natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I visse tilfžlde overholdes EU-bestemmelserne ikke. 
In certain instances EU provisions are not respected.
Forskellene vedrżrer vigtige punkter i udbudsprocedurerne ssom offentliggżrelsen af udbuddet, fristen for indgivelse af bud, de garantier, der stilles for tilbudsgivernes deltagelse, minimumsantallet af deltagere og de evalueringsmetoder og Đkriterier, der anvendes ved tildeling af kontrakten (jf. tekstboks 13). 
The differences concern important points of the tendering procedure such as the publicity given to the invitations to tender, the deadline for the submission of the offers, the guarantee lodged for the participation of the tenderers, the minimum number of participants and the evaluation methods and criteria used for awarding the contract (see Box 13).
34 Kommissionen fżlger og analyserer markedspriserne for en ržkke produkter som led i vedtagelsen af udbudsprocedurerne for salg af landbrugsprodukter fra interventionsorganerne og fastsžttelsen af de minimumssalgspriser, der skal vedtages af det relevante forvaltningsudvalg. 
34 The Commission follows and analyses market prices for a number of products in the context of adopting the invitation to tender procedures for the sale of agricultural products held by intervention agencies and the fixing of the minimum sale prices to be adopted by the corresponding management committee.
Eurostat offentliggżr ogs med jžvne mellemrum markedspriser. 35 Medlemsstaternes forpligtelse til at meddele Kommissionen, hvilke modeller for tilbudsindhentning der benyttes (artikel 4, stk. 4, i forordning (EŻF) nr. 
Market prices are also published by Eurostat regularly. 35 The obligation of the Member States to send the Commission the models of the invitations to tender (Article 4(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 3149/92) was abolished by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1127/2007 (OJ L 255, 29.9.2007, p.
29 TEKSTBOKS 13 Spanien Frankrig36 Italien37 Polen Offentliggżrelse i EUT NEJ JA BO1: JA BO2: NEJ NEJ Frist for indgivelse (dage) 15 BO1: 22 BO2: 45 BO1: 8-19 BO2: 10 20 Deltagelsesgaranti 2% BO1: 5 % BO2: 5 euro/ton BO1: 10 % BO2: 15 euro/ton 50 000 PLN (14 200 euro) Minimumsantal deltagere NEJ NEJ JA (2) NEJ Antal tilbudsgivere 1-5 BO1: 6-7 BO2: 3-4 2-4 1-9 Evaluering af priser vs. marked NEJ BO1: NEJ BO2: JA Acceptable priser/ mžngder anfżres i tilbudsindkaldelsen NEJ FORSKELLE I DE REVIDEREDE MEDLEMSSTATERS UDBUDSPROCEDURER OG -BETINGELSER 36 Frankrig: betalingsorgan 1 ONIEP (Office National Interprofessionnel de lŐlevage et de ses Productions); betalingsorgan 2 ONIGC (Office National Interprofessionnel des Grandes Cultures). 
29 BOX 13 Spain France36 Italy37 Poland Publication in OJ No Yes PA1: Yes PA2: No No Submission deadline (days) 15 PA1: 22 PA2: 45 PA1: 8–19 PA2: 10 20 Participation guarantee 2% PA1: 5 % PA2: 5 euro/tonne PA1: 10 % PA2: 15 euro/tonne 50 000 PLN (14 200 euro) Minimum number of participants No No Yes (2) No Number of tenderers 1–5 PA1: 6–7 PA2: 3–4 2–4 1–9 Evaluation of prices vs. market No PA1: No PA2: Yes Acceptable prices/ quantities are indicated in the invitation to tender No DIFFERENCES IN TENDER PROCEDURES AND CONDITIONS BETWEEN MEMBER STATES AUDITED 36 France: Paying Agency 1: ONIEP (Office National Interprofessionnel de l’Élevage et de ses Productions); Paying Agency 2: ONIGC (Office National Interprofessionnel des Grandes Cultures).
37 Italien: betalingsorgan 1: AGEA (Agencia per le Erogazioni in Agricoltura); betalingsorgan 2: Ente Nazionale Risi. Sžrberetning nr. 
37 Italy: Paying Agency 1: AGEA (Agencia per le Erogazioni in Agricoltura); Paying Agency 2: Ente Nazionale Risi.
Revisorerne konstaterede svagheder i de gennemgede procedurer ssom begržnset offentliggżrelse af tilbudsindkaldelsen, lavt antal deltagere Ń i nogle tilfžlde kun n Ń kort tid fra offentliggżrelsen til sidste frist for indgivelse af bud. 
The auditors found weaknesses in the tender procedures examined, such as limited publicity of the tender invitations, low number of participants — which in some cases was just one — short time given between publication and the closing date for the submission of offer.
Hertil kommer, at evalueringen af buddene og tildelingen af aftalerne primžrt er baseret p sammenlignelige data i de modtagne tilbud, uden at der foretages en systematisk sammenligning med andre informationskilder som f.eks. markedspriser. 
Additionally, the evaluation of the offers and the award of contracts are based principally on comparative data of the offers received, with no systematic comparison with other sources of information such as market prices.
De anvendte procedurer sikrer ikke som sdan bne procedurer og den bredeste konkurrence og heller ikke, at der opns de mest fordelagtige betingelser og priser. 
As such, the processes followed do not ensure the openness of the tenders, the broadest competition and that the best conditions and prices are obtained.
En analyse af de gennemgede udbud i en ržkke medlemsstater har vist, at aftalerne vedrżrende en ržkke produkter i flere r er blevet tildelt et begržnset antal virksomheder. 
An analysis of the tenders examined in certain Member States has shown that the contracts for several products were awarded to a limited number of companies over several years.
Ovennžvnte eksempler viser, at der er en risiko for, at man ikke opnr de mest fordelagtige betingelser, navnlig nr kompensationsordningen anvendes. 
The abovementioned examples illustrate the risk that the most advantageous conditions are not achieved, particularly when bartering arrangements are applied.
I sdanne tilfžlde er der to begržnsende faktorer: a) Kompensationsordningens natur begržnser antallet af aktżrer, der eventuelt kan vžre interesseret i at deltage. b) Det er vanskeligt at vurdere buddene, fordi det er svžrt for betalingsorganet at fastsžtte det forventede udbytte, som vil kunne anses for at vžre acceptabelt. 
In such cases, two constraining factors apply: (a) the nature of the bartering arrangements limit the number of parties potentially interested in participating; and (b) the evaluation of the offers is difficult insofar as the paying agency cannot easily determine the expected yields which could be considered acceptable.
REFORMFORSLAG: KOMMISSIONENS NYLIGE INITIATIV OG KONSEKVENSANALYSE AF PROGRAMMET 71. 
REFORM PROPOSAL: A RECENT COMMISSION INITIATIVE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRAMME 71.
I februar 2008 ivžrksatte Kommissionen en detaljeret analyse af ordningen med henblik p udarbejdelsen af et forslag til reform af programmet. 
A detailed analysis of the scheme was undertaken by the Commission starting in February 2008 for the preparation of a proposal for the reform of the programme.
Der blev etableret en tvžrtjenstlig styringsgruppe, som 17 generaldirektorater blev inviteret til at deltage i, der var bredt samrd med medlemsstaterne, de velgżrende organisationer, akademiske eksperter p omrdet, og der blev foretaget en offentlig onlineundersżgelse. 
An inter-service steering group was set up, whereby 17 directorates-general were invited to participate, and a broad consultation with the Member States, the charitable organisations, academic experts in the field and a public online survey took place.
P baggrund heraf vedtog Kommissionen i september 2008 et forslag til žndring af Rdets forordning38 og offentliggjorde en konsekvensanalyse om ordningen. 
As a result the Commission adopted in September 2008 a proposal for the amendment of the Council Regulation38 and published an impact assessment report on the scheme.
Dette forventes at resultere i et ny retsgrundlag for 2010-programmet. 
This is expected to lead to a new legal framework for the 2010 programme.
De vigtigste elementer i Kommissionens forslag: a) to forsyningskilder: interventionslagre eller produkter direkte opkżbt p markedet. Hvis der er egnede interventionslagre, bżr disse dog fżrst og fremmest bruges b) stżrre variation i de fżdevarer, der uddeles: De fżdevarer, der uddeles, bżr ikke lžngere vžre begržnset til dem, der er omfattet af intervention c) langsigtet perspektiv: For at hżjne effektiviteten bżr EUŐs fżdevarehjžlpeprogram etableres for tre r ad gangen d) klarere prioriteringer: Medlemsstaterne skal basere deres stżtteansżgninger p de nationale fżdevareuddelingsprogrammer, idet de gżr rede for deres ml og prioriteringer e) medfinansiering: Medfinansiering gżr det muligt at styrke ordningens samhżrighedsaspekt, sikre tilstržkkelig planlžgning og stżrre synergi mellem de forskellige aktżrer f) styrkelse af overvgning og rapportering: Kravene til rapporteringen p de forskellige niveauer vil blive strammet op. 
The main elements of the Commission proposals are: (a) two sources of supply: intervention stocks or products directly purchased from the market, with priority given to the use of suitable intervention stocks; (b) wider variety of foods to be distributed: the products distributed would no longer be limited to those for which intervention applies; (c) long-term perspective: in order to enhance its efficiency, the Community food distribution plan would be established for a three year period; (d) clearer priorities: Member States would base their aid requests on national food distribution programmes, setting out their objectives and priorities; (e) co-financing: the introduction of co-financing would underpin the cohesion dimension of the scheme, ensure proper planning and reinforce synergies between the various actors; (f) reinforcing monitoring and reporting: reporting obligations at various levels would be increased.
Retten erkender fordelene ved disse kommissionsforslag, hvoraf nogle, hvis de gennemfżres, vil bidrage til at afhjžlpe en ržkke af de svagheder, der er konstateret ved denne revision, f.eks. behovet for at mlrette EU-stżtten mere effektivt, inddragelsen af programmet i en bredere socialpolitik, stżrre variation i de produkter, der uddeles, og behovet for at forbedre forvaltnings-og administrationssystemerne, isžr udbudsprocedurerne. 
The Court recognises the benefit of these Commission proposals, some of which, if implemented, would help to remedy certain weaknesses identified by this audit such as the need for better targeting the EU aid, the inclusion of the programme in a broader social policy, the enlargement of the variety of products to be distributed and the need for improving management and administrative systems, especially tendering procedures.
Retten understeger imidlertid, at reformen af de fleste af markederne under den fžlles landbrugspolitik, og interventionslagrenes faldende niveau i de senere r, tyder p, at der er et behov for at overveje, om det er hensigtsmžssigt at fortsžtte med at finansiere denne foranstaltning over udgifterne til den fžlles landbrugspolitik39. 
However, the Court emphasises that the reform of most of the markets under the CAP and the declining level of the intervention stocks in recent years imply that there is a need to reflect on the opportunity of continuing to finance this measure through CAP expenditure39.
38 Forslag til Rdets forordning KOM(2008) 563/3. 
38 Proposal for a Council Regulation COM(2008) 563/3.
39 Reglerne vedrżrende den fžlles landbrugspolitik og navnlig reglerne vedrżrende markedsstżtteforanstaltninger indebžrer en ržkke vanskeligheder, som Kommissionen allerede har identificeret, ssom flerrig planlžgning, hvad der nžppe er foreneligt med EGFL-finansiering, og det forhold, at det ikke er muligt at overfżre uudnyttede bevillinger til de fżlgende regnskabsr. 31 Sžrberetning nr. 6/2009 Ń Den Europžiske Unions fżdevarehjžlp til socialt drligt stillede personer: en vurdering af mlene og de anvendte midler og metoder 
39 CAP rules and especially those for the market support measures imply certain difficulties already identified by the Commission like multiannual planning, which is hardly compatible with EAGF financing, and the impossibility of transferring non-used appropriations to the following years. 31 Special Report No 6/2009 — European Union food aid for deprived persons: an assessment of the objectives, the means and the methods employed
I denne sammenhžng żnsker Retten ogs at henlede opmžrksomheden p det forhold, at programmet, som det gennemfżres, ikke ČgiverÇ de socialt drligt stillede en ret til EU-stżtte. 
In this respect the Court also wishes to draw attention to the fact that the programme as implemented does not ‘give’ any right of the deprived persons to EU aid.
Det er ikke i trd med den stżtte, der normalt ydes til landbrugssamfundet under den fžlles landbrugspolitik. 
This is not in line with the support provided traditionally by the CAP to the agricultural community.
Dertil kommer, at programmets effekt med hensyn til markedsinterven-tion svžkkes yderligere af, at der ved opkżb p markedet ikke skelnes mellem EU-varer og importerede varer. En foranstaltning, der direkte stżtter opkżb af importerede produkter, er ikke i overensstemmelse med den fžlles landbrugspolitiks ml. 
Furthermore, the fact that market purchases would make no distinction between domestic and imported products further weakens the effect of the programme in terms of market intervention, as a measure directly supporting the purchase of imported products is not in line with the objectives of the CAP.
Kilde: velgżrende organisationer 32 Kilde: velgżrende organisationer Sžrberetning nr. 
Source: Charitable Organisations.
6/2009 Ń Den Europžiske Unions fżdevarehjžlp til socialt drligt stillede personer: en vurdering af mlene og de anvendte midler og metoder 33 KONKLUSIONER OG ANBEFALINGER ER PROGRAMMETS ML STADIG GYLDIGE, OG ER FREMGANGSMDEN HENSIGTSMŽSSIG? 
Special Report No 6/2009 — European Union food aid for deprived persons: an assessment of the objectives, the means and the methods employed 33 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAMME REMAIN VALID AND IS THE APPROACH APPROPRIATE?
DET OVERVEJENDE SOCIALE ML ER FORTSAT GYLDIGT, SELV OM FORBINDELSEN TIL INTERVENTIONSLAGRENE OG DERMED TIL LANDBRUGSUDGIFTERNE ER BLEVET SPINKEL, ... 
THE PREDOMINANTLY SOCIAL OBJECTIVE REMAINS VALID, ALTHOUGH THE LINK WITH INTERVENTION STOCKS AND CONSEQUENTLY WITH AGRICULTURAL EXPENDITURE HAS BECOME TENUOUS, ...
Fżdevarehjžlp til socialt drligt stillede personer blev indfżrt i 1987 som reaktion p forholdene for de socialt drligt stillede under en usždvanligt hrd vinter. 
Food aid for deprived persons was first introduced in 1987 as a reaction to conditions faced by deprived persons during a particularly harsh winter.
Selv om den havde det tosidede ml at hjžlpe de socialt drligst stillede og stabilisere landbrugsmarkederne ved at frigive en del af de betydelige interventionslagre, blev den primžrt anset for at vžre en social foranstaltning. 
Although it had the twin objectives of making a ‘significant’ contribution to the well-being of the most deprived citizens and the stabilisation of agricultural markets through the disposal of part of the substantial intervention stocks, its primary objective was considered to be a social measure.
Det blev anerkendt i den evaluering af foranstaltningen, som Kommissionen offentliggjorde i 1998. 
This was acknowledged in the evaluation of the measure published by the Commission in 1998.
Foranstaltningen blev anset for at vžre egnet til gennemfżrelse p varig basis, indtil lagrene var nedbragt til normal stżrrelse. 
The measure was considered appropriate for implementation ‘on a durable basis until the stocks have been run down to a normal level’.
Budgetmyndigheden mener, at der stadig er behov for stżtten som en social foranstaltning. 
The budgetary authorities consider that there is still a need for the aid as a social measure.
Faktisk ansls det, at omkring 16 % af Unionens befolkning, dvs. ca. 80 millioner borgere, er omfattet af den definition af socialt drligt stillede, som Kommissionen anvender. 
In effect, it is estimated that some 16 % of the population of the Union accounting for some 80 million citizens fall into the definition of deprived persons used by the Commission.
I en erklžring fra 2006 henstiller Europa-Parlamentet, at stżtten opretholdes og żges som led i bestržbelserne p at formindske fattigdom. 
A European Parliament declaration in 2006 called for maintaining and increasing the aid as part of the efforts to reduce poverty.
Kommissionens reformforslag fra september 2008 har til hensigt at forbedre gennemfżrelsen og den forsvarlige żkonomiske forvaltning af programmet, og det indeholder elementer, som, hvis de gennemfżres, vil afhjžlpe en ržkke af de svagheder, Retten har ppeget i denne beretning. 
The Commission’s reform proposal of September 2008 intends to improve the implementation and sound financial management of the programme and contains elements, which, if implemented, will remedy certain weaknesses identified by this report.
Med reformen foreslr Kommissionen imidlertid, at der fortsat anvendes landbrugsmidler til en foranstaltning, som ikke er rettet mod landbrugere eller landbrugssamfundet, og som har flere karakteristika, ssom flerrighed og den ikke-obligatoriske art af stżtten til drligt stillede, som ikke er forenelige med den fžlles landbrugspolitik og navnlig EGFL-finansiering. Sžrberetning nr. 6/2009 Ń Den Europžiske Unions fżdevarehjžlp til socialt drligt stillede personer: en vurdering af mlene og de anvendte midler og metoder 
However, the reform proposes to continue using agricultural funds for a measure, which is not targeted to farmers or to the farming community and with several characteristics such as multiannuality and the non-compulsory nature of support to deprived persons, which are not compatible with the CAP and especially EAGF financing. Special Report No 6/2009 — European Union food aid for deprived persons: an assessment of the objectives, the means and the methods employed
OG INDDRAGELSEN AF SOCIALPOLITIKKER OG SAMORDNINGEN MED LIGNENDE FORANSTALTNINGER VIL STYRKE PROCEDUREN 79. 
AND INTEGRATION WITH SOCIAL POLICIES AND COORDINATION WITH SIMILAR MEASURES WOULD ENHANCE THE APPROACH 79.
Generelt har forvaltningen af programmet vžret pržget af utilstržkkelig samordning og samarbejde med andre nżgleaktżrer p omrdet sociale foranstaltninger i medlemsstaterne. 
In general the programme has operated with insufficient coordination and cooperation with other key actors for social actions in the Member States.
Et sdant samarbejde er nżdvendigt for en bedre forstelse og imżdekommelse af behovene hos de drligt stillede personer og hos de velgżrende organisationer, der gennemfżrer programmet. 
Such cooperation is necessary for better understanding and meeting the needs of the deprived persons and the charitable organisations implementing the programme.
34 ANBEFALING 1 Kommissionen bżr overveje, om det er hensigtsmžssigt at fortsžtte med at finansiere en sdan social foranstaltning over den fžlles landbrugspolitik. 
34 RECOMMENDATION 1 The Commission should consider whether it is appropriate to continue financing such a measure from the Common Agricultural Policy.
ANBEFALING 2 Kommissionen bżr tilskynde medlemsstaterne til at tržffe de nżdvendige foranstaltninger til at integrere programmet i den socialpolitiske ramme og styrke samorordningen og samarbejdet med andre centrale aktżrer p omrdet sociale foranstaltninger for at żge synergien mellem organer med erfaring i forvaltning af sdanne programmer. 
RECOMMENDATION 2 The Commission should encourage Member States to take the necessary steps to embed the programme in the social policy framework and improve coordination and cooperation with other key actors for social actions in order to increase the synergy between bodies experienced in managing such programmes.
PRIORITETER OG MLRETNING MOD MODTAGERNE VIL ŻGE PROGRAMMETS EFFEKT, ... 
PRIORITIES AND TARGETING OF THE RECIPIENTS WOULD INCREASE THE IMPACT OF THE PROGRAMME, ...
Foranstaltningen blev primžrt indfżrt for at lette de socialt drligst stilledes vanskelige situation og var ikke beregnet til at afskaffe al fżde-varefattigdom. 
The measure was introduced primarily to alleviate the difficult situation of the most deprived persons, it was not designed to eliminate all food poverty.
De velgżrende organisationer, der forvalter programmet p operationelt niveau, og som primžrt er bemandet med frivillige, henvender sig endvidere til en mlgruppe, som ikke er tilstržkkeligt stabil til at fremme fuld regnskabspligt og ansvarlighed for den modtagne stżtte. 
Moreover, the charitable organisations that manage the programme at operational level, mostly staffed by volunteers, address a target group which is not sufficiently stable to facilitate full accountability for the aid received.
35 ANBEFALING 3 Med henblik p at żge foranstaltningens effekt bżr Kommissionen definere anvendelige prioriteter til udvžlgelse af stżttemodtagere og mellemled under behżrig hensyntagen til de sžrlige forhold, der gżr sig gžldende ved leveringsmekanismer, der omfatter frivillige organer og ustabile mlgrupper, hvor det er vanskeligt at anvende normalt accepterede administrations-og kontrolmekanismer. ... VARIATIONEN AF DE UDDELTE PRODUKTER BEGRŽNSES AF, AT PROGRAMMET ER KNYTTET TIL PRODUKTER, DER ER OMFATTET AF DE OFFENTLIGE OPLAGRINGSFORANSTALTNINGER ... 
35 RECOMMENDATION 3 In order to increase the impact of the measure, the Commission should define workable priorities to select the recipients and intermediaries of the aid, taking due account of the specificities of delivery mechanisms involving voluntary bodies and volatile target groups to which generally accepted administrative and control mechanisms are difficult to apply. ...THE VARIETY OF PRODUCTS DISTRIBUTED IS CONSTRAINED BY THE PROGRAMME’S LINK TO PRODUCTS ELIGIBLE FOR PUBLIC STORAGE MEASURES, ...
Bestemmelserne tillader, at der opkżbes fżdevarer p fžllesskabsmarkedet, hvis der midlertidigt ikke er produkter disponible p interventionslagrene til gratis uddeling til socialt drligt stillede. 
Legal provisions allow the purchase of food products on the Community market in case intervention stocks are temporarily not available for free distribution to deprived persons.
De fżdevarer, der opkżbes p markedet, skal imidlertid tilhżre samme produktgruppe, som dem p interventionslagrene, hvilket begržnser udvalget af produkter, der er til rdighed til uddeling. 
However, food thus purchased on the market must belong to the same product group as the one in intervention stocks, which limits the choice of products available for distribution.
ANBEFALING 4 Den lovgivningsmžssige begržnsning, at der kun kan fordeles fżdevarer, der er omfattet af ordningen for offentlig oplagring, bżr tages op til revision med henblik p at żge mangfoldigheden, komplementariteten og den ernžringsmžssige vžrdi af de uddelte fżdevarer. Sžrberetning nr. 6/2009 Ń Den Europžiske Unions fżdevarehjžlp til socialt drligt stillede personer: en vurdering af mlene og de anvendte midler og metoder 
RECOMMENDATION 4 The regulatory restriction of foods for distribution to products eligible for intervention storage should be reconsidered in order to increase the diversity, complementarity and nutritional value of the food provided. Special Report No 6/2009 — European Union food aid for deprived persons: an assessment of the objectives, the means and the methods employed
OG DISTRIBUTIONEN ER MEGET UENSARTET 83. 
AND DISTRIBUTION VARIES WIDELY 83.
Der anvendes en bred vifte af systemer i distributionskžden fra forvaltningsmyndighederne til de velgżrende organisationer og til de socialt drligt stillede. 
There is a wide variety of systems applied in the distribution chain from the managing authorities to charitable organisations and to deprived persons.
Der er ingen fžlles standarder eller retningslinjer p EU-plan eller p nationalt niveau vedrżrende kvantiteten eller variationen af de produkter, der skal uddeles pr. person. 
There are no common standards, guidelines at EU or national level concerning the quantity and variety of products to be distribu– ted per person.
Det żger risikoen for, at der kun opns en lav effekt, hvilket kan fżre til ulige behandling af stżttemodtagerne. 
This increases the risk of low impact which may lead to an unequal treatment of the recipients of the aid.