 2050.
In France, nuclear power accounts for 76 % of electricity, and demand is to double by 2050.
Selv om der er tale om en uundværlig energikilde, har de seneste begivenheder imidlertid vist, at det er afgørende, at den er mere sikker.
Nevertheless, whilst nuclear energy is essential, recent events have shown that it must become more reliable.
Sikkerheden omkring atomkraftanlæg skal også styrkes.
The security and safety of nuclear plants must be increased.
Da denne form for katastrofer har globale miljøkonsekvenser, og ingen lande er beskyttet mod jordskælv eller terrorisme, er der nogen, som foreslår, at der oprettes et råd for international nuklear sikkerhed under ledelse af de store internationale agenturer.
Since this kind of disaster has worldwide environmental consequences and no country is sheltered from the risk of an earthquake or a terrorist attack, some people are proposing the creation of a global nuclear safety and security council under the aegis of major international organisations.
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003532/2011
Question for written answer E-003532/2011
Den 22. marts, der er den internationale vanddag, kunne organisationerne oplyse om de vandmængder, der anvendes til produktion af varer og fødevarer.
On 22 March 2011, World Water Day allowed various organisations to raise public awareness of the amount of water used to produce goods and food.
Man ved, at der skal 15 500 liter vand til at fremstille et kilo oksekød, hvilket ofte er modstandernes argument for en kost med kun lidt kød.
15 500 litres of water are required to produce a kilogramme of beef, which is frequently an argument used by detractors to promote low-meat diets.
Men det er blevet afsløret, at der går 10 000 liter vand til fremstilling af et stykke chokolade (mængden blev ikke præciseret i undersøgelsen foretaget af organisationen Nature Conservancy).
It has now been revealed that 10 000 litres of water are required to produce chocolate (the quantity of chocolate was not indicated in the study carried out by Nature Conservancy).
Er Kommissionen i besiddelse af mere nøjagtige oplysninger om de vandmængder, der er nødvendige til chokoladeproduktion?
Does the Commission have more detailed information on the quantity of water required to produce chocolate?
Skal de europæiske virksomheder, der fremstiller chokolade, redegøre for deres miljøindvirkning, særlig med hensyn til vandforbrug?
Do European companies which produce chocolate have to account for their environmental impact, particularly with regard to water consumption?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003533/2011
Question for written answer E-003533/2011
Om: Anvendelse af forordning (EF) nr. 1108/2009
Subject: Implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009
Det fremgår af artikel 8a, stk. 4, i forordning (EF) nr. 1108/2009, der blev vedtaget inden for rammerne af den anden pakke om et fælles europæisk luftrum, at »flyvepladsoperatører skal overvåge aktiviteter og udviklinger, der kan medføre uacceptable risici for luftfarten i flyvepladsens omgivelser, og, inden for rammerne af deres kompetence, træffe passende risikobegrænsende foranstaltninger«.
Pursuant to Article 8a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009, adopted as part of the second Single European Sky package, ‘aerodrome operators shall monitor activities and developments which may cause unacceptable safety risks to aviation in the aerodrome surroundings and take, within their competence, mitigating measures as appropriate’.
Formuleringen af denne tekst kunne direkte eller indirekte indebære, at flyvepladsoperatøren bliver pålagt beføjelser, der i nogle medlemsstater er overdraget til den offentlige myndighed.
The wording of the text could directly or indirectly imply that aerodrome operators are responsible for exercising powers devolved to public authorities in certain Member States.
Kommissionen skal på forslag fra Det Europæiske Luftfartssikkerhedsagentur (EASA) vedtage gennemførelsesforordninger herom inden 2013.
On the basis of a proposal from the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the Commission is to adopt implementing regulations in this area before 2013.
Kan Kommissionen i denne forbindelse oplyse, om den via disse forordninger agter at ændre fordelingen af tilsynsopgaverne mellem flyvepladsoperatørerne og de offentlige myndigheder, som allerede er fastlagt i medlemsstaterne?
With this in mind, could the Commission say whether it intends to use these regulations to reassess the way in which policing tasks are currently divided in Member States between aerodrome operators and public authorities?
Da flyvepladsledernes opgaver er blevet udvidet betydeligt, agter Kommissionen så at tage spørgsmålet om begrænsning af flyvepladsoperatørernes civile eller strafferetlige ansvar op?
Given that aerodrome operators' responsibilities are being considerably extended, does the Commission also plan to consider whether the civil or criminal liability of aerodrome operators should be limited?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003534/2011
Question for written answer E-003534/2011
Om: Ulovlig eksport til EU fra de af Israel besatte områder
Subject: Illegal exports to the EU from the Israeli-occupied territories
Ifølge en dom fra EU‑Domstolen kan varer fra de palæstinensiske områder, som Israel ulovligt har besat, ikke være omfattet af de præferencesatser, der er indrømmet dette land i associeringsaftalen mellem EU og Israel.
In line with a judgment of the European Court of Justice, produce from the Palestinian Territories illegally occupied by Israel may not benefit from the preferential tariffs granted to Israel under the EU‑Israel Association Agreement.
Men ifølge forskellige officielle kilder (den britiske regering, retten i Montpellier osv.) skulle forskellige israelske selskaber, herunder Carmel Agrexco, Ahava, Sodastreams, have forfalsket visse eksporterede produkters oprindelse.
However, according to several official sources (the British Government, the Court of Montpellier, etc.), various Israeli companies, including Carmel Agrexco, Ahava and Sodastreams, have falsified the origin of certain exported products.
Hvilke foranstaltninger agter Kommissionen at træffe for at kontrollere den egentlige oprindelse af produkter, som Israel eksporterer til en præferencesats til EU?
What measures does the Commission intend to take to check the real origin of products exported by Israel to the EU under preferential tariffs?
Hvordan forholder Kommissionen sig til appellen fra 26 europæiske personligheder (herunder Javier Solana, Romano Prodi, Felipe Gonzales, Richard von Weizsäcker) af 10. december 2010, hvori de kræver, at EU indfører sanktioner mod Israel som følge af genoptagelsen af bosættelserne i de besatte områder?
What is the Commission’s view of the call made on 10 December 2010 by 26 important Europeans (including Javier Solana, Romano Prodi, Felipe Gonzales and Richard von Weizsäcker) asking the EU to take sanctions against Israel following the resumption of the construction of colonies in the occupied territories?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003535/2011
Question for written answer E-003535/2011
Om: Lønforvridning i Europa
Subject: Wage distortion in the EU
Den seneste franske klage over Tyskland, der anklages for at omgå direktivet om udstationerede arbejdstagere, sætter igen fokus på spørgsmålet om lønforvridning i Europa.
The recent complaint lodged by France against Germany accusing that country of circumventing the posted workers` directive has refocused attention on the wage distortion issue in the EU.
Frankrig kritiserer Tyskland for at lade sine slagterier sænke lønnen ved at beskæftige billig arbejdskraft fra Østeuropa.
France is accusing Germany of allowing its abattoirs to slash prices by employing cheap labour from eastern Europe.
Disse arbejdstagere betales mellem tre og syv EUR i timen, mens tyske arbejdstagere får mellem ni og 15 EUR.
They are paid between EUR 3 and 7 per hour, as compared to the hourly wage of between EUR 9 and 15 paid to German workers.
De konkurrerende slagterier har kun en løsning til imødegåelse af denne situation, nemlig at sænke den pris, der betales til producenten.
Competing abattoirs have decided that the only response open to them is to reduce the prices that they pay to stock farmers.
Agter Kommissionen at gennemføre et program til bekæmpelse af disse problemer med konkurrenceforvridning på lønområdet?
Does the Commission intend to implement a programme to combat distortion of competition problems arising from wage distortion issues?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003536/2011
Question for written answer E-003536/2011
Om: Repræsentation i rådet for nuklear sikkerhed
Subject: Representation at the Nuclear Safety Council
Såfremt rådet for international nuklear sikkerhed oprettes under ledelse af de store internationale agenturer, er der så mulighed for, at EU bliver repræsenteret heri med en enkelt stemme, mens det nukleare område hører under de nationale kompetencer?
If the International Nuclear Safety and Security Council were to be set up under the auspices of the major international agencies, is it conceivable that the EU would speak in it with one voice, given that nuclear energy is a national matter?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003537/2011
Question for written answer E-003537/2011
Om: Sikkerhed i forbindelse med lukning af atomkraftværker
Subject: Safety implications of shutting down nuclear power plants
Hændelserne på Fukushima atomkraftværket rejser spørgsmålet om indstilling af de nukleare aktiviteter for nogle af atomkraftværkerne i flere lande.
The events in Fukushima raise the question of whether operations should be halted in certain nuclear power plants in a number of countries.
Men så opstår spørgsmålet om disse atomkraftværkers miljøsikkerhed, når en gang de er lukket.
However, this in turn raises the issue of the environmental safety of these plants once they have been shut down.
Er man i besiddelse af oplysninger om de reelle miljørisici i forbindelse med lukning af et atomkraftværk og om risiciene, når det er lukket?
Is there information available on the actual risks to the environment of shutting down a nuclear power plant and the risks once it has been shut down?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003538/2011
Question for written answer E-003538/2011
Om: Interessekonflikter blandt EFSA's bestyrelsesmedlemmer
Subject: Conflict of interests involving members of EFSA Management Board
Et af EU-agenturerne, Den Europæiske Fødevaresikkerhedsautoritet (EFSA), er kommet i miskredit på grund af et tilfælde af interessekonflikter blandt mindst fire medlemmer af den 14 medlemmer store bestyrelse http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.corporateeurope.org/system/files/files/openletter/Letter-to-Dalli-EFSA-15-March-2011.pdf&ei=uPGSTabMBs6SOtGxockK&sa=X&oi=unauthorizedredirect&ct=targetlink&ust=1301477568109574&usg=AFQjCNHRlZXEu4P-BIbg1U_Aq_0fwke7OA. .
One of the EU agencies, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has come under criticism through a conflict of interests involving at least four members of its 14-person Management Board http://www.corporateeurope.org/system/files/files/openletter/Letter-to-Dalli-EFSA-15-March-2011.pdf .
De fire medlemmer skal i henhold til agenturets vedtægter varetage »offentlighedens interesser«, men står på kommercielle selskabers og lobbygruppers lønningsliste.
According to the statutes of the Authority, these four members ought to be serving ‘the public interest’, and yet they are on the payroll of commercial undertakings and lobby groups.
Derfor følgende spørgsmål: 1.
I should therefore like to ask: 1.
Er Kommissionen bekendt med følgende tekst i »EFSA's politik for interesseerklæringer«: »Alle EU-tjenestemænd og -ansatte skal handle uafhængigt og med integritet, må ikke behandle anliggender, i hvilke de har personlige interesser, eller besidder interesser, der kan tænkes at svække deres uafhængighed« http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/keydocs/docs/doipolicy.pdf. .
Is the Commission aware of the following, taken from the EFSA Policy on declarations of interests: ‘All EU officials and servants are required to act with independence and integrity, cannot deal with matters in which they have personal interests or hold interests likely to impair their independence’ http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/keydocs/docs/doipolicy.pdf 2.
EFSA's administrerende direktør forsvarede sig ved at oplyse, at »fire bestyrelsesmedlemmer skal have en baggrund i organisationer, der varetager forbrugernes interesser såvel som andre interesser i fødevareindustrien«.
The Executive Director of EFSA defended herself by stating that ‘four members of the Board should have their background in organisations representing consumers and other interests in the food chain’.
Hvordan stemmer dette overens med de interne EFSA-regler om, at medlemmer »ikke må have interesser, der på nogen måde kan bringe deres uafhængighed i fare«?
How can this be reconciled with EFSA’s internal rules which state that Board members must not serve interests likely to impair their independence in any way?
Er Kommissionen enig med PVV i, at de pågældende fire bestyrelsesmedlemmer således straks skal nedlægge deres hverv hos EFSA? 4.
Does the Commission agree with the PVV that the four EFSA Management Board members in question should therefore resign from their duties at EFSA immediately? 4.
Er Kommissionen enig med PVV i, at EU-agenturerne hurtigst muligt skal nedlægges, og at deres funktioner skal gives tilbage til de relevante nationale agenturer i medlemsstaterne?
Does the Commission agree with the PVV that EU agencies should be abolished as soon as possible and their functions restored to the relevant agencies in the Member States?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-003539/2011
Question for written answer E-003539/2011
Om: Brug af ESF-midler til jobkonsulentaktivitet udbudt af socialistisk fagforening, som udelukker personer, hvis politiske tilhørsforhold er flamsk
Subject: Use of ESF funds for Jobconsult activity by a Socialist trade union which excludes people with Flemish nationalist convictions
Den socialistiske fagforening ABVV laver i Belgien fremstød for "Jobconsult", gratis rådgivning om arbejde og karriere, med angivelse af ESF- og EU‑logo.
In Belgium the Socialist trade union ABVV is promoting ‘Jobconsult’, free advice on employment and careers, using the logos of the ESF and the EU.
På det tilhørende websted www.abvvjobconsult.be oplyses det, at "der er 35 jobkonsulenter til rådighed til at assistere medlemmet" og videre, at "medlemmerne" får telefonrådgivning, altså kun medlemmerne af denne fagforening.
The associated website, www.abvvjobconsult.be, states that ‘35 job advisers are available to assist members’, and also that ‘the members’ receive advice by telephone, i.e. only members of the trade union.
Den pågældende fagforening udelukker medlemmer, hvis politiske tilhørsforhold er flamsk, hvilket vil sige, at flamlændere ikke får adgang til gratis rådgivning, der er betalt med EU‑midler.
This union does allow Flemish nationalists to join, so that people with Flemish nationalist convictions have no access to free advice paid for from European funds.
Såfremt der anvendes europæiske ESF-midler til finansieringen af gratis rådgivning om arbejde og karriere, hvorfor arbejder konsulenterne så for en privat forening og ikke for en myndighed?
If ESF funds are used to finance free advice on work and careers, why are these advisers working for a private association and not for an authority?
Er det acceptabelt og foreneligt med foreningsfriheden, at sådanne private foreninger fortæller borgerne, at den gratis rådgivning kun er til rådighed, hvis de bliver medlem af foreningen?
Is it acceptable and compatible with freedom of association that these private associations should inform the public that this free advice is available only if they join the association?
Hvis denne gratis rådgivning, betalt med EU‑midler, kun er tilgængelig via medlemskab af en privat forening, er det så acceptabelt, at den private forening udelukker borgere på grund af deres politiske tilhørsforhold?
If this free advice, paid for with European money, is available only via membership of a private association, is it acceptable for the private association to exclude individuals from membership on account of their political convictions?
Sørges der for, at nøjagtig den samme gratis rådgivning stilles til rådighed for borgere i Flandern, der ikke ønsker at blive medlem af en privat forening?
Are measures taken to ensure that, in Flanders, exactly the same free advice is available to people who do not wish to join a private association?
Hvor stort et beløb gives i 2011 til ESF-projektet "Jobconsult" i Belgien?
How much is being spent on this ESF project ‘Jobconsult’ in Belgium in 2011?
Hvor meget af det går til ABVV, og hvor meget går til andre foreninger eller myndigheder?
How much of the funding is being paid to the ABVV, and how much to other associations or authorities?
Hvilket organ beslutter og fører tilsyn med udformningen af ESF-projekter i Belgien?
What body decides on, and supervises, the way in which ESF projects are implemented in Belgium?
Hvem er med i dette organ?
Who belongs to the body?