natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Man kan blot se på tidsplanen og rækkefølgen af de interne og eksterne opgaver, som Fællesskabet har planlagt for de kommende år.
This is clear from the time table and the succession of tasks which the Community has set itself both in the domestic and foreign arenas over the next few years.
Jeg mener, det er endnu mere nødvendigt nu i den nuværende fase af Fællesskabets eksistens.
I believe that the need has become more pressing in the present stage in the life of the Community.
Intet er mere egnet som svar på nye eller gamle udtryk for europessimisme end Fællesskabets prompte bekræftelse på, at det er rede til at gennemføre de målsætninger, det har sat sig.
There can be no more adequate response to the old and new manifestations of Europeanism than the rapid assertion by the Community of its determination to pursue unequivocally the objectives it has set itself.
Afgørelsen om Delors Ilpakken, som uden tvivl er en fundamental etape på vor vej, vil blive betragtet både som en chance og en afgørende test på De Tolvs omtalte vilje og evne til at give et konkret svar, der vil modarbejde ethvert forsøg på stagnation eller tilbageskridt i integrationsprocessen. tionsprocessen.
The conclusion of the Delors II package which no one can deny will represent a fundamental stage in this process, will be seen simultaneously as an opportunity and a decisive test of the resolve and the ability of the Twelve to provide a practical political response which will effectively counteract the temptations of stagnation and retreat where the integration process is concerned.
Endvidere skal det bemærkes, at de finansielle over slag fastsætter maksimumsgrænser, og man bør være glad for, at vi ikke har udnyttet alle de disponible beløb.
The recently completed reform of the common agricultural policy has reorganized one of the most important areas of expenditure.
Vi ligger under grænsen.
We are now in a position to estimate agricultural expenditure with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
For 1992 ligger vi på 1,15%, medens grænsen ligger ved 1,20% af BNP for betalingsbevillingerne. For 1993 ligger vi i det forelagte budgetforslag på 1,14%.
The Council is cooperating with the Commission on this area of the package in the light of the new developments.
Med andre ord bliver en god forvaltning af fællesskabs budgettet til en boomerang mod dem, der har til opgave at holde liv i Fællesskabet ...
In general terms, it can be said, without exaggeration, that the Temporary Committee supports the second package, which, it is worth pointing out, was adopted unanimously by the Commission.
Delors, formand for Kommissionen. — (FR) Hr. formand, hr. rådsformand, mine damer og herrer, jeg vil først takke hovedordføreren, hr. von der Vring samt ordførerne for udtalelserne for deres forslag, kritik og støtte.
We cannot ignore the growth in real terms of expenditure where the common agricultural policy is concerned, just as we cannot remain indifferent to the need for reform and to the concern which is being expressed by European agriculture.
Man kan generelt og uden at overdrive sige, at Det Midlertidige Udvalg støtter den anden »pakke«, som vedtoges enstemmigt af Kommissionen, det bør påpeges.
Here too a solution must be found, based not merely on technical analysis and budgetary action, but on political sensitivity. This, we are well aware, is a fundamental issue.
Ligeledes gør jeg opmærksom på, at de finansielle overslag med eller uden Maastricht-Traktaterne skal fornys, idet de udløber i 1992.
I must also underline the point that, with or without Maastricht, it would have been necessary to renew the financial perspective, since 1992 is the last year that it covers.
Selvfølgelig har de nye Traktater smittet af på de af Kommissionen foreslåede generelle retningslinjer, men man kan ikke sige, at den anden pakke er prisen for Maastricht.
In fixing the level of resources it is essential to clarify adequately the guidelines for Community policy as well as the relevant priorities and the measures needed to implement them.
For øvrigt irriterer denne metode i høj grad visse medlemsstater. Men som den første pakke er det en instrumentel og finansiel
We are actively engaged on this task in the Council.
Men lad os lave regnestykket. Nogle medlemsstater — jeg taler ud fra erfaringerne fra to måneders arbejde i COREPER og to Ministerråd — siger. »Da De ligger under maksimumsgrænsen, kan vi fortsætte med 1,20% indtil 1997«.
It is of course the case that the new treaty arrangements have influenced the general policy directions proposed by the Commission, but it cannot be said that the second package is the bill to be paid for Maastricht.
Jeg vil gerne illustrere denne hypotese.
Besides, that kind of talk is a source of considerable irritation to a number of Member States.
Ud fra den kunne man indtil 1997, fra 1992 til 1997, skaffe 11 mia. ECU, medens den anden pakke kræver 21 mia. Hvad vil det resultere i?
No, this package, like the first, is a view of the instruments and financial resources needed for the future of the Community, and it takes its lead from the provisions in the Maastricht Treaty that directly concern the structure of revenue or the structure of expenditure.
Det er kun en illustration blandt andre. Vi kunne med disse 11 mia. ECU finansiere den landbrugspolitiske reform, Samhørighedsfonden op til 10 mia. ECU for de fem år og eventuelt også
Where the structure of resources is concerned, we have to take account of the search for a more equitable system in line with the Maastricht guidelines.
Kommissionen har prøvet på at foreslå en femte indtægtskilde.
This package presents the European Parliament and Council with seven policy questions.
Jeg genta­ger, at der er tale om maksimumsgrænser, og ser jeg på betragtning Τ i hr. von der Vrings betænkning, skal der i disse 21 mia. ECU tages hensyn til udgiftsoverførslerne.
von der Vring's motion for a resolution, transfers of expenditure have to be taken into account in this figure of ECU 21 billion.
Det er mit skøn, at 9 mia ECU af de ønskede 21 mia. ECU er reelle ekstraudgifter, som skyldes udbygningen af de fælles politikker, medens de 12 mia. ECU repræsenterer overførsel af udgifter fra nationalstaterne til Fællesskabet.
My estimate is that, of the extra ECU 21 billion we are seeking, ECU 9 billion is genuine addition­al expenditure arising out of reinforcement of common policies and ECU 12 billion arises from transfers of expenditure from the States to the Community.
Hvis man ikke vil gennemføre aktionerne i fællesskab, må det selvfølgelig ske nationalt. Det var det, jeg ville sige om dette spørgsmål.
Obvious­ly, if it is preferred not to conduct these activities at Community level, they can be carried out at national level.
Hvad den fælles eller nationale karakter af disse fællesskabsindtægter angår, kunne der siges meget. Intet hindrer en medlemsstat i at forelægge et drifts­budget ved siden af sit nationale budget.
I shall be coming to these in a moment, but I must first deal with a criticism that runs along these lines: 'You at the Commission took expenditure as your starting-point without bothering to establish what financial margins were available.
Dette driftsbudget vil sætte landet i stand til enten at holde fællesskabsindtægterme eller bidragene uden for sit budget.
Had you been a family, you would have looked at your income and then worked out a budget according to what you could afford to spend'.
Altså har medlemsstaterne også deres ansvar på dette felt.
I must start by answering this charge, so what is the position in this respect?
Sidste punkt: »Spar!« De vil bemærke, at vi på 1993­budgettet har strøget 70 konti.
Lastly, we are being told to make savings. In the 1993 budget, as you will see, we have deleted 70 budget lines.
Der er yderli­gere 230, der eventuelt kunne udgå.
There are 230 more that could be eliminated.
Hvis De som budgetmyndighed vedtager det, vil det kun udgøre en besparelse på 50 mio. ECU.
If you, as budgetary authority, decide to do so, the resulting savings will come to only ECU 50 million.
Sammenlign denne besparelse på 50 mio. ECU med de beløb, der er tale om mellem de to ekstreme hypoteser: Opretholdelse af maksimumsgrænsen på 1,20 % indtil 1997 eller de 1,37%, og De vil se, at der overhovedet ikke er noget forhold i det.
Compare these savings of ECU 50 million to the figures at the extreme ends of the bracket, with the ceiling held at 1.2% until 1997 or at 1.37%, and you will agree that the orders of magnitude are altogether different.
Endelig er der — det vil jeg sige, idet det drøftedes i Rådet af Økonomi­ og Finans­ministre i går, nogle lande, der på ny vil diskutere den britiske kompensation.
A last point that I ought to mention, since it came up yesterday in the Council of Ministers for Economic Affairs and Finance: a number of countries are calling for a review of the British rebate.
De påberåber sig i denne forbindelse de i 1984 i Fontainebleau og i 1988 i Bruxelles trufne afgørelser.
They are doing so on the basis of the decisions taken at Fontainebleau in 1984 and Brussels in 1988.
Kommissionen er rede til at lave et overslag og til at fremsætte nogle syns­punkter til overvejelse af den britiske kompensation.
The Commission is ready to provide an assessment of the situation and background information concerning the British rebate.
Kommissionen »slæber altså ikke fødderne efter sig«, men fandt det gunstigt at vente lidt med at offentliggøre dette dokument.
So the Commission is not dragging its feet, as the saying goes, but considered it a matter of observing the proprieties to delay publication of this document.
Nu kommer jeg til Parlamentets og Rådets syv politiske valgmuligheder.
First of all, I acknowledge that the general context is not favourable.
Som anden valgmulighed nævnes: Hvordan er udsig­terne efter reformen af den fælles landbrugspolitik?
We see that the additional contributions called for make the task faced by the States concerned only very marginally more compli­cated.
Jeg gør opmærksom på, at reformen af den fælles landbrugspolitik i februar 1988 skulle diskuteres samtidig med den første pakke.
However, bearing this context in mind, I would remind you that we based our forecasts on a growth rate of 2.5% by volume a year, which is not very high, but even so we perhaps erred on the side of optimism.
Denne gang er der vedtaget en reform.
I come now to the seven policy options to be considered by Parliament and the Council.
Lad os sige, at reformen er af strukturel art, medens 1988­reformen var rent finan­siel.
It also has to be remembered that the financial perspec­tive sets ceiling figures, and we can take satisfaction from the fact that we have not used all the funds available.
Den indførte stabilisatorerne, men blev ingen succes.
We have kept below the ceilings.
Den var utilstrækkelig til bekæmpelse af overproduktion og voksende lagerbeholdninger, og til trods for udgiftsforøgelsen kunne den ikke give landbrugerne tilstrækkelige indkomster.
The 1992 figure is 1.15% whereas the ceiling is 1.2% of gross national product for payment appropriations.
Ej heller hindrede den, at mange bønder måtte give op.
For 1993, we have the figure of 1.14% in the draft budget that has been submitted to you.
Den nye reform skal altså forlige vort bedste landbrugs konkurrenceevne med rimelige indkomster for alle bønder samt ved tilskyndelse til ekstensiv produk­tion fastholde tilstrækkeligt mange landmænd på deres jorder.
Can this argument be used against the Commission and Parliament by telling them that there are amounts still available, in other words that efficient management of the Community budget is something that should backfire against those who have the task of meeting the Commun­ity's needs...
Hvordan skal man for det første på indtægtssiden gennemføre den Maastricht­protokol, der siger, at man for de fattigste medlemsstaters vedkommende skal korrigere de regressive elementer i det nuvæ­rende system for de egne indtægter?
First, on the income side, what is to be done to apply the Maastricht protocol, which refers to the need to correct 'regressive elements existing in the present own resources system' affecting the less prosperous Member States?
De regressive elementer kan sammenfattes i et meget enkelt for­hold: I de fattigere lande er privatforbrugets andel større end i de rigeste lande, og følgelig er mervær­diafgiftens andel også større.
Regressive elements that come down to a simple fact: in the less prosperous countries, the private con­sumption component is larger than in the more prosper­ous countries, with the result that the VAT component is larger.
Derfor har vi foreslået en overflytning fra merværdiafgiftsandelen til BNP­andelen.
That is why we have proposed a transfer between the VAT component and the contributions based on GNP.
I øjeblikket udgør merværdiafgiftsandelen 55% af fællesskabsindtægterne.
Currently, the VAT component accounts for 55% of Community resources.
Den skal efter vort forslag ændres til 35%.
According to our proposal, this would come down to 35%.
BNP­andelen udgør 20% af fællesskabsindtægterne. Den skal forhøjes til 40%.
The GNP component would rise from its present 20% to 40% of Community resources.
Virkningen deraf bliver til fordel for de lande, der klagede over merværdiafgiftens regressive karak­ter.
The effects of this would be favourable to the countries that have been complaining about the regres­sive influence of VAT.
Forslaget vækker modstand i tre medlemsstater, der mener, at det er dem og dem alene, ændringen
This proposal is meeting with a hostile reception from three Member States which take the view that the costs of this change are going to fall on them and them alone and are calling for a fifth resource.
Men i denne forbindelse gør jeg opmærksom på, at den af Rådet af Landbrugsministre indgåede aftale indebæ­rer videreførelse af 1988­retningslinjerne, dvs. en årlig forhøjelse i løbende ECU på 74 % af national­produktets vækst.
What might that mean in practice? To suggest just one possible scenario among others, we could use this money to fund the common agricultural policy reforms and the Cohe­sion Fund, at a cost of ECU 10 billion over the five years, and possibly some external policy measures.
Det siger sig selv, at hvis man, som nogle ønsker det, reducerer retningslinjerne, så ryger aftalen.
But there would be no increase in the structural funds, no increase in funding for internal policies.
Så vil der ikke længere være enighed mellem De Tolv. Men hr. Mac Sharry har forsikret
Does that bear thinking about?
Dér står vi, og vi skal tage hensyn til den af Ministerrådet indgåede aftale.
There is a great deal that could be said about whether these Community resources are supposed to be communautaires or national.
Det er det, vi har foreslået. Det er indlysende, at denne fordobling kan virke som en slags »pavlovsk refleks« hos Kommissionen.
There is nothing to prevent a State having an operating budget in addition to its national budget.
Der fordobledes mellem 1987 og 1992, og der er planlagt en ny fordobling.
So the Member States too have their responsibilities in this area.
Men det er, fordi vi kan se, hvor langt man er kommet med udviklingsniveauerne.
hand in implementation of structural policies, despite all the talk of subsidiarity.
Jeg kan dog fortælle Dem, at der ved denne periodes udgang ikke bliver tale om en ny fordobling.
That is beyond my comprehension.
Af den gode grund at vi til den tid sikkert skal til at optage lande i Fællesskabet, hvis udviklingsniveau ligger under 50, hvorfor en solidaritetsindsats fra Fællesskabets side sikkert skal udfolde sig i helt andre retninger. Det er altså ikke kun vor tanke at fordoble strukturfondene hvert femte år.
It is so easy, for us, to trust these countries when they come to us with a regional development programme, pick out from this programme the items for which Community technical, human and financial support can be provided, and then make a retrospective evaluation in conjunction with the Member State and region concerned.
Det er kun som følge af udviklingsforskelle og opnåede resultater, at fordoblingen forekom os påkrævet.
If the current trends prevail, the Commission will not be intervening at three stages but at five, from beginning to end of the process.
Endvidere kan jeg tilføje, at det er i overensstemmelse med Maastricht-ånden.
I do not think we can talk about this sort of thing and subsidiarity at the same time.
For det tredje, hvad med den økonomiske og sociale samhørighed for de fire såkaldte samhørigheds lande?
The second policy question for consideration concerns the prospects after reform of the common agricultural policy.
Først og fremmest er der fremført megen kritik af gennemførelsen af disse strukturpolitikker, afmål nr. 1, i den foregående periode.
In February 1988, you will remember, reform of the common agricultural policy had to be discussed at the same time as the first package.
Men resulta terne foreligger, og jeg kan f.eks. nævne et for Irlands vedkommende. For Irland udgjorde strukturfondenes udbetalinger 12,3% af landets BNP i perioden 1989/1993.
It can be described as a structural reform, whereas the one in 1988 was purely financial.
For Irland nærmer alle Fælles skabets udbetalinger sig 6% af landets BNP.
It also failed to prevent large numbers of farmers leaving the land.
For Irland, der har oplevet en meget kraftig vækst sammenlignet med fællesskabsgennemsnittet, nemlig 4%, udgør strukturpolitikkernes bidrag alene et halvt vækstprocentpoint etc. etc. Alle, der kritiserer strukturpolitikkerne, vil efter min mening ikke se realiteterne i øjnene, selv om processen selvfølgelig kan forbedres.
This fresh reform therefore seeks to reconcile competitiveness in our modern farming with decent incomes for all farmers and, through its incentives to extensive production, to enable a sufficient number of farmers to remain on the land.
Hvis jeg skal tro Revisionsrettens beretning og det, nogle finansministre siger, skal Kommissionen, når der tales om subsidiaritet, gribe endnu mere ind i strukturpolitikkernes gennemførelse.
Keeping a sufficient number of farmers on the land is in my view an absolutely necessary requirement for sustain ing the development of our rural areas and keeping the balance between town and country in our societies.
Man kommer da til det paradoks, mine damer og herrer, at det indre markeds virkeliggørelse opbygges på gensidig tillid mellem medlemsstaterne — gensidig anerkendelse af standarder og kvalifikationsbeviser — medens strukturpolitikkerne bygger på gensidig mistro mellem medlemsstaterne!
For the objective 1 regions, we have proposed a 67% increase in funding for the structural policies, and we have calculated that, with the addition of the Cohesion Fund decided upon by the European Council in Maastricht, we would get close to a twofold increase for the four countries concerned — Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland — which would be joined by the East German Länder, East Berlin no doubt, and the French Overseas Departments and Territories.
Det har jeg svært ved at forstå.
A continuation, in financial terms, of the present policy would have seen expenditure rise, by 1997, to about ECU 41 to 42 billion, some 2 to 3 billion above the guideline.
Det er så nemt for os at have tillid til disse lande, når de forelægger os et regionalt udviklingsprogram, at fjerne alt det fra programmet, der kan gøres til genstand for teknisk, menneskelig og finansiel fællesskabsstøtte, og dernæst, ex-poste, at foretage en vurdering i samarbejde med medlemslandet og den pågældende region.
But I would remind the House that under the agreement reached in the Council of Ministers for Agriculture, the guideline is to be renewed on the same basis, that of an annual increase, in current ecus, corresponding to 74% of the increase in national product. Needless to say, if this guideline were reduced, which is what some people are calling for, the agreement would collapse.
Det er den eneste metode.
There would no longer be an agreement among the Twelve.
For det fjerde, hvad skal man gøre med de øvrige strukturpolitikker, nemlig mål nr. 2, 3, 4, 5, 5 a og 5 b?
That is where matters stand, and we have to take account of the agreement that has been reached in the Council of Ministers.
Uden Fællesskabets intervention, som man siger, havde »bordrunden« — for at bruge et finansudtryk — ikke været fuldstændig.
The fund ing was doubled from 1987 to 1992, and we are propos ing to do the same again.
Endvidere påpeger jeg den politiske og psykologiske virkning af disse aktioner, der omfatter hele Fælles skabets territorium.
But the reason is that we are looking at the comparative levels of development.
Det bør forklares for borgerne, at Fællesskabet ikke blot er ensbetydende med solidaritet med de mindst udviklede, men også med en generel indsats! Med hensyn til mål nr. 3 og 4 bør de, hvis man følger os, tilpasses med henblik på i højere grad at ledsage de industrielle forandringer.
Taking the average for the Community to be 100, there are two countries that are still no higher than 50 and 60.
Men det kommer jeg tilbage til i forbindelse med konkurrenceevnen.
So it is not our intention to double the structural funds every five years.
Hvad mål nr. 5 a angår, skal det lidt efter lidt indgå i EUGFL, Garantisektionen, idet man ikke kan fortsætte med at finansiere moderniseringsforanstaltninger, der fører til intensivering, når reformens dominerende tendens er ekstensivering.
No, it is just that we thought it necessary on this occasion, in view of the disparities and the results achieved.
Det må siges rent ud.
I must add that this is also in line with the spirit of Maastricht.
Fulgte man de nuværende tendenser, er det ikke tre interventioner fra Kommissionens side, der er brug for, men fem i løbet af hele processen.
The third policy question has to do with the outlook for economic and social cohesion for the four countries most directly concerned.
Hvorfor ikke sætte tre eller fire medlemmer af Kommissionen bag hver leder af et regionalprogram, medens man er i gang?
The first point here is that there has been a lot of criticism about the application of these structural policies, for the purposes of objective 1, during the earlier period.
Jeg mener ikke, at man samtidig kan tale om subsidiaritet.
But the results are there to see, and I can give examples for Ireland, for instance.
Endelig har vi med Det Midlertidige Udvalgs støtte tilføjet mål nr. 6 for fiskeriet, idet fiskerikapaciteten som bekendt overstiger vore ressourcer, hvorfor der bør ske en tilpasning af de områder, hvor fiskeri hyppigt er den eneste aktivitet.
The combined payments from the Community come to almost 6% of Ireland's gross national product. Contributions under the structural policies alone represent half a point on Ireland's growth rate, which, at 4%, has been very high in comparison to Community average, etc., etc.
Femte valgmulighed er europæisk erhvervslivs konkurrenceevne.
Fourthly, what is to be done about the other structural policies, objectives 2, 3, 4, 5, 5a and 5b?
Jeg siger straks, at det er her, at vi har opnået de dårligste resultater i medlemsstaterne.
Had it not been for the Community's intervention, funding would have fallen short of what was required.
Det er grundlaget for Kommissionens overvejelser. elser.
We have to be frank about this.
Men det vil ganske enkelt sige, at Fællesskabet ikke kan spille en til skyndende rolle på dette felt!
If the European Council takes the view that this should not be done by the Community, then so be it!
Det vil jeg for mit vedkommende i høj grad beklage i betragtning af eksemplerne fra andre områder.
But that would mean quite simply that the Community would be left without a leadership role in this area.
Vi har udarbejdet en beretning om graden af europæisk erhvervslivs konkurrenceevne, og vi har konstateret to ting.
I personally would find that deeply regrettable, bearing in mind what has been achieved in other areas.