natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Derefter varede det dog til januar 1993. inden høringerne kunne finde sted, igen med omkring en snes virksomheder, og når det varede så længe, så havde det også at gøre med den kendsgerning, at virksomhederne havde bedt Kommissionen om at få noget mere tid, fordi de juridiske tjenester på det tidspunkt havde alt for meget arbejde med antidumpingsager i De Forenede Stater.
It then took until January 1993 for the hearings to be held, again involving a few dozen companies, and the reason for the delay was that the companies had asked the Commission for a little more time because their legal departments were currently very overworked on anti-dumping issues in the United States.
Kommissionen var her meget fleksibel.
The Commission was very flexible on this.
Min forgænger var med rette meget fleksibel og gav derefter de pågæl­dende virksomheder og de juridiske tjenester noget mere tid. idet han vidste, at de allerede var under stort pres andre steder og skulle behandle vanskelige sager.
My predecessor was quite rightly very flexible on this and gave more time to the companies concerned and to the legal departments, knowing that they were already under great pressure on other fronts and were having to deal with difficult matters.
(NL) Må jeg også henvise til, at den periode, som vi har taget i betragtning ved idømmelsen af bøder, kun er en begrænset periode.
I would also make the point that we had required the fines imposed to be enforced by a set deadline.
For i virkeligheden går disse metoder helt tilbage til året 1984, og de har udviklet sig igennem flere år. Men vi var af den opfattelse, at vi, i betragtning af at man her var i en noget tvivlsom situation med den åbenbare krisesituation, godt kunne slå en streg over disse perioder.
Because these practices actually go back to 1984 and have evolved over a numberof years.
De, som mener, at vi har været overdre­vent strenge, må dog stille sig selv det spørgsmål, om det også var muligt at idømme endnu større bøder for længere perioder.
Those who think we were over-strict here should bear in mind that we did have the alternative option of levying even larger fines over longer periods of time.
Vi har slået en streg over det, fordi man i denne periode faktisk kan tale om nogen tvetydighed.
We chose not to do so because there was at that time a measure of ambiguity.
Men Kommissionen ν ar juridisk ikke forpligtet til at gøre det. Vi kunne juridisk perfekt have forsvaret, at der også for denne periode skulle idømmes bøder for visse meto­der, men vi har således ikke gjort det.
But the Commission was not legally obliged to renounce that option.
Kommissionen er begyndt at regne fra juli 1988 for virksomhederne i al almindelighed.
The Commission counted infringements from July 1988 in general.
For de spanske virksomheder fra januar 1989.
From January 1989 for the Spanish companies.
Fordi man efter overgangsperioden for Spaniens tiltrædelse i denne sektor egentlig kun kan regne fra 1. januar 1989. selv om der også allerede inden da blev anvendt visse metoder.
Because following Spain's post-accession transitional period one can only really count from 1 January 1989 in this sector, even though a number of practices were already current before that.
Lad mig nu lige sige et par ord om selve ov ertrædelserne.
A word of two now about the infringements themselves.
Jeg kunne formulere det således, at alt. hvad der kunne overtrædes, faktisk også blev overtrådt.
I can confirm that all the alleged infringements had in fact been committed.
Det betyder, at virk­
In this case it was exchanged.
Tillad mig nu lige at komme ind på selve bøderne.
This brings me to the fines themselves.
De er faktisk temmelig store.
They are pretty hefty, it is true.
Det drejer sig om 104 mio ECU. Det drejer sig om en periode på to et halvt
They total 104 million ECU.
Van Miert måde - se for øvrigt, hvad der sker i dag.
Van Miert firms which try to bend the rules of free competition, especially when the heads of those companies them selves claim to be the champions of this free competition.
Må man ikke sige tingene, som de er?
You will appreciate that the Commission was not being rash here.
I hvert fald har Kommissionen intet at skjule.
We had proof aplenty, clear proof, documentary proof.
Der er andre, som har ting at skjule, ikke vi. Jeg er rede til om hele denne sag at skaffe alle oplysninger, som Parlamentet ønsker. Kom missionen har intet at skjule, hverken i den almene sag eller i denne sag.
Given that the offences were so blatant we had no choice but to act, in accordance with precedent and bearing in mind the seriousness of the infringements which had been committed.
Det ønskede jeg at sige Dem i dag, og jeg er Dem meget taknemlig for. at De har givet mig lejlighed hertil.
But we have no proof and so we shall leave it at two and a half years.
Fayot (PSE). - (FR) Fru formand, hr. kommissær, nyheden om den klækkelige bod på adskillige hundrede millioner belgiske francs - og andre på et latterligt beløb, knap 200 BEF eller 2.000^BEF - har virket som en bombe.
The Commission's announcement on 16 February of the fines imposed on the girder producers has in fact raised a great deal of concern, not to say incomprehension, amongst steel workers and their unions, while the bosses and managers seem to have taken it all with a certain detachment.
Jeg er enig med hr. Van Miert i det synspunkt, at hans dossier, hvad substansen angår, synes at være solidt, og jeg vil nødig her give indtryk af. at jeg opkaster mig til forsvarer for virksomheder, der forsøger at omgå reglerne for fri konkurrence, når virksomhedslederne selv erklærer sig for tilhængere af denne frie konkurrence.
The Sarre-Lor-Lux Interregional Union Council, for example, is not only very disturbed about these fines, but above all it has criticized the purely passive attitude of the Commission to the restructuring of the steel industry.
Må jeg gøre Dem opmærksom på, at den globale omsætning i de stålvirksomheder, som var involveret deri, androg 40 mia ECU. Altså 40 mia ECU i omsætning i 1990 blot for de involverede virksomheder, og for stålbjælkesektoren ligger omsætningen på 1,7 mia ECU, altså specifikt for stålbjælkerne.
Whatever the case, and despite the denials of the Commission, one is left wondering whether there is a direct connection between the timing of the announcement of the fines and the attempts to restructure the steel industry.
Det drejede sig også om overtrædelsernes varighed, for der var også et par recidivister, som allerede tidligere havde fået en bøde på grund af forbudte metoder i denne sektor.
No doubt some of the firms affected are not involved in the restructuring, but the question of whether the Commission wanted to give a strong warning to the whole sector remains.
Desuden har Kommissionen ment, med rette, at der for betalingen af disse bøder, i betragtning af omstændighederne i denne sektor, skal iagttages en vis fleksibilitet, således at man kan sprede det over en periode på fem år.
Madam President, with the European elections just four months away, what are we to say to steelworkers fearful for their jobs, who might lay the blame on the Community if it seems incapable, on the other hand, of imposing restructuring to protect jobs?
Man havde så at sige flere kilo beviser, faste beviser, skriftlige beviser, til rådighed.
Madam President, you will agree that we are all in a tight corner.
Må jeg for øvrigt lige tilføje, at vi nu for beregningen af disse bøder har brugt to et halvt år, men jeg tør ikke med hånden på hjertet påstå, at nogle af disse metoder ikke er fortsat siden den periode. Men det har vi ingen beviser for, og lad os nu afslutte sagen for denne periode på to et halvt år.
The steelworkers who fear for their jobs, first and foremost, but also the Commission and the entire Community, which ought to be safeguarding an efficient and competitive steel industry and is not succeeding.
Således er f.eks. det interregionale fagforeningsråd (Conseil syndical interregional) Sarre-Lor-Lux ikke blot blevet foruroliget ved boden, men det har først og fremmest kritiseret den rent passive holdning.
Herman (PPE). - (FR) Madam President, far be it from me to question the powers of the Commission or the justice of the decision.
Kommissionen har indtaget under omstruktureringen af stålindustrien.
Clearly, illegal acts must be condemned and penalties imposed.
Hvordan det end forholder sig og trods Kommissionens dementier, må man spørge sig selv, om ikke der består en direkte sammenhæng mellem det tidspunkt, hvor boden er blevet idømt, og forsøgene på at omstrukturere stålindustrien.
Personally, I would have pleaded attenuating circumstances. We are in deep crisis, the facts in the indictment go far back into the past, and the consequences of the fine could be very serious socially.
Blandt de virksomheder, der er blevet ramt. er der uden tvivl nogle, som ikke er berørt af omstruktureringen, men man må alligevel spørge sig selv, om ikke Kommissionen har ønsket at give hele sektoren en kraftig advarsel.
The principal distortion having a stunning effect on the market today is not illegal actions that occurred some years ago, it is the maintenance of subsidies for firms in difficulty.
Fru formand, hvad kan vi sige til arbejdstagerne i stålindustrien, der frygter for deres job fire måneder før Europa-valgene, og som meget vel kan holde Fælles skabet ansvarligt for det. når EF på den anden side ikke er i stand til at gennemtvinge en omstrukturering for at opretholde arbejdspladserne?
And there, the Community - it is not really the fault of the Commission, it is principally the fault of the Council - has proved incapable of remedying the situation.
Jeg ved, at nogle af Dem knytter forbindelsen med den globale kontekst i dag.
I know that some of you are making a connection with today's overall context.
Jeg gentager, at der ikke er nogen forbindelse, der må heller ikke være nogen forbindelse.
Once again, there is no such connection, there cannot be.
Det forhindrer ikke, at Kommissionen fortsat beskæftiger sig med og bekymrer sig om den vanskelige situation i stålsektoren.
That is not to say that the Commission will not continue to address and concern itself with the difficult situation in the steel industry.
Må jeg dog i den forbindelse lige henvise til den kendsgerning, at Kommissionen virkelig har gjort sit yderste for, at de forskellige elementer af den plan, som hr. Bangemann og jeg i sin tid udarbejdede, og som Kommissionen godkendte, og som derefter også Ministerrådet godkendte, og som også blev udarbejdet bl.a. efter anmodning fra stålsektoren, at disse forskellige elementer derfor skal gennemføres normalt.
And let me say here that the Commission really has done its very best to get the various elements of the plan, which Mr Bangemann and I worked out, which the Commission approved and which the Council of Ministers also approved, to get these various elements implemented, in response too to the wishes of the steel industry.
De ved, at vi somme tider har store vanskeligheder i denne forbindelse.
As you know we are experiencing great difficulties over this in some respects.
Jeg minder Dem om de sager, hvor der var involveret temmelig megen offentlig støtte, og så siger jeg det på en meget diplomatisk måde, for det drejede sig om snesevis af milliarder, som De ved. Men den kendsgerning, at vi skulle have Rådets enstemmige tilladelse, gjorde Kom missionens opgave så godt som umulig.
I would remind you of the cases which involved a fair bit of state aid, and I am putting that tactfully, because the sums involved were tens of billions, as you are aware.
Jeg kunne godt give Dem billedet af dommeren på fodboldbanen, som først skal bede en spiller, som begår en overtrædelse, om tilladelse til at måtte give ham det gule eller det røde kort.
I can best illustrate it by the idea that a footballer commits a foul and is asked by the referee whether or not he can show him a yellow or a red card.
I denne situation befinder Kommissionen sig således, når vi talerom stålvirksomheder, som får offentlig støtte.
This is the situation the Commission is in when it has to deal with steel companies which receive state aids.
Det er den juridiske situation.
That is the legal position.
Og så forhandler man med ministre, som har vetoret.
And then you negotiate with ministers who have the right of veto.
Vil Forsamlingen nu indse dette, inden man skyder med pile på Kommissionen. Også stålsektoren ved dette.
It would be nice if the House could remember that before attacking the Commission.
De ved det kun alt for godt.
Only too well.
Det ville være noget mere korrekt at ræsonnere på grundlag af kendsgerninger og juridiske situationer end blot at gribe noget ud af luften og skyde med skarpt på Kommissionen.
It would be more appropriate to reason on the basis of facts and legal realities than to pluck things out of the air and snipe at the Commission.
Jeg har for øvrigt indtryk af, at stålsektoren indbyrdes omgås hinanden på en alt andet en blød
In fact, I feel the Commission would be better protected if this function was in a separate institution for verifying and regulating that competition.
De er sikkert enig i det synspunkt, at vi alle er i en slem knibe.
I agree with Mr Van Miert that there seems to be a solid case, and I would not want to give the impression of speaking up for
Først og fremmest arbejdstagerne i stålindustrien, der frygter for deres job. men også Kom missionen og hele Fællesskabet, der skal opretholde en effektiv og konkurrencedygtig stålindustri, men som ikke formår det.
Ernst de la Graete (V). - (FR) Madam President, on behalf of my group and like two previous speakers, I would also like to highlight the unfortunate timing of the fines we heard about during our last part-session in Strasbourg.
Jeg håber, at denne debat vil bidrage til at oplyse os og oplyse arbejdstagerne om Kommissionens virkelige intentioner.
You know what a difficult position the European steel industry is in today. In my region, the Walloon region, we have lost 29,000 jobs since 1975 in
Herman (PPE). - (FR) Fru formand, jeg vil ikke på nogen måde anfægte Kommissionens beføjelser eller det velbegrundede i afgørelsen.
steelmaking. After all the sacrifices made, and which we had hoped were at last going to return us to a stable situation in Europe particularly in the steel sector, we realize that we have not yet-covered the whole distance.
Når det er sagt, er omstændighederne, tidspunktet for afgørelsen såvel som bodens størrelse mere diskutable.
In this case, should not our approach rather be a strategy of cooperation and a united front against this new storm raging through a sector crucial to Europe's industrial fabric?
forsøger at forsvare en grov. omhyggeligt timet afpresning over for stålindustrien.
How far, for example, was initial rationalization in the eighties, aimed at limiting capacity, destroyed by subsequent expansion of capacity?
Det er det. der skete i sidste uge, og intet mindre.
What part was played in that by the cartel?
Det nytter ikke noget, at kommissæren kommer her og prøver at føre Parlamentet bag lyset med hensyn til, hvad Kommissionens foranstaltning i sidste uge gik ud på.
Is it true that dilatory decision-making by the Council meant that the Commission took action here far later than it really should have done?
Personligt ville jeg have påberåbt mig formildende omstændigheder.
What were the consequences for companies which were not part of the cartel?
Vi befinder os midt i en krise, de forhold, der påtales, går langt tilbage i tiden, konsekvenserne af boden kan meget vel blive alvorlige på det sociale plan.
Did the Commission put off acting till the very last chance for an agreement had come?
Den vigtigste forvridning, der i dag berører markedet på en iøjnefaldende måde, det er ikke de ulovlige manøvrer, der har fundet sted for nogle år siden, det er den omstændighed, at kriseramte virksomheder fortsat modtager statsstøtte.
Can the Commission say how it proposes to deal with the acute difficulties which its action is likely to cause?
Og på det felt har Fælles skabet - det er ikke så meget Kommissionens, det er især Rådets fejl - været ude af stand til at råde bod på situationen.
Pasty (RDE). - (FR) Madam President, the question I would like to put to the Commission is as follows: does the Commission have a coherent steel policy or not?
Hvorfor blev undersøgelsen afsluttet i maj 1992. og alligevel valgte han sidste tirsdag og onsdag at idømme stålindustrien bod? Forventer han virkelig, at Parlamentet vil tro, at det - næsten to år efter, at han afsluttede sin undersøgelse - skyldtes en tilfældighed, at han idømte stålindustrien boden samme dag, som han mødtes med stålproducenterne i Bruxelles?
I would like to ask the Commission how it intends, not only to restore order to the European steel industry, which up to a point we can support, but also to determine what need there is to offer positive inducements both to our own industries, encouraging them to move towards more environmentally friendly and specialized production, and to the countries of Eastern Europe as well.
Det er umuligt at tro, at det var et sammentræf af omstændigheder. Hvorfor opfordrede GD III faktisk i 1980'erne, da krisen inden for stålindustrien var åbenbar, denne industri til selv at nå frem til et eller andet arrangement, og hvorfor skulle GD IV så - efter at have gjort dette - vælge at undersøge det arrangement, som GD III havde anbefalet stålindustrien at indgå?
I want to ask the Commission whether it thinks any particular policy should be followed at that level to prevent unfair competition against our steelmakers and also to encourage the Eastern European steelmakers to move towards less environmentally harmful production.
Det er derfor, jeg spørger mig selv - det er en fornemmelse, jeg har haft i nogen tid - om ikke opretholdelsen af Kommissionens beføjelse til at forvalte konkurrencen i dag bør tages op til revision.
Indeed, where is the coherence between the efforts deployed to adapt the Community steel sector to the current crisis situation, notably by the implementation of a restructuring plan which is costly for firms and unfortunately costly in jobs as well, aimed at reducing what is regarded as excess capacity, and this incomprehensible decision to inflict heavy fines on these same firms at this time?
Jeg mener nemlig, at Kommissionen ville være bedre beskyttet, dersom denne funktion blev varetaget af et særskilt institut, der skulle undersøge og kontrollere denne konkurrence.
Is the Commission aware of the consequences its decision will have on the position of the firms affected, many of which are losing a lot of money and unfortunate ly a lot of jobs?
Tror kommissæren virkelig, at Kommissionen én dag kan tilråde stålproducenterne at nå frem til et eller andet arrangement og så nogle år senere umiddelbart give dem pålæg om at træde ud af det arrangement i løbet af nogle dage?
Donnelly (PSE). - Madam President, of course this House expects the Commission to apply the Rules on competition but I have to say to Commissioner Van Miert that I am very saddened by the fact that he is attempting to defend a blatant, carefully-timed blackmail against the steel industry.
Det er simpelthen inacceptabelt.
That is what happened last week and nothing short of that.
Men det vigtigste spørgsmål er spørgsmålet om, hvorfor kommissæren har valgt at give sig i lag med en stålindustri, der er lønsom.
It is no good the Commissioner coming here and trying to hoodwink the House over what the Commission's action last week was.
British Steel har mistet 140 000 arbejdspladser i de sidste ti år.
Our objection to the grounds for the decision is clear.
Det er en lønsom stålindustri, og kommissæren har valgt at idømme denne stålvirksomhed en historisk bod, hvad der vil koste arbejdspladser i Det Forenede Kongerige.
I think I should also recall that it was the Commission itself, under the Davignon plan, which encouraged European steelmakers to organize the market between 1980 and 1988, particularly as regards establishing quotas and imposing minimum prices.
Ernst de la Graete (V). - (FR) Fru formand, på min gruppes vegne vil også jeg - ligesom det blev gjort af de to kolleger, der talte før mig - understrege ubetimeligheden af den bod, som vi hørte om under vor sidste mødeperiode i Strasbourg.
Why was it that the investigation was concluded in May 1992 and yet he chose last Tuesday and Wednesday to invoke the fines against the steel industry?
Som De ved, er situationen i dag vanskelig i den europæiske stålindustri.
Does he really expect this House to believe that almost two years after he concluded his investigation that he happened to invoke the fines against the steel industry on the very day he was meeting those steel producers in Brussels?
I min region. den wallonske, har vi siden 1975 mistet 29 000 arbejdspladser i stålsektoren.
It is incredible to believe that was a coincidence.
Efter de ofre, der er bragt, og som vakte håb om, at vi i Europa og i stålsektoren i særdeles hed omsider måtte kunne genfinde en stabil situation, gør vi os på ny klart, at vi endnu ikke har tilbagelagt hele vejen.
Why was it that DG III actually invited the steel industry in the 1980s with the manifest crisis in that industry to come to some arrangement themselves and why, having done that, should DG IV then choose to investigate the arrangement that DG III had recommended the steel industry enter into?
Beumer (PPE). - (NL) Fru formand, allerførst tror jeg, at det må være tydeligt, at Parlamentet støtter konkurrence politikken, bestemt også når det drejer sig om åbenlyse karteller, således som det her synes at være tilfældet.
Garcia Arias (PSE). - (ES) Madam President, when my country joined the European Community in 1986, it was decided that its exports would be limited until December 1988.
Jeg har dog lige et par spørgsmål.
So it was difficult for it to take part in any quota cartel within the Community.
I denne sammenhæng spørger vi os selv, om den strategi, der er fulgt af Kommissionen, og som går ud på at anlægge et strengt juridisk synspunkt og sige, at konkurrencereglerne skal overholdes, nu også er den rigtige.
During the years 1989 and 1990, Ensidesa was overwhelmed with orders on the Spanish market at a time of economic boom and high demand connected with the Olympic Games and the World Exhibition.
Bør vi ikke i dette tilfælde snarere satse på en samarbejdsstrategi og i fællesskab byde dette nye uvejr trods, som raser i en sektor, der er af afgørende betydning for den europæiske industris struktur?
Other European producers who could export took advantage of this situation in Spain. As a result Spanish steel prices fell to the level they were at in 1986. when Spain joined the Community.
Jeg vil gerne spørge Kommissionen om, hvordan den agter, ikke blot at bringe orden igen i den europæiske stålsektor, hvad vi kan billige til en vis grad. men også at afgøre, i hvilket omfang der er behov for at tilbyde ikke blot vore egne industrier, men også de østeuropæiske lande positive incitamenter for at få dem til at satse på en mere effektiv produktion i henseende til miljø og specialisering. lisering.
If the share of Spanish steel in the Spanish market decreased, and prices fell too. what explanation is there for the charge that these firms took part in the alleged cartel?
Hvor vidt er f.eks. den første sanering i firserne, der var rettet mod kapacitetsbegrænsning, tilintetgjort af kapacitetsudvidelse derefter?
Does the Commissioner really believe that steel producers can be advised by the Commission on one day to come to some arrangement and then immediately be instructed some years later to come out of that arrangement within a matter of days?
I hvilket omfang har kartellet spillet en rolle i denne forbindelse?
It is simply unacceptable.
Er det rigtigt, at den tøvende beslutningsproces i Rådet virkelig har ført til, at Kommissionen meget senere, end det egentlig ville have været nødvendigt, har grebet ind her?
But the most important question is why the Commission er has chosen to tackle a steel industry which is profitable.
Hvilke virkninger har det haft for virksomheder, der ikke var involveret i kartellet?
British Steel has lost 140.000 jobs in the last ten years.