natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Europafonden er et middel til at fremme en tilnærmelse af befolkningerne, sprogene, tankerne og de forskellige kulturer, og den kan og bør være et effektivt og konstruktivt instrument, og man må uden toven gå i gang med at gennemføre den.
The European Foundation is a means of uniting people, languages, ideas and cultures, and can and should be a really effective instrument, but the first step is to set it up without further delay.
Det forslag, vi har liggende foran os, kan medvirke hertil, og der for vil vi stemme for det.
The motion which has been put before us can help in this direction, and that is why we propose to approve it.
Hammerich (ARC), skriftlig. — (DA) Ifølge denne ændring af forretningsordenen skal et forslag til an modning om uopsættelig forhandling ikke længere oversættes til de officielle sprog, før der stemmes om det.
Mrs Hammerich (ARC), in writing. — (DA) If of this amendment to the rules of procedure is adopted, draft requests for urgent debate will no longer have to be translated into the official languages before the vote is taken.
Vi er imod enhver svækkelse af de nationale sprogs stilling i EF-samarbejdet og kan derfor ikke støtte betænkningen.
We are against any weakening in the standing of the national languages in EC cooperation and can therefore not support this report.
(Afgørelsen vedtoges)
(Parliament adopted the resolution)
Marck (PPE). — (NL) Hr. formand, jeg vil fatte mig i korthed.
Mr Marck (PPE). — (NL) Mr President, I shall be very brief.
Man kan fastslå to ting: for det første, at det nu er bevist, at ratifikationsproceduren går langsomt, og at den metode, vi har valgt med hensyn til at oprette en Europafond uden om fællesskabsinstitutio nerne, er fuldkommen forkert, og at vi kommer til at betale for denne fejl i fremtiden.
Two comments: the first is that the ratification procedure has proven to be slow, showing that the method we have chosen to establish a European Foundation outside the Community institutions is totally wrong, and that we will have to pay for this in the future.
A2-33/85) af Anastassopoulos for udvalget for forretningsordenen og andragender om ændring af artikel 85 i forretningsordenen.
A2-33/85), drawn up by Mr Anastassopoulos on behalf of the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions, on the amendment to Rule 85 of the Rules of Procedure
Anastassopoulos (PPE), ordfører. — (GR) Inden vi stemmer, vil jeg gerne komme med to bemærkninger.
My second observation is that the Preparatory Com mittee is handling preparations in a way we cannot accept.
Den første gælder den græske udgave af ændringsforslag nr. 2, som foreligger for Forsamlingen.
However, the primary task of the Foundation is to foster the European idea among the European population.
Teksten lyder sådan: »... kan også fremsættes i begyndelsen af hver mødeperiode under drøftelsen af dagsorden en «, mens der i virkeligheden skal stå : »... af for slaget til dagsordenen «, sådan som der også står i den engelske, franske og i de andre sprogs udgaver.
The fact that the diplomats and technocrats sitting on the Preparatory Committee are neglecting this task does not surprise us, after the debate on a citizens' Europe, but I think that we as politicians should point out that cultural policy is not the principal aim of the European Foundation.
For muleringen har en vis betydning, og derfor vil jeg bede om, at den græske udgave ændres.
I would therefore call for attention to be given to this problem, and I have tabled an amendment to this effect.
For det andet kan vi fastslå, at den kurs, det foreløbige styrelsesråd er slået ind på, medfører, at de for beredende arbejder forvaltes på en måde, som vi ikke kan acceptere.
Mr Anastassopoulos (PPE), rapporteur. — (GR) I should like to ask the House to take account of two points before we vote.
At de diplomater og teknokrater, som udgør det foreløbige styrelsesråd, negligerer denne opgave, undrer os ikke efter forhandlingerne om Europa og borgerne, men efter min mening bør vi som politikere påpege, at dette ikke er Europafondens for nemste opgave.
The Greek text reads during the discussion of the agenda, whereas in the English, French and other versions it reads during a discussion of the draft agenda.
Derfor vil jeg gerne insistere på — og jeg har fremsat et ændringsforslag herom — at man også er opmærksom på denne problematik.
The wording is quite important, and so I would ask for it to be corrected.
For det andet vil jeg gerne henlede Parlamentets op mærksomhed på et andet ændringsforslag, som jeg har indgivet, men som i henhold til artikel 112 i for retningsordenen ikke er blevet vedtaget af præsidiet.
The second point to which I should like to draw Parliament's attention concerns another amendment which was tabled but was not accepted by the Presidency under Rule 112 of the Rules of Procedure.
Det drejede sig om et forslag til ændring af artikel 56, stk. 2, andet afsnit, således at uforenelighed med ændringsforslaget til artikel 85 undgås.
It was an amendment seeking to change the second subparagraph of Rule 56 (2) so as to avoid any confusion after the amendment which is proposed to Rule 85.
Natali, næstformand i Kommissionen. — (IT) Hr. for mand, Kommissionen deler de bekymringer, der er givet udtryk for her, og den er også enig i Europa-Parlamentets opfordring til, at ratifikationen finder sted så hurtigt som muligt.
Mr Natali, Vice-President of the Commission. — (IT) Mr President, the Commission shares the con cern which has been expressed here and at the same time we endorse the European Parliament's appeal that this text be ratified as quickly as possible.
Vi i Kommissionen vil fremsætte en erklæring i overensstemmelse hermed på kulturministrenes samling, som finder sted den 20. december 1985.
The Commission will make a statement along these lines at the meeting of the Ministers of Culture which is to take place on 20 December 1985.
(Modet udsat kl. 13.000 og genoptaget kl. 15.05).
(Parliament adopted the resolution)
ordenen, og her henvises til artikel 56, stk. 1.
But this is after the agenda has been adopted, and so there is a difference: the amendment which I have put to the House refers to the draft agenda and comes under the provisions of Rule 56 (1).
Men hvis vi taler om forslag til dagsordenen, så betyder det, at dagsordenen i henhold til artikel 56, stk. 2, undtagen hvis artikel 84 til 88 anvendes, ikke mere kan ændres.
But we are talking about the draft agenda, and so this means, in accord ance with Rule 56 (2), that the agenda can no longer be amended except in the cases refered to in Rules 84 to 88.
Hvis et forslag til ændring af forslag til dagsordenen afvises under henvisning til artikel 56, er der stadig mulighed for at fremsætte under henvisning til artikel 85.
This means that if a proposal to amend the draft agenda is rejected under Rule 56, it is still possible to submit it under Rule 85.
Jeg ville gerne gøre opmærksom på dette, da der var en del uklarhed hos mine kolleger, og jeg håber at have sat tingene på plads med denne klare fortolkning.
I wanted to draw attention to this point since it has given rise to some doubts among my colleagues, and I hope that this reasoned interpretation settles the mat-
Formanden. — Hr. Anastassopoulos, hvad Deres første bemærkning angår, så foreslår jeg Dem at gå ud fra den franske tekst, hvor der jo rigtigt står » forslag til dagsordenen«.
Mr Juncker, President-in-Office of the Council. — (FR) Madam President, I have requested the floor in order to explain the efforts made by the Council President and the Council itself to reach agreement with your House on the 1986 budget.
Deres anden bemærkning tager vi sammen med præ sidiet ad notam, og vi er enige med Dem.
As for your second remark, and in agreement with the registrar, we have taken note of what you said and we agree with it.
Jeg kom herover i oktober for at forelægge Dem resultaterne af førstebehandlingen i Rådet.
I appeared before you in October to let you know the results of the Council's first reading.
De vil sik kert huske, at man i Rådet under førstebehandlingen var blevet enige om en maksimalsats for forhøjelser af budgettet på 7,1%. Dengang kritiserede De Rådet for dette.
You will no doubt remember that during its first reading the Council agreed to a maximum increase rate for the budget of 7.1%, something you criticized at the time.
De vil også huske, at formanden for Rådet tilsluttede sig de parlamentsmedlemmer, som havde kritiseret denne beslutning, truffet af Rådet, hvilket var ret usædvanligt.
You will remember that the Council President, quite unusually, supported your criticism of this Council decision.
Jeg mente nemlig dengang, at de bevillinger, Rådet havde afsat under førstebehandlingen, ikke var store nok til at dække de finansielle virkninger af udvidelsen og udligne byrderne fra tid ligere.
This was because I felt that the appropiations proposed by the Council at first reading were insufficient to cover the financial effects of enlargement and the cost of the past.
Jeg lovede Dem ved den lejlighed at gøre alt, hvad jeg kunne, for at få Rådet til under andenbe handlingen at undlade at gentage fejlene fra førstebehandlingen, og nogle af Dem udtrykte tvivl om for mandskabets vilje til at bringe Rådet til fornuft.
On that occasion I pledged to do my utmost during the second reading to persuade the Council not to repeat the mistakes it made in its first reading, but some of you doubted the Presidency's determination to make the Council see reason.
A2-68/85) af Rothley for udvalget for forretningsordenen og for andragender om artikel 33 i forretningsordenen.
A2-68/85), drawn up by Mr Rothley on behalf of the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions, on Rule 33 of the Rules of Procedure
Deres budgetudvalg reagerede under Parlamentets førstebehandling og meddelte Rådet sin mening.
During Parliament's first reading your Commission on Budgets replied and let the Council know its opinion.
De ved alle, at Rådet ikke gik ind for alle de ændrings forslag fra Parlamentet, som det fik forelagt.
As you know, the Council did not accept all the amendments submitted by Parliament.
Men under andenbehandlingen satte Rådet maksimalsatsen for forhøjelser — der, som De vil huske, under førstebehandlingen var på 7,1% for så vidt angår betalingsbevillingerne, og jeg taler om de ikke-obliga-toriske udgifter — op til 20,5% under andenbehandlingen.
However, during its second reading the Council raised to 20.5% the maximum increase rate, which during the first reading was, I would remind you, 7.1% for payment appropiations, and here I am speaking about noncompulsory expenditure.
Det var meget vanskeligt for formandskabet at opnå dette resultat.
The Presidency had a difficult time achieving this result.
Medlemmerne af denne Forsamling, og især de, der har været medlemmer af Ministerrådet, ved, hvor vanskeligt det er at opnå et kvalificeret flertal i Rådet sammensat af budgetministrene.
The Members of this House, and especially those who have belonged to the Council of Ministers, know how difficult it is to obtain a qualified majority within the Budget Council.
Jeg opnåede dette kvalificerede flertal efter 21 timers vanskelige for handlinger.
I obtained this qualified majority after 21 hours of tough negotiation.
Hammerich (ARC), skriftlig. — Vi var allerede imod artikel 33, da den blev inddraget i forretningsordenen, fordi den overdrager beføjelser til at træffe beslutninger til Parlamentets udvalg.
Mrs Hammerich (ARC), in writing — (DA) We opposed Rule 33 when it was first incorporated into the Rules of Procedure, because it delegated powers of decision to Parliament's committees.
Nu vil man ud vide disse beføjelser fra, at udvalgene kan træffe beslutninger af teknisk karakter, til at udvalgene også kan træffe beslutninger af kontroversiel karakter.
Now the plan is to extend these powers to allow the committees to take decisions not only on technical matters but also on controversial issues.
Dette er fuldstændig uacceptabelt, når man tænker på, at ikke alle medlemslande er repræsenteret i alle udvalg.
This is totally unacceptable, seeing that not all Member States are represented on all the committees.
De mindre lande har svært ved at dække alle udvalg; f.eks. har Danmark efter 1. januar 1986 kun 16 ud af 518 pladser.
The smaller countries find it difficult to cover all the committees — for example, after 1 January 1986 Denmark will only have 16 of the 518 seats.
Vi kunne således risikere, at særlige danske forhold og interesser slet ikke blev taget i betragtning, når udvalgene træffer beslut ninger.
We would then risk special Danish interests and conditions being simply ignored when the committees take their decisions.
Derfor kan vi ikke støtte denne betænkning.
We therefore cannot support this report.
Nu siger jeg noget, man aldrig burde sige : det kvalificerede flertal, jeg opnåede under andenbehandlingen i Rådet, adskilte sig fra de øvrige kvalificerede flertal, som alle mine forgængere har opnået i Rådet sammensat af budgetministrene, derved, at det var første gang en medlemsstat, som altid havde udtalt sig for Rådets budgetforslag, nu stemte imod det, og to andre medlemsstater, som altid havde været imod forslaget fra Rådet, stemte for det.
I will now say something that one should never say: the qualified majority I obtained during the Council's second reading differs from the other qualified majorities which all my predecessors brought about within the Budget Council because, for the first time, a Mem ber State which had previously been in favour of the Council's draft budget voted against, while two other Members who had previously been against the Council draft voted for.
Juncker handling og således komme frem til en maksimalsats for forhøjelserne på 20,5%.
I believed that this outcome was a remarkable effort on the part of the Council and a major step in the direction of your Assembly.
gationer — og ikke de mindste af dem — at grænsen for det acceptable var overholdelsen af Parlamentets aktionsmargen.
When I asked my colleagues to define the scope of my brief more precisely, several delegations — and by no means the least important — told me that the most they could accept was adherence to Parliament's mar gin of manoeuvre.
Mange i Rådet troede, at de havde gjort en stor indrømmelse ved at tilbyde Parlamentet hvad det i forvejen har ret til, nemlig dets aktionsmargen. margen.
Many within the Council thought they were making a great concession by offering Parliament something which is its by right, i.e. its margin for manoeuvre.
På dette grundlag afslog jeg at tage imod det sonderende mandat.
Because of this I rejected this exploratory brief.
Derefter viste mine kolleger mig — og det var ikke kun en formsag, det håber jeg i det mindste ikke — deres tillid og bad mig mødes med parlamentsdelegationen, forhandle om en aftale og komme tilbage til Rådet, men det måtte være sådan, at par lamentsdelegationen, som jeg skulle møde i går aftes, havde ikke blot et forhandlingsmandat, men også et mandat til at indgå aftale.
How ever, my colleagues demonstrated their confidence in me — and they were not just going through the motions, or at least I hope they weren't — by asking me to meet the delegation from Parliament to nego tiate an agreement and to return to the Council, on the understanding that the parliamentary delegation which I was to meet last night would not only have a mandate to negotiate but also to conclude agreements.
Jeg havde i øvrigt stillet Deres formand, hr. Pflimlin, spørgsmål herom på samrådsmødet.
I had, by the way, brought this up with your President, Mr Pflimlin, during the conciliation meeting.
Da finansministrene efter forhandlingerne den 26. og 27. november skiltes i Bruxelles, ønskede de fleste af dem mig glædelig jul og godt nytår i håb om, at Rådet ikke blev nødt til at mødes en tredje gang.
When the negotiations of 26 and 27 November were over and the Finance Ministers were leaving Brussels, most of them wished me a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, and said they hoped the Council would not have to meet a third time.
Blandt dem, der var så venlige at overbringe mig deres juleog nytårsønsker, var der dem, som giver formændene for Rådet mulighed for at opnå deres kvalificerede flertal.
Among those who were kind enough to wish me all the best were those who had made it possible for the Presidents-in-Office to reach their qualified majority.
Til trods herfor og efter forskellige møder, jeg havde med Deres formand, hr. Pflimlin, og med De res budgetudvalg, besluttede jeg uden at følge de hen stillinger, der blev rettet til mig netop af dem, som havde gjort det muligt for mig at opnå et kvalificeret flertal under andenbehandlingen, at indkalde til et tredje møde i Rådet sammensat af budgetministrene i Strasbourg.
Despite this, and following various meetings I had with your President, Mr Pflimlin, and with your Committee on Budgets, I myself decided to disregard the recommendations made to me — even by those who had made it possible for me to achieve a qualified majority during the second reading — and to call a third Budget Council meeting in Strasbourg.
Det er i øvrigt første gang, en luxembourgsk formand indkalder til et rådsmøde i Strasbourg. bourg.
This was, by the way, the first time that a Luxembourg President had convened a Council meeting in Strasbourg.
De kender de forslag, formandskabet for Rådet har stillet Deres parlamentsdelegation.
You know the proposals made to your delegation by the Council Presidency.
Af de 569 mio. ECU, som parlamentsdelegationen havde foreslået os på samrådsmødet, er jeg gået ind for 242 mio. ECU, der, madame Barbarella, indbefatter Parlamentets aktionsmargen. tionsmargen.
Of the 569 million ECU which the Parliamentary delegation proposed to us at the conciliation meeting, I had managed to retain 242 million ECU which includes, Mrs Barbarella, Parliament's margin for manoeuvre.
Jeg måtte gøre mig store anstrengelser for at overtale tolv finansministre til at komme til Strasbourg; de fleste af dem havde nemlig fortalt mig, at de havde sagt deres sidste ord i den sag under andenbehandlingen i Rådet.
I had to use all my powers of persuasion to get the twelve Finance Ministers to come to Strasbourg: most of them told me they had said their last word on the subject during the Council's second reading.
Repræsentanterne for stater af samme størrelse som den, jeg har den ære at repræsentere i Rådet, er i reglen kompromisets folk, idet jo de små nationer over lever ved hjælp af kompromiser.
As a rule, the representatives of countries the size of the one it is my honour to represent in the Council are men of compromise because it is through compromises that small nations survive.
Jeg har altid været stærkt optaget af dette kompromisforhold.
My main concern has always been to achieve compromise.
Det havde jeg sagt til Deres formand, jeg havde sagt det til Deres budgetudvalg, og det var i ønsket om et kompromis, jeg havde besluttet at indkalde Rådet i Strasbourg og var enig med Deres formand, hr. Pflimlin, i, at der skulle afholdes et allersidste møde. Jeg mener det samrådsmøde, som fandt sted i går aftes.
I told your President so, as I did your Committee on Budgets, and it was because of my desire for compromise that I decided to call a meeting of the Council in Strasbourg and agreed with your President, Mr Pflimlin, that we should organize a last-chance meeting, by which I mean last night's conciliation meeting.
På dette møde stillede Parlamentet forslag og anmodede Rådet om ud over resultaterne fra andenbe handlingen at yde et yderligere beløb på 569 mio. ECU — jeg taler her om ikke-obligatoriske udgifter og betalingsbevillinger.
During this meeting Parliament put forward a number of proposals, calling on the Council to add an ad ditional 569 million ECU to the figures resulting from its second reading — and here I am talking about noncompulsory expenditure and payment appropriations.
Jeg har i dag kunnet konstatere, at de holdninger, for manden for Rådet indtog under denne allersidste for handling med Deres parlamentsdelegation, er ret ukendte, og efter at have talt med en række parlamentsmedlemmer føler jeg, at der er behov for at supplere de oplysninger, Forsamlingen sidder inde med. Jeg mener ikke, at man kan nægte formanden for Rådet at give Forsamlingen oplysninger om de beslutninger, der blev truffet under tredjebehandlingen i Rådet sammensat af budgetministrene.
It has become clear to me today that the stand, taken by the Council President during this final round of negotiations with your delegation, is not very well known and, after speaking to a number of parliamentarians, I féel there is a need to add to the information at your Assembly's disposal.
Men inden jeg giver oplysning om disse forslags nøjagtige indhold, vil jeg gerne sige følgende: De forslag, jeg stillede parlamentsdelegationen, var ikke alle delegationsmedlemmerne enige i.
I do not think any one could refuse the Council President permission to inform this House of the decisions taken at third read ing by the Budget Council.
På baggrund af det man dat, jeg havde fået, konstaterede jeg, at forhandlinger ne var brudt sammen, og derefter gik jeg ilbage til mine kolleger i Rådet sammensat af budgetministrene Disse havde sagt til mig, at hvis forhandlingerne brød sammen, ville resultatet af andenbehandlingen i Rådet, altså en maksimalsats for forhøjelser på 20,5% være det forslag, Rådet ville stille Deres Forsamling.
But before going into detail on this, I would just like to tell you one thing: the proposals I made to the parliamentary delegation did not meet with the agreement of all delegation members.· In line with the brief conferred upon me I saw that the negotiations had broken down and I went back to my Budget Council colleagues, who told me that if there had been a breakdown then the proposal which the Council would be putting before your Assembly would be that resulting from the Council's second reading, i.e. a maximum increase rate of 20.5%.
Til trods herfor foreslog jeg Rådet, at det skulle gøre en allersidste indsats, og jeg gik ud over mit mandat og anmodede det om at sørge for, at formanden i forbindelse med disse forslag, han havde stillet Parlamentet, kunne få det kvalificerede flertal, et flertal, som ikke var sikkert på forhånd.
Despite this I proposed that the Council make one last final effort and — exceeding my brief — I asked the Council to make sure the President would have a qualified majority, a majority which was not obtained in advance, for the proposals he had made to Parliament.
Jeg holdt møde med mine kolleger i går aftes. Som en karakteristik af den atmosfære, der herskede under forhandlingerne i Rådet, kan jeg fortælle Dem, at Rådet ikke ville svare på dette tilbud, som parlamentsdelegationen havde fremsat.
I called a meeting of my Council colleagues last night, and in order to give you an idea of the atmosphere of our deliberations I would simply say that the Council was loath to reply to this proposal from the parliamentary delegation.
Men Rådet gav mig et mandat — et mandat, som nogle med humoristisk sans betegnede som et sonderende mandat — og anmodede mig om at mødes med Deres parlamentsdelegation og for egen regning forhandle om en aftale med delegationen og anføre, at hvis denne aftale ikke gik for vidt efter det ene eller det andet råds medlems mening, ville Rådet tage aftalen, som dets formand havde forhandlet med Deres parlamentsdelegation, til følge.
But the Council gave me a brief — which certain people with a sense of humour have des cribed as an exploratory brief— and asked me to meet your parliamentary delegation to negotiate, on my own head, an agreement with it, indicating that if this agreement did not exceed the expectations of the var
I nattens løb sendte jeg en meddelelse til budgetudvalget om, at selv om forhandlingerne mellem Rådet og Forsamlingen var brudt sammen, var Rådet med kvalificeret flertal gået ind for de forslag, jeg havde fremsat på egne vegne over for parlamentsdelegationen.
During the night I sent a message to the Committee on Budgets, saying that despite the breakdown in negotiations between the Council and the Assembly, the Council had agreed by a qualified majority to the proposals I had made in my own personal capacity to