natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Som ordfører er jeg af den opfattelse, at vi kan udelade denne formulering og præcisere, i hvilke til fælde udvalget faktisk har beføjelse — nemlig ved anmodning om udtalelse eller høring i overensstemmelse med artikel 32.
This was the opinion of your rapporteur, accepted unanimously by the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions. It is the proposal which I am submitting today.
Den anden ændring, jeg skal begrunde, vedrører artikel 34.
Nord, assumes greater theoretical importance.
Ordningen har hidtil været den, at der kan stemmes om et forslag uden forhandling, medmindre en gruppe eller mindst ti medlemmer af Parlamentet på forhånd har rejst indvending herimod.
Despite the arguments backing this opinion, your rapporteur would prefer to adopt a different position.
Nu kommer den afgørende sætning: I så tilfælde, altså efter ind vending fra ti medlemmer af Parlamentet, henvises forslaget til fornyet behandling i det kompetente ud valg.
For me, the argument that once the President announces a particular matter to be in the agenda the debate has begun, seems to provide the simplest, clear est and most practical solution.
Det er meget klart og præcist, og vi har tilføjet, at ikke kun formanden kan stille forslag herom, men at tillige et udvalg eller 21 medlemmer af Parlamentet kan gøre det.
Otherwise, we would run the risk of repeating the confusion which occurred in November 1984 concerning the Sherlock report.
Den mulighed, at udvalget skal træffe afgørelse, gælder vel at mærke ikke for beslutningsforslag i henhold til artikel 47, for vi lægger vægt på en formel afgørelse fra Parlamentet — enten på for slag af formanden eller af et udvalg eller af 21 med lemmer.
Then, the rapporteur had not yet spoken, but we had entered into the debate on the general points of the agenda, and the chairman of the Committee on the Environment, Mr Weber, and Mr de Gucht had spoken.
Så skal Parlamentet afgøre, om det går ind for udvalgets beføjelse til at træffe afgørelse eller ej.
Could it really be argued that the debate had not started because Mr Sherlock had not yet spoken?
Det drejer sig navnlig om problemet med henvisning til fornyet udvalgsbehandling.
Another problem which arose following the drawing up of this report concerns the time within which the request for referral of a report back to committee may be submitted.
Vi er af den opfattelse, at en sådan henvisning til fornyet udvalgsbehandling snarere er en hindring, og derfor har denne bestemmelse heller ikke spillet nogen stor rolle i praksis.
The Bureau, giving a wider interpretation of Rule 85, accepted two circumstances in which a request may be submitted, not during the debate on the matter itself, but during the debate on the agenda for the proceedings.
Vi foreslår i stedet for henvisning til fornyet udvalgsbehandling, at betænkningen med forhandling opføres på dagsordenen — altså Parlamentets — for en af de senere mødeperioder.
On the occasion of the Nord mann report, the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions expressed its disagreement with the Bureau's interpretation, and Parliament agreed with its stand.
Nu til proceduren i det udvalg, som har fået sagen overdraget til afgørelse.
From our research, we noted that Rule 85 has a his tory stretching back for more than 20 years.
Der er først problemet vedrørende offentlighed.
It is one of the oldest procedures in the Rules of Procedure, appearing in the 1968 text as Rule 29(5).
Vi tager dermed hensyn til den omstændighed, at der allerede er vedtaget en dagsorden for den igangværende mødeperiode.
The Rule has survived up to today, though, as it did not fall within the more general review of the Rules of Procedure carried out in 1983 by Mr Luster's report.
Man kan ikke under afviklingen af denne dagsorden ændre den ved, at ti medlemmer af Parlamentet rejser indvending.
There are certainly some advantages to the view that a first general debate in the plenary session would facilitate the relevant committee in re-examining a report and the amendments to it.
Derfor vort forslag om at opføre betænkningen på dagsordenen for en af de senere mødeperioder.
But when there has been a geometric increase in the number of reports, and we have reached the point — as we now have — where 1 000 reports are being prepared, and there is a real battle to reserve any space in the agenda of the sessions, is it really still possible, in 1986, to preserve the luxury of two debates which could indeed be held to destroy the idea of unity of examination of affairs?
Endvidere kan alle medlemmer af Parlamentet stille ændringsforslag. Det har vi slået fast i artikel 33, stk. 4.
I am among those who believe that we in the European Parliament should look at ourselves critically, and should cease to be concerned only with its pride.
Når der ikke foreligger nogen betænkning, er det meget van skeligt at drøfte sagen i Parlamentet eller træffe en afgørelse.
They point to the chiefly practical advantages that would be provided by such a solution, giving time for improved regulating of the work of the proceedings.
Der skal derfor for proceduren uden afgivelse af betænkning i overensstemmelse med artikel 99, stk. 1, være den mulighed for undtagelse, at for slaget henvises til fornyet behandling i det kompetente udvalg.
Your rapporteur is of this opinion. And in this spirit I have proposed two amendments which institute this possibility, but on one basic condition: that in the event that a request for referral back to the committee is submitted during discussion on the agenda, the request shall come within the restricted scope of Rule 56 of the Rules of Procedure.
Vi har i det nye stk. 4 nærmere redegjort for udvalgsbeslutningens form.
These are the amendments which your rapporteur is proposing to the Assembly.
Det går fra et forslag fra for manden, som accepteres, til en fuldstændig betænk ning med grundig undersøgelse af det spørgsmål, der skal træffes afgørelse om. I stk. 6 i det nye forslag redegøres der for den procedure, efter hvilken udvalgsbeslutningen formelt godkendes af Parlamentet.
They are changes which should make procedures easier and clearer, and I have tried to put forward the most practicable solutions in the hope that the work of Parliament will, with their help, become smoother, swifter and flow more easily.
Det hedder her, at Parlamentets formand ved åbningen af næste møde underretter Parlamentet om ud valgets afgørelse. Udvalgets afgørelse føres så til pro tokol.
With these thoughts and with this earnest desire, I beg you, Mr President, and colleagues, to approve the alterations submitted to you.
Adam (S). — (EN) Hr. formand, antallet af bestemmelser, der bliver tilbagevist til udvalget for fortolkning og eventuel ændring er stigende.
Having made these observations, the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions proposes that the possibility of holding a general debate should be removed, when a proposal for the referral of a report back to a committee has previously been accepted.
Det afspejler behovet for, at forretningsordenen er i overensstemmelse med det stigende aktivitetsniveau i Parlamentet snarere end nogen indbygget svaghed i selve for retningsordenen.
If however, the proposal was submitted after the debate had taken place, then equal opportunity must be guaranteed for the representatives of those political groups who had not spoken up to the time of the proposal being submitted.
Alle de forslag, der er for Parlamentet i denne uge, har den socialistiske gruppes støtte. Vi er sikre på, at de vil forbedre sagsbehandlingen, hvilket er det primære formål med forretningsordenen.
Therefore, in accordance with a pro posal from the current Bureau, we are asking for a regulation similar to that already contained in Rule 86(2) of the Rules of Procedure to be introduced.
Jeg behøver ikke at gå i detaljer, fordi de er blevet forklaret af ordførerne.
With the proposed regulations, the question of the point of opening of a debate, raised last year by Mr
Udvalget for forretningsordenen og for andragender har på flere møder drøftet de foreslåede nyordninger.
Mr Rothley (S). rapporteur. — (DE) Mr President, I should like to speak for the amendments to Rules 33 and 34 of the Rules of Procedure.
Ellers vil vi udelukke anvendelse af artikel 56 ved vedtagelsen af dagsordenen for mødeperioden.
version of Rule 33 should result in a considerable alleviation of the work of both Parliament and its commit tees.
te den gunstige situation i denne uge på grund af bud getforhandlingen.
We stipulate the form that decisionmaking would take in the committee in more detail in paragraph 4 of the new version.
For det andet mener jeg, at disse spørgsmåls modenhed, som er opnået ved flittige un dersøgelser i de kompetente udvalg, ikke bør tages op igen til bedømmelse i Parlamentet med dets nye sam mensætning fra begyndelsen af næste år.
This can range from a proposal by the chairman being approved by the committee to a complete report with a full debate on the matter to be decided.
Jeg mener derfor, at det vil være det mest korrekte, hvis Fællesskabets nye medlemsstater forefinder en forretningsorden, der er forbedret mest muligt.
Paragraph 6 of the proposed new version sets out the procedure whereby the committee's decision would be formally approved by Parliament.
Hr. Anastassopoulos har også stillet et ændringsforslag til sin egen betænkning, der foreslår, at tilbage visning til udvalget også skal kunne ske i henhold til artikel 56, stk. 1.
There are various simplified procedures in our Rules that have hitherto been inadequately applied in practice.
Det vil vi også støtte. Det forekom mer mig at være helt logisk.
Let me make this clear from an example.
Der er tilfælde, hvor medlemmerne ønsker at tilbagevise betænkninger til udvalg, når forslaget til dagsorden godkendes af Par lamentet på mødet mandag, og det ville være klart bedre at fremsætte disse forslag for Parlamentet med det samme i stedet for at vente til senere på ugen.
And although Parliament debated and reached decisions on a total of about 300 reports in 1983, the procedure under Rule 33 was not invoked even once.
Det vil også medvirke til at rense ud i dagsordenen og befordre Parlamentets arbejde.
This can only mean that the Rule needs to be redrafted.
Endelig vil jeg minde om, at alle de foreliggende ændringsforslag er udslag af behov, der er opstået Parlamentets daglige, praktiske funktion.
The procedure proposed is that the President of Parliament would inform the House of the committee's decision at the opening of the next sitting.
Disse behov har Parlamentets formand hver gang gjort opmærksom på i et officielt brev til udvalget for forretnings ordenen og for andragender.
The com mittee's decision would then be recorded in the minutes. With the approval of the minutes Parliament would be deemed to have formally adopted the decision of the committee.
Dette, mener jeg, giver mig mulighed for at bede såvel Derïi, hr. formand, som vore kolleger om at stemme for de foreslåede ændringer i overbevisningen om, at De på denne måde vil bidrage til den forbedring af Parlamentets funktion, som har interesse for os alle.
I would however point out that this would no longer mean that by raising an objection to the minutes Parliament would have the opportunity to record a different vote on the matter. This would only be a formal procedure that would mean that the decision of the committee had received the approval of Parliament.
Afstemningen finder sted i næste afstemningstid.
For that reason I ask Parliament to approve the proposed amendment.
Alle disse foreslåede ændringer vil gøre forretningsordenen klarere.
It relates to the procedure without debate.
De vil medvirke til fortolkningen, og jeg håber, at de vil støtte Dem og Deres medformænd i behandlingen af procedurespørgsmål, når de opstår.
In its current version the Rule stipulates that a proposal may be put to the vote without debate unless a political group or at least ten Members of Parliament lodge a protest in advance.
Det vi har brug for er et sæt artikler, som ikke kræver hyppige tilbagevisninger til udvalget for forretnings ordenen og for andragender, og som kan hindre de forsinkelser, der opstår på grund af langvarige proceduredebatter i Parlamentet. Vi tror, at de ændringer af forretningsordenen, som vi har for os i denne uge, vil forbedre forholdene, og den socialistiske gruppe vil derfor støtte dem.
Then comes the key sen tence: 'In the latter case' — that is if ten Members have objected — 'the proposal shall be referred back to the committee responsible for reconsideration'.
A 2-161/85) af Dido for udvalget om sociale anliggender og beskæftigelse over forslag fra Kommissionen (KOM (85) 579 endel. - dok.
In such cases it would be for Parliament to decide whether to authorize the committee to take a decision or not.
C 2124/85) til Rådet til forordning om ændring af Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 2950/83 om gennemførelse af afgørelse 83/516/EØF om den europæiske socialfonds opgaver i anledning af Spaniens og Portugals tiltrædelse, og afgørelse om ændring af Rådets afgørelse 83/516/EØF om den europæiske socialfonds opgaver i anledning af Spaniens og Portugals tiltrædelse.
This proposal may be opposed by one tenth of the Members of Parliament as before, in other words the protection of minority rights would be fully safeguarded, just as in the previous version. The decision would moreover be taken at the opening of the sitting following that in which Parliament was informed of the proposal.
Konkret drejer det sig om betænkning fra hr. Amadei, for mand for udvalget for forretningsordenen og for an dragender, som foreslår en ændring af artikel 57, om hr. Anastassopoulos' betænkning vedrørende en ændring af artikel 57, og endelig om de to betænkninger fra hr. Rothley, som vedrører ændringer af artikel 33 og 34 i forretningsordenen.
We propose that instead of being referred back to committee in such cases, the report should be placed on the agenda — the agenda of Parliament, that is — at a subsequent partsession.
Didò (S), ordfører. — (IT) Hr. formand, Spaniens og Portugals tiltrædelse nødvendiggør en ændring af nogle af den europæiske socialfonds bestemmelser med henblik på at åbne mulighed for, at disse to lan de kan få støtte fra denne fond.
I turn now to the procedure in the committee to which the item is referred for its decision. First, there is the problem of whether meetings should be open to the public.
Hr. formand, som talsmand for min gruppe i dette udvalg skal jeg fatte mig i yderste korthed, eftersom ordførerne grundigt har analyseret deres synspunkter og — som De vil bemærke — disse fire betænkninger er blevet enstemmigt vedtaget af det kompetente ud valg i første halvdel af indeværende år.
We take the view that in the case of committee meetings at which a decision is to be taken pursuant to Rule 104(4) of our Rules of Procedure, all Members of Parliament should be entitled to attend.
Vi nærmer os nu årets udgang, og jeg tror, at en yder ligere udsættelse af afstemningen om disse betænk ninger vil indvirke på Parlamentets ordentlige funktion.
Here we are allowing for the fact that an agenda will already have been drawn up for the current partsession.
Årsagerne er indlysende: for det første, kræver en godkendelse af ændringer i forretningsordenen til slutning fra et absolut flertal af Parlamentets 218 medlemmer.
It would be unreasonable for the agenda of the current partsession to be changed during the pro ceedings simply because ten Members had raised an objection.
Som bekendt, hr. formand, er dette et sjældent fænomen i denne sal, og derfor må vi udnyt
We therefore propose that the item should
Didò har til hensigt at ændre ved den afstemning, der skal finde sted nu på torsdag under andenbehandlingen.
voting have, as I am sure you are aware, assumed a particular relevance as a result of the confusion which occurred in this chamber yesterday over the interpretation of Rule 87.
Hos os siger man, at når man holder et bryllup, skal man også være spendabel, og derfor er det absurd af medlems staternes regeringer at udvide Fællesskabet uden i passende omfang at øge midlerne til strukturfonde ne.
There must therefore be provision for an exception to be made pursuant to Rule 99(1) in the case of a procedure without report for the proposal to be referred back to the committee responsible for further consideration.
Socialfonden har allerede undergået reformer i de sidste år, netop for at den kunne blive et effektivt instrument for en fællesskabspolitik, der fremmer beskæftigelsen, og ikke blot et instrument der tjener en tilfældig fordeling af de beskedne finansielle ressourcer.
I shall, Mr President, be very brief in my capacity as coordinator for my political group on this committee, as the rapporteurs have already given a detailed analysis of their opinions and — as you have noted — the four reports were approved unanimously during the first half of the year ending by the competent com mittee.
Hvad selve spørgsmålet angår, har Kommissionen foreslået blandt de særligt prioriterede regioner ud over Portugal også at inkludere syv spanske regioner, hvilket repræsenterer næsten alt det, den spanske og den portugisiske regering havde anmodet om.
We are already at the end of the year, and I feel that any further delay in voting on these reports would be prejudicial to the smooth functioning of Parliament. The reasons are quite evident: firstly, the fact that the approval of amendments of the Rules of Procedure requires an absolute majority of all 218 Members of the European Parliament.
Disse regioner er blevet udvalgt på basis af kriterier, der er fastlagt i fondsforordningen, nemlig: beskæftigelsesindeks, bruttonationalprodukt pr. indbygger, emigrationsopgørelser og den regionale økonomis struktur.
As you know only too well, Mr President, this is a rare occurrence in this chamber, so we should take advantage of this happy circumstance, which has arisen this week thanks to the debate and vote on the budget.
Jeg har nævnt de to nye medlemslande som eksempel, men de samme overvejelser gælder for de andre lande i Fællesskabet.
It reflects the need of our Rules to respond to the increasing level of activity in the Parliament rather than any inherent weaknesses in the Rules themselves.
For nærværende gælder et uendeligt antal prioriteter, og de foranstaltninger, der virksomt burde støttes gennem en koncentration af midler og energi, fortaber sig i utilstrækkelige initiativer. ver.
I do not need to go into the details because they have been explained by the rapporteurs. But as far as Rule 34 is concerned, I believe it is more logical to use the term 'draft agenda' rather than 'the agenda' which was the term used in the original report.
Derfor anmoder vi om, at man benytter den lejlighed, Spaniens og Portugals tiltrædelse byder os, til at gennemføre en generel revision af socialfondens aktiviteter, som, for at der ikke skal spildes yderligere tid, skal foretages i løbet af 1986.
Secondly, I feel that these matters are now ripe for action, following the painstaking research carried out in the competent committees and should not have to be judged again by the newly-composed Parliament which is due to come into effect from the beginning of next year.
Disse re gioner vil nyde godt af en interventionssats på 55% i stedet for 50% og af en fremskyndet modernisering af erhvervsuddannelsescentrene.
In other words, Mr President, I think it is right that the new Member States of the Community should find an improved and amended Rules of Procedure.
Lad os håbe, at jeg får ret, for vi må minde Rådet om, at Parlamentet hævder sin ret til på lige fod at deltage i arbejdet med enhver ændring af socialfondens funktionsmåde.
There are cases where Members want to refer reports back to committee when the draft agenda is being adopted at the Monday sitting, and it would clearly be better to put these requests to the House straight away rather than wait until later in the week.
Det andet problem vedrører den ændring af den nu værende reserve på 40% af socialfondens midler til fordel for de særligt prioriterede regioner i hele Fæl lesskabet, der skal foretages efter Spaniens og Portugals tiltrædelse.
All these proposed changes will make the Rules clearer. They will help with interpretation and I hope they will assist you and your co-vice-presidents in dealing with points of order when they arise.
På dette punkt havde Kommissionen foreslået i løbet af tre år gradvis at gå fra 40 til 42.5% i 1986, til 43,5% i 1987 og til 44,5% i 1988.
What we need is a set of Rules which do not require frequent referral to the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions and which will avoid the delays caused by the lengthy procedural discussions in the House.
I de nye forslag, som Rådet skal have vedtaget, ændrer man Kommissionens oprindelige forslag på to punkter.
Thirdly and finally, Mr President, I should like to recall the fact that all these proposed amendments arose from the needs involved in the day-to-day man agement of affairs in Parliament.
For det første øges reserven på 40% til de særligt prioriterede regioner straks til 44,5% for de næste tre år fra og med 1986.
These needs were pointed out by the President of the Assembly to the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions on each occasion, by formal letter.
For det andet bekræfter man, at Rådet eventuelt vil overveje fra og med 1987 at begynde at tage sine forslag op til revision på grundlag af en rapport fra Kommissionen og dennes eventuelle forslag.
I believe that this fact affords me the opportunity to call both on you, Mr President, and on my other colleagues to vote in favour of the amendments before them, in the certainty that by so doing, they are contributing to the improvement of parliamentary work, which I believe to be in the interests of us all.
Selv om vi tager til efterretning, at Rådet har vist vilje til fra og med 1986 at øge procetsatsen for fondens reserve til Fællesskabets særligt prioriterede re gioner, vil vi i vores beslutningsforslag alligevel insistere på nødvendigheden af, at Rådet:
A 2-124/85) for: finding up-to-date statistics for these countries — to express a sufficiently detailed opinion, but we consider that, with the situation as it is, the decisions that have been taken are adequate, subject to a re-examination of the position at a later date.
Men hvad der betyder endnu mere, er, at der ifølge fondens kriterier sker en forøgelse af den erhvervsaktive befolkning, der bor i områder med absolut prioritet, fra 13 til godt 23 mio og i prioritetsområder fra 54 til godt 61 mio.
These regions will benefit from an intervention rate of 55 per cent instead of 50 per cent, and the modernization of vocational training centres will be speeded up.
1) accepterer vores foreløbige forslag til budget for 1986 for socialfonden,
— a regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 2950/83 on the implementation of Decision 83/516/EEC on the tasks of the European Social Fund with a view to the accession of Spain and Portugal
2) accepterer vores anmodning om, at Kommission en forpligtes til inden udgangen af 1986 at forelægge nye forslag til en fastlæggelse af socialfondens opgaver.
The Commission's proposal for this pur pose was to proceed progressively over three years, rising from 40 per cent to 42.5 per cent for 1986, 43.5 per cent for 1987 and 44.5 per cent for 1988.
I modsat fald forbeholder vi os ret til at indlede en samrådsprocedure.
— a decision amending Decision 83/516/EEC on the tasks of the European Social Fund with a view to the accession of Spain and Portugal
Det var, hr. formand, kære kolleger, de bemærkninger, jeg ville knytte til det beslutningsforslag, der er blevet enstemmigt vedtaget i udvalget om sociale an liggender og beskæftigelse.
Mr Didò (S), rapporteur. — (IT) Mr President, the accession of Spain and Portugal to the Community makes it necessary to amend some of the European Social Fund regulations so as to allow these two countries to benefit from the aid provided by that Fund.