natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hvad er det for en slags demokrati, hvor vand ikke garanteres til alle?
What kind of democracy is it that fails to guarantee water for all?
En velfungerende offentlig service er et fundament, hvorpå ligeværdighed og demokrati skal bygges.
A viable public service system is the basis of equality and democracy.
Det er derfor godt, at i Amsterdamtraktaten anerkendes de of fentlige ydelser som en central værdi og rettighedsprincip i EU.
For that reason it is good that the Amsterdam Treaty recognizes public services as immensely important and an essential principle of law in the EU.
Jeg tror, at effektive offentlige ydelser er et tillidsspørgsmål også for Den Europæiske Union.
I believe that effective public services also inspire confidence in the European Union.
Uden dem formindskes medborgernes tillid til Unionen.
Without them people's trust in the Union will diminish.
En ensidig privatisering bør ikke sættes foran de kollektive rettigheder. der.
Small-minded privatization must not come before com mon rights.
Såvel artikel 7 D som erklæringen til slutakten giver garantier for alle dem, der opfatter tjenesteydelserne af almen interesse, eller de offentlige tjenesteydelser, således som vores ordfører så udmærket systematisk omtaler dem, som økonomiske aktiviteter, der er vitale for borgerne og samfundet.
It is indeed the case that both article 7d and the declaration in the final Minute provide guarantees for all those who consider that services of general interest, or 'public services', as our rapporteur systematically and quite rightly refers to them, are economic activities which are vital to citizens and society.
Det er historisk, at vi godkender denne betænkning.
The approval of this report is a historic occasion.
Mens gamle monopoler bliver nedbrudt, bør der ikke sættes private monopoler eller duopoler op.
While the old monopolies need a good shaking up, they should not be replaced by private monopolies or duopolies.
Unionen kan ikke efter min mening udvides, hvis ikke ligeværdigheden forbedres.
In my view, the Union should not enlarge unless equality improves.
Det der sker nu, er at statsgrænserne mister deres betydning, men inden for staterne uddybes grænserne.
Now borders between countries are falling away, but gulfs within states are deepening.
Gode offentlige ydelser hjælper os med det mest vigtige: solidaritet, ligeværdighed, tillid og forøgelse af disse.
Good public services help us to attain the things most essential to us: solidarity, equality, confidence, and the growth of all three.
Og de udgør fundamentet for demokratiet.
And that is the basis of democracy.
Den ny traktats anerkendelse heraf ved at betragte sådanne tjenesteydelser som en af Europas fælles værdier og et kommunitært princip, ligesom den fulde respekt, som Domstolens retspraksis viser, særlig med hensyn til tjene sternes ligeværdige behandling, kvalitet og videreførelse, udgør utvivlsomt en enorm satsning i et Europa centreret ikke blot omkring virksomhederne og konkurrencen, men også omkring borgerne, deres rettigheder og den europæiske samfundsmodel.
This acknowledgment in the new treaty, inasmuch as it considers such services as one of the common values of Europe and a Community principle, like full respect for the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, particularly as regards equality of treatment, quality and continuity of services, undoubtedly represents an enormous vote of confidence in a Europe centred not only on companies, and competition, but above all on citizens and their rights and the European social model.
Den sociale samhørighed kan kun opnås gennem en socialt afpasset infrastruktur.
Social cohesion can only be achieved if there is a coherent social infrastructure.
Tjeneste ydelserne af almen interesse udgør per definition den vigtigste bestanddel af en sådan infrastruktur.
Services of general interest are by definition the principal component of that infrastructure.
Et af de vigtigste problemer, der berører ydelsen af offentlige tjenester, er konkurrencen.
One of the essential problems affecting public services is competition.
Når det drejer sig om tjenester af offentlig interesse, kan konkurrencen ikke retfærdiggøres som et mål i sig selv.
Competition cannot be justified as an end in itself where public services are concerned.
Dens værdi ligger i den virkning, som den kan have for niveauet, kvaliteten i de tjenester, der ydes til borgerne. Ejendomsretten til de almene tjenester kan juridisk antage statslig, kommunal, kooperativ eller privat form.
Its value lies in its effect on the standard and quality of the services provided to citizens.
Det afgørende er, at udbyderne garanterer kvalitetstjenester, uafhængigt af ejendoms- eller organisationsformen, at de ansatte er passende specialiserede, uddannede, motiverede, belønnede og en gagerede, og at borgerne, hvor de end måtte bo i landet, kan drage nytte af de tjenester, som de har ret til. Dette er
The essential thing is that service suppliers should guarantee quality services, inespective of the type of ownership or organization, that their workers should be properly specialized, trained, motivated, paid and employed, and that citizens, whichever part of the country they live in, can have the benefit of the services due to them in identical conditions.
Konrad (PPE). - (DE) Hr. formand, mine damer og herrer, vi drøfter et kommissionsforslag, hvis formål er at lave et supplement til artikel 3 i EF-traktaten.
van Miert, Member of the Commission. - (FR) Mr President, first I wish, like many other speakers, to add my voice to the congratulations to Mrs Billingham for work well done, detailed and effectively based on contributions from other committees.
I henhold til den skal Fællesskabets virke omfatte et bidrag til fremme af ydelser, der tjener almenvellet.
I think, as little as possible. In my opinion, the state must fulfil the following tasks, and it is sometimes good to remember them.
Det er efter min mening integrations- og konkurrencepolitisk farligt og skal efter min opfattelse forkastes. At traktatfæste det ville betyde, at statens forsyningspligtsydelser ville få en dimension, der overhovedet ikke mere ville være til at afgrænse.
Fourth, it must also fill the gaps in public life which are not filled by private business initiative.
se, at der skulle være brug for én til.
The article itself, 7d, is not at issue here.
Det passer ikke.
That is wrong.
Se Dem dog lidt omkring.
Just take a little look around you.
Kerede datidens monopoler sig meget om deres kunder og forbrugerne? Var det sådan?
Were the monopolies of the day very concerned about their custom ers and consumers?
Jeg kan nævne Dem snesevis af eksempler i alle lande på, at det ikke var tilfældet.
I can cite for you dozens of examples from all countries where that was not the case.
Og der var ingen sikkerhed for et alment tjenesteudbud, frue.
And universal service was not assured, Mrs Moreau.
Lad mig give Dem et eksem pel: Gaz de France, som naturligvis var domineret af CGT.
Let me give you one example: Gaz de France, dominated of course by the CGT.
Når jeg siger nogle sandheder, må de ikke føle Dem ramt, frue.
You have no need to feel offended when I speak the truth, Mrs Moreau.
Det gælder for EDF og det gælder for Gaz de France. Og jeg benytter eksemplet med Gaz de France, frue.
This is true of EDF, it is true of Gaz de France.
Mine damer og herrer, ved De, at Gaz de France, som har monopol, forhindrer små kommunalforvaltninger i at ud vide deres gasforsyning for at servicere befolkningen, med henvisning til monopolet.
Ladies and gentlemen, do you know that Gaz de France, which has a monopoly, prevents small licence holders extending their trade in gas \o serve the population by invoking monopoly.
Men hvad er dog det for en offentlig tjenesteudbyder?
And what is public service?
Tjener man forbrugerne?
Is it not a matter of serving the consumer? No!
Gaz de France forhindrer de kommunale forvaltninger i at betjene forbrugerne andre steder end i deres kommuner.
Gaz de France is preventing municipal licensees from serving consumers anywhere other than in their municipalities or communes.
For det andet beder De, med god ret for øvrigt, Kommissionen om at håndhæve disse regler strengt som en del af det ansvar, den har for konkurrencepolitikken.
Secondly, you are requesting, and rightly so, the Commission to apply these rales rigorously as part of its responsibilities in the field of competition policy. That is exactly what has been done.
Det er præcis, hvad Kommissionen har skrevet i sin meddelelse, baseret på de forudgående års praksis.
That is exactly what the Commission has written in its communication based on the practice of the previous years.
Jeg benægter rigtigheden af visse forlydender, som jeg har hørt her, gående ud på, at der skulle have fundet ukontrollerede liberaliseringer sted og udskridninger af enhver slags.
I would reject some of the affirmations that I have heard here, according to which some liberali zation was not controlled, and that there were unwelcome trends of all kinds.
Vores praksis var velafvejet og i fuld overensstemmelse med vores meddelelse.
Our practice has always been balanced and has always fallen within the framework of our communication.
Der optræder nu en reference i traktaten. Når man refererer til domme, skal man nævne dem alle og ikke kun dem, der passer i éns kram.
A reference or benchmark is now present in the treaty.
Jeg vil i øvrigt gerne her erindre om en anden dom vedrørende de offentlige tv-kanaler, hvor Domstolen sagde til Kommissionen, at den ikke var enig med den, fordi Kommissionen havde motiveret sin beslutning med henvisning til de forpligtelser, som de offentlige tjenesteydere har.
I would also like to call to mind another judgement relating to public broadcasting stations, in which the Court of Justice told the Commission that it did not agree, because the Commission had, in giving reasons for its decision, made reference to public service obligations.
Har De glemt den sag?
Have you forgotten that case?
Når De taler om Domstolens dom på energiområdet, så sagde Domstolen ikke, at den ikke var enig med Kommissionen, den sagde at Kommissionen ikke havde motiveret sin afgørelse godt nok. Punktum finale!
When we were talking about the judgement of the Court of Justice in the field of energy, the Court did not say it was not in agreement with the Commission, it said that the Commission had not proffered the conect reasons for its decision.
Kommissionen havde i sit enfold ment, at et monopol på import og eksport er i den grad i modsætning til selve princippet om det store marked, at den mente den kunne overbevise dommerne.
The Commission in its naivety be lieved that a monopoly on imports and exports was so contrary to the very principle of the single market that it believed it could convince the judges on that point.
Dommerne beder Kommissionen om at for klare sig bedre ud fra et økonomisk synspunkt.
The judges asked the Commission to provide further explanation, from the economic point of view. That will be done.
Det er kendsgerningen.
What is a charter?
Det skal vi nok gøre ved lejlighed.
Do you understand by charter a modification of the treaty?
Så .vær venlig ikke at påberåbe Dem den dom for at bevise en tese, der tager sig helt anderledes ud. '
In that case, you will need to organize a new intergovernmental conference forthwith.
Sådan er virkeligheden, frue, den nøgne virkelighed: et monopol er ikke altid til gavn for forbrugerne.
Mrs Moreau, the reality, the stark reality. A monopoly is not always profitable to consumers.
Se dog virkeligheden i øjnene.
Acknowledge the reality.
Jeg accepterer ikke, at De skal belære mig om noget.
I am not going to take lessons from you.
Lad det bare være helt klart! Når De forlanger en handlingsplan, så sørg for at tingene hænger sammen.
Let that be absolutely clear.
De siger, rigtigt nok, at ansvaret for de offentlige tjenesteydelser påhviler de nationale myndigheder og ikke Kommissionen.
You rightly say that responsibility for public services lies with national authorities and not with the Commission.
Men i virkeligheden skal Kommissionen vurdere, om der ikke sker overtrædelse af visse, af det indre markeds eller EU's principper.
The Commission has to determine whether or not there has been violation of certain principles of the single market or the European Union.
Det er vores rolle, i særdeleshed med udgangspunkt i artikel 90.
That is our role, notably on the basis of article 90.
Men i princippet er det de nationale myndigheder der bestemmer, hvilke forpligtelser den offentlige sektor, her under de offentiige kanaler, skal have.
But in principle the national authorities determine public service obligations, and in particular as regards public sector broadcasting channels.
Det er ikke Kom missionen der gør det.
The Commission does not do that.
Når en regering vil gøre det, så godt det samme.
If a govern ment wants to do that, so much the better.
Men når en regering ikke vil det, så kan Kommissionen ikke stille noget op.
But if a government does not want to do that, the Commission can do nothing.
Så hvis De beder os opstille en plan for alt det, så kan De jo begynde med at tage tingene tilbørligt i betragtning og finde ud af, hvem der har ansvaret.
So if you are asking us for a plan to do this, let us start by adopting a properly discriminating attitude, and knowing exactly who has responsibility.
Og så siger jeg, javel, lad os diskutere visse ting på europæisk plan.
And I say yes, let us discuss some things at European level.
Jeg kommer nu til spørgsmålet om charteret.
Indeed, it is by adding monopolies to monopolies that we have lost market share in freight transport.
Hvad er et charter?
That is the reality.
Mener De med charter en ændring af traktaten?
So if you are prepared to debate in this context the Commission will join you, but on condition that you speak the truth.
I så fald skal der på stedet afholdes en ny regeringskonference. Sådan som jeg ser det, udgør meddelelsen fra Kommissionen en retningslinje, en kilde til inspiration for Kommissionen.
I refuse to get into the old hat ideological debate some of you are having.
Det er i en vis forstand mit charter.
We are ready to do so.
Det er stadfæstet ved en henvisning i traktaten.
And I have, it seems to me, demonstrated that on many occasions in this Parliament.
Europa­Parlamentets forhandlinger
■ Debates of the European Parliament
For så vidt angår det sidste, vil jeg bede Dem om ikke at begrænse Dem til to domme, men henvise til samtlige Domstolens domme.
Denominations in euros but refened to all the decisions of the Court of Justice.
Jeg tilføjer endvidere ændringsforslagene 10 og 13.
I would also like to add Amendment Nos 10 and 13.
Nu er jeg færdig, hr. formand, og jeg beder undskylde, at jeg har talt for længe.
I have finished, Mr President, and I beg your pardon for having spoken for so long.
Desama (PSE). ­ (FR) Hr. formand, jeg har bedt om ordet for en personlig bemærkning, for nok holder jeg af spøgefuldheder, men der er dog grænser.
Desama (PSE). ­ (FR) Mr President, I have asked for the floor on a pointr of personal explanation, because I like a joke, but there are limits.
Altså, tak til Karel for henvisningen til min stilling som lærer, men det er lige præcis læreren, der nu vil give ham en lille belæring.
So thank you, Karel, for alluding to my position as a teacher, and it is precisely the teacher who is going to teach you a little lesson.
Den første er, at før man kritiserer sin lærer, skal man høre efter, hvad han siger.
The first thing is that before you criticize your teacher, you should first listen to what the teacher said.
Jeg har aldrig sagt, at artikel 7 D erstattede artikel 90, stk 2.
I never said that article 7d replaced article 90.2.
Det har jeg ikke sagt på noget tidspunkt, det ville jo være absurd.
At no time did I ever say that and it would be absurd to say so.
De skulle altså have høre mere efter hvad jeg sagde, før De gav mig dette svar.
So you should have listened to me more before you gave that reply.
Soltwedel­Schäfer (V), ordfører. ­ (DE) Hr. formand, kære kolleger, så temperamentsfuldt som hr. kommissær Van Miert netop har afgivet sin redegørelse, bliver det under ingen omstændigheder.
Soltwedel-Schäfer (V), rapporteur. ­ (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this will not be anywhere near as lively as Commissioner van Miert was when he gave his presentation.
Jeg vil lige sige, at han da i dag var den mest temperamentsfulde taler under hele plenarmødet.
Allow me to comment that he was today the liveliest speaker of the whole part­session.
Ved andenbehandlingen af min betænkning Denominations and technical specifications of EURO­coins vil jeg kort endnu en gang gøre opmærksom på, at et flertal i Parlamentet under førstebehandlingen ønskede og stemte om væsenuige ændringer på tre punkter.
On the second reading of my report on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins, I would like to point out again briefly that at first reading the majority of Parlia­ment wanted and voted for essential changes to three points.
For det første en reduktion af antallet af mønter fra otte til seks.
First, to reduce the number of coins from eight to six.
For det andet proportionalitet mellem den egentlige værdi og form og udformning.
Second, to create a relationship between the actual size and the form and shape.
For det tredje ingen nikkel i de dele af mønterne, som kommer i berøring med den menneskelige hud.
Third, to exclude nickel from all parts of the coin which come into contact with human skin.
Det vil jeg gerne kort begrunde endu en gang.
I would like to justify this again briefly.
Jeg citerede den dom, fordi den er vigtig på grund af én ting, hr. kommissær.
I cited that decision because it is important for one thing, Mr Commissioner.
Denne gang siger Domstolen nemlig i sin dom, at det påhviler Kommissionen at levere beviset for, at monopolet udgør en hindring for den fri konkurrence.
This time, in its decision, the Court of Justice said that it is the Commission's responsibility to provide the proof that the monopoly is an impediment to free competition.
Det er på dette punkt, at Domstolens dom tydeligvis er en nyskabelse.
And it is on that point that the decision of the Court of Justice is clearly an innovation.
Vi har nu i alt otte mønter, og i EU som helhed og i mange nationer i EU er der for øjeblikket i gennemsnit seks, nogle steder færre.
We now have a total of eight coins, and in the whole EU and many nations of the EU there are at the moment six coins on average, sometimes even less.
Hvis vi går ud fra, at det for nogle dele af befolkningen som f.eks. de blinde, er meget vanskeligt at håndtere et stort antal mønter, ville det f.eks. være en grund til at reducere antallet af mønter som helhed.
If we start from the fact that for many sections of the population, such as blind people for instance, it is very difficult to handle a large number of coins, this would be an example of a reason for reducing the total number of coins.
Hvis vi for det andet går ud fra, at elektroniske betalingsmidler vinder stadig større indpas, er og ville det være endnu en grund.
Secondly, if we start from the fact that electronic money is constantly growing, this would be another reason.
Det næste argument, nemlig at mønten vokser med sin værdi og der således ikke opstår kaos med hensyn til størrelserne, var ligeledes et vigtigt krav.
The next argument, that the coin should grow with its value to avoid confusion of sizes, was also an important demand.
F.eks. har fem­centmønten nu med 21, 75 mm nøjagtig samme størrelse som tyvecentmønten, hvilket er udpræget vanskeligt for handikappede.
For instance, the 5 cent coin, at 21.75 mm, is exactly the same size as the 20 cent coin, which makes things extremely difficult for people with disabilities.
Donnelly, Alan (PSE). ­ (EN) Hr. formand, det vigtige i forbindelse med denne betænkning er ikke kun de æn­dringsforslag, som Kommissionen accepterer, men hvor­vidt kommissæren vil sætte sig ned sammen med ordføre­ren i starten af det nye år og undersøge idéerne i betænkningen for at se, hvad der kan udvikles mellem Europa­Kommissionen og Europa­Parlamentet.
Donnelly, Alan (PSE). ­ Mr President, the important thing about this report is not just the amendments that the Commission will accept, but whether or not the Commis­sioner would sit down with our rapporteur early in the New Year and explore the ideas in the report to see what can be progressed between the European Commission and the European Parliament.
Til trods for den retorik, som vi alle har været involveret i her til aften, er der nogle meget konkrete idéer i fru Billinghams betænkning.
In spite of the rhetoric that we have all been involved in this evening, there are some very concrete ideas in Mrs Billingham's report.
Vi ville gerne udvikle nogle af disse konkrete idéer.
What we would like to do is to progress some of those concrete ideas.
Hvis De her til aften kunne give tilsagn om, at De er villig til at gøre det, vil Udvalget om Økonomi, Valuta­spørgsmål og Industripolitik bestemt forsøge at videreføre disse idéer og samarbejde med Dem med henblik på at udvikle dem.
If tonight you could give a commitment that you are willing to do that then certainly in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy of the European Parliament we will try and take up those ideas and work with you to develop them.
Det tredje aspekt, nemlig folks sundhed, bør være et særligt og vigtigt aspekt af stor betydning.
The report was accepted in November with a large majority, but rejected by the Council.
Også dette punkt kom under førstebehandlingen igennem Parlamentet med flertal.
The European Parliament had decided by a large majority, but the Council only accepted Amendment Nos 8 and 12.
Når vi siger, at nikkel ikke bør komme i berøring med den menneskelige hud, følger vi dermed kun andre EU­direktiver, som allerede for længst har fastsat
I certainly will be available to anyone ­ not just to the rapporteur ­ to make sure that we do not take risks as far as serving people everywhere in the European Union is concerned.
Soltwedel-Schäfer bestemmelser herom inden for andre af dagliglivets områder. der.
Soltwedel-Schäfer only say that the debate is obviously about small change.
Det synes ikke at være så vigtigt for os alle, men småpengene har da et volumen på 70 milliarder mønter, og derfor har vi hidtil i Udvalget om Økonomi, Valutaspørgsmål og Industripolitik taget det meget alvor ligt, og vi har seriøst prøvet på at deltage i drøftelsen af nyskabelsen af mønter bl.a. ved at stille ændringsforslag.
It seems pretty unimportant to all of us, but the scale of this small change is 70 billion coins, and for this reason we in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy have taken it very seriously so far, and we have seriously tried to participate in the discussion about creating the new coins, by proposing amendments among other things.
De ændringsforslag, Rådet forkastede under førstebehandlingen, havde Parlamentet alle eller en del af dem kunnet vedtage igen med absolut flertal blandt sine medlemmer som ændring til den fælles holdning. Den mulighed har vi efter proceduren i henhold til artikel 189 C, og det kunne vi have gjort.
If the Commission or the Council show in the debate in the House that they are not prepared to accept Parliament's desired amendments to a sufficient extent, Parliament could again reject the com mon position, and that is what I want and have proposed.
Vi kan endvidere, dersom Rådet ikke overtager bestemte ændringer, forkaste den fælles holdning eller vedtage den med forbehold, det vil sige, at godkendelsen af den fælles holdning bortfalder, hvis Rådet ikke accepterer de af Parlamentet vedtagne ændringer.
If the Council does not accept certain amendments, we can also break down the common position, and only accept it under conditions, that is, if the Council does not accept the amendments which Parliament has adopted, the common position is not approved.
Møntdirektørerne, finansministrene, så anderledes på det.
The mint directors and finance ministers saw it otherwise.
De har udarbejdet tekster og foreslået strategier.
They have prepared texts, proposed strategies.