natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ïé ãåíéêþò ÷ áìçëïß ñõèìïß ðëçèùñéóìïý ðñïêýðôïõí êáé áðü Üëëïõò óõíáöåßò äåßêôåò ôéìþí ( âë . Ðßíáêá 2 ) .
This pattern of generally low rates of inflation is also apparent when it is measured in terms of other relevant price indices ( see Table 2 ) .
¼ óïí áöïñÜ ôéò ðñüóöáôåò ôÜóåéò êáé ðñïâëÝøåéò , ïé óçìåñéíïß ñõèìïß ðëçèùñéóìïý , ìå âÜóç ôï äùäåêÜìçíï ñõèìü ôïõ äåßêôç ôéìþí êáôáíáëùôÞ , ìåéþíïíôáé óå åðßðåäï êÜôù áðü 2 %, áëëÜ õðÜñ ÷ ïõí êÜðïéåò åíäåßîåéò üôé èá áóêçèïýí Üìåóåò áíïäéêÝò ðéÝóåéò , üðùò ðñïêýðôåé áðü ôïõò äåßêôåò ôïõ Ðßíáêá 3á .
Looking at recent trends and forecasts , current outturns for consumer price inflation ( measured as a percentage change over the corresponding month a year earlier ) have been decreasing to below 2 % but there are some signs of immediate upward pressure on the basis of the measures shown in Table 3a .
ÐñïâëÝðåôáé ñõèìüò ðëçèùñéóìïý ãýñù óôï 2,5% ãéá ôï 1998 êáé ôï 1999 ( âë . Ðßíáêá 3â ) .
Forecasts of inflation suggest rates of around 2‰ % for 1998 and 1999 ( see Table 3b ) .
ÄçìïóéïíïìéêÝò åîåëßîåéò Óôï Ýôïò áíáöïñÜò 1997 , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ôïõ åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá Þôáí 1,4% , äçë . áñêåôÜ êÜôù áðü ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 3 %, êáé ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò Þôáí 72,1% , äçë .
Fiscal developments In the reference year 1997 the general government deficit ratio was 1.4% , i.e. well below the 3 % reference value , and the debt ratio was 72.1% , i.e. above the 60 % reference value .
ðÜíù áðü ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 60 %. Óå óýãêñéóç ìå ôï ðñïçãïýìåíï Ýôïò , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ìåéþèçêå êáôÜ 0,9 ôçò åêáôïóôéáßáò ìïíÜäáò êáé ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò êáôÜ 5,1 åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò .
Compared with the previous year , the deficit ratio has been reduced by 0.9 percentage point and the debt ratio has decreased by 5.1 percentage points .
Ãéá ôï 1998 ðñïâëÝðåôáé üôé ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò èá áõîçèåß óå 1,6% ôïõ ÁÅÐ , åíþ ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò èá ìåéùèåß óå 70,0% .
In 1998 the deficit ratio is forecast to increase to 1.6% of GDP , while the debt ratio is projected to decline to 70.0% .
Ôï 1996 êáé ôï 1997 , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò äåí õðåñÝâç ôï ëüãï ôùí äáðáíþí äçìüóéùí åðåíäýóåùí ðñïò ôï ÁÅÐ ( âë . Ðßíáêá 4 ) .
In 1996 and 1997 the deficit ratio did not exceed the ratio of public investment expenditure to GDP ( see Table 4 ) .
Áðü ôçí áíáóêüðçóç ôùí åôþí 1990-1997 äéáðéóôþíåôáé üôé ï ëüãïò ÷ ñÝïõò / ÁÅÐ ôçò Ïëëáíäßáò ìåéþèçêå êáôÜ 7,1 åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò .
183 Looking back over the years 1990 to 1997 , the Dutch debt-to-GDP ratio declined by 7.1 percentage points .
Ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò áõîÞèçêå áðü 79,2% ôï 1990 óå 81,2% ôï 1993 , óôç óõíÝ ÷ åéá üìùò áêïëïýèçóå ðôùôéêÞ ðïñåßá êáé ôï 1997 Ýöèáóå óôï 72,1% ( âë . ÄéÜãñáììá 2á ) , äçë .
Whereas the debt ratio increased from 79.2% in 1990 to 81.2% in 1993 , a downward movement was discernible thereafter , and in 1997 the debt ratio stood at 72.1% ( see Chart 2a ) , i.e. a decline of 9.1 percentage points over four years .
ìåéþèçêå êáôÜ 9,1 åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò óå äéÜñêåéá ôåóóÜñùí åôþí . ¼ ðùò áðåéêïíßæåôáé ëåðôïìåñÝóôåñá óôï ÄéÜãñáììá 2â , ôï ðñùôïãåíÝò ðëåüíáóìá äåí Þôáí áñêåôÜ õøçëü óôï ìåãáëýôåñï ìÝñïò ôçò ðåñéüäïõ Ýùò ôï 1995 þóôå íá áíôéóôáèìßóåé ôçí áõîçôéêÞ åðßäñáóç ðïõ Üóêçóå óôï ÷ ñÝïò ç áñíçôéêÞ äéáöïñÜ áíÜðôõîçò-åðéôïêßïõ .
As is shown in greater detail in Chart 2b , the primary surplus was not sufficiently high for most of the period up to 1995 to outweigh the debt-increasing effects of a negative growth / interest rate differential .
Ï Ýíáò Þôáí ç ÷ ñçìáôïïéêïíïìéêÞ ìåôáññýèìéóç óôïí ôïìÝá ôçò êïéíùíéêÞò êáôïéêßáò ôï 1994 , åíþ ï Üëëïò Þôáí ôï ãåãïíüò üôé ôï ÷ ñåùóôéêü õðüëïéðï ôïõ ëïãáñéáóìïý ôïõ Äçìïóßïõ óôçí ÔñÜðåæá ôçò Ïëëáíäßáò ó ÷ åäüí åêìçäåíßóôçêå , åíþ ÷ ñçóéìï - ðïéÞèçêå ðáëáéüôåñï ðëåüíáóìá ãéá ôçí áðïðëçñùìÞ ôìÞìáôïò ôïõ äçìüóéïõ ÷ ñÝïõò .
The first , in 1994 , related to a financial reform in the social housing sector , and the second , in 1997 , occurred when the Treasury moved to a nearly balanced position at De Nederlandsche Bank and used the earlier surplus to pay off debt .
Ôï 1996 êáé ôï 1997 ôï ìáêñïïéêïíïìéêü ðåñéâÜëëïí Ýãéíå ðéï åõíïúêü : åðéôá ÷ ýíèçêå ç áýîçóç ôïõ ÁÅÐ , ôá ìÝóá åðéôüêéá ìåéþèçêáí ïñéáêÜ êáé ôá ðñùôïãåíÞ ðëåïíÜóìáôá áõîÞèçêáí , óõìâÜëëïíôáò Ýôóé óôç ìåßùóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò .
In 1996 and 1997 the macroeconomic environment became more favourable : GDP growth strengthened , average interest rates declined marginally , and primary surpluses increased , thereby contributing to a falling debt ratio .
Ç åîÝëéîç ðïõ ðáñáôçñÞèçêå óôéò áñ ÷ Ýò ôçò äåêáåôßáò ôïõ 1990 ìðïñåß íá èåùñçèåß åíäåéêôéêÞ ôùí áíïäéêþí ðéÝóåùí óôï ëüãï ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ðïõ ìðïñïýí íá åêäçëùèïýí üôáí ôï ðñùôïãåíÝò ðëåüíáóìá äåí åßíáé áñêåôÜ õøçëü þóôå íá áíôéóôáèìßóåé ôéò óõíÝðåéåò ôùí äõóìåíþí ïéêïíïìéêþí óõíèçêþí .
The patterns observed in the early 1990s may be seen as indicative of the upward pressure on the debt ratio which can arise when the primary surplus is not sufficiently high to offset the effects of adverse economic conditions .
Óôï ðëáßóéï áõôü óçìåéþíåôáé üôé ôï ôìÞìá ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ìå ìéêñÞ åíáðïìÝíïõóá äéÜñêåéá ðáñáìÝíåé ìéêñü , áí êáé áõîÜíåôáé êáôÜ ôç äéÜñêåéá ôçò äåêáåôßáò ôïõ 1990 , åíþ ç ìÝóç äéÜñêåéá ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò äéáôçñÞèçêå ó ÷ åäüí áìåôÜâëçôç êáôÜ ôçí åîåôáæüìåíç ðåñßïäï ( âë . Ðßíáêá 5 ) .
In this context , it may be noted that the share of debt with a short-term residual maturity has been low ( though increasing ) during the 1990s , and the average maturity has remained broadly stable in the period considered ( see Table 5 ) .
Óôç äéÜñêåéá ôçò äåêáåôßáò ôïõ 1990 ï ëüãïò åëëåßììáôïò / ÁÅÐ ðáñÝìåéíå ó ÷ åäüí áìåôÜâëçôïò Ýùò ôï 1995 êáé áêïëïýèùò óçìåßùóå óõíå ÷ Þ âåëôßùóç .
During the 1990s a broadly flat trend up to 1995 and subsequently improving outturns can be observed in the deficit-to-GDP ratio .
Îåêéíþíôáò áðü 5,1% ôï 1990 , ôï Ýëëåéììá êõìÜíèçêå ìåôáîý 2,9% êáé 4,0% ìÝ ÷ ñé ôï 1995 .
Starting from a ratio of 5.1% in 1990 , the deficit fluctuated between 2.9% and 4.0% during the period up to 1995 ;
Áêïëïýèùò , ôï Ýëëåéììá õðï ÷ þñçóå óôï 2,3% ôï 1996 êáé óôï 1,4% ôï 1997 ( âë . ÄéÜãñáììá 3á ) .
thereafter the deficit fell to 2.3% in 1996 and 1.4% in 1997 ( see Chart 3a ) .
¼ ðùò öáßíåôáé ëåðôïìåñÝóôåñá óôï ÄéÜãñáììá 3â , ôï ïðïßï åðéêåíôñþíåôáé óôéò ìåôáâïëÝò ôùí åëëåéììÜôùí , ïé êõêëéêïß ðáñÜãïíôåò äåí Ýðáéîáí óçìáíôéêü ñüëï ( ìå åîáßñåóç ôï 1993 ) .
As is shown in greater detail in Chart 3b , which focuses on changes in deficits , cyclical factors did not play a large role ( with the exception of 1993 ) .
Åíôïýôïéò , ç ìç êõêëéêÞ âåëôßùóç èá ìðïñïýóå íá áíôáíáêëÜ ìéá ìïíéìüôåñç ,  äéáñèñùôéêÞò öýóåùò  ìåôÜâáóç ðñïò ðéï 201 éóïññïðçìÝíç äçìïóéïíïìéêÞ ðïëéôéêÞ Þ / êáé ìéá ðïéêéëßá ìÝôñùí ìå ðñïóùñéíÞ åðßäñáóç .
However , the non-cyclical improvements could reflect a lasting , structural move towards more balanced fiscal policies and / or a variety of measures with temporary effects .
Ôá äéáèÝóéìá óôïé ÷ åßá õðïäçëþíïõí üôé ìÝôñá ìå ðñïóùñéíÞ åðßäñáóç óõíÝâáëáí ( êáôÜ 0,6% ôïõ ÁÅÐ ) óôç ìåßùóç ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ôï 1996 , áëëÜ äåí Ýðáéîáí ñüëï ôï 1997 .
Evidence available suggests that measures with a temporary effect played a deficit-reducing role in 1996 , amounting to 0.6% of GDP , but did not play a role in 1997 .
¼ óïí áöïñÜ ôéò ôÜóåéò Üëëùí äçìïóéïíïìéêþí äåéêôþí , áðü ôï ÄéÜãñáììá 4 öáßíåôáé üôé ï ëüãïò ôùí óõíïëéêþí äáðÜíùí ôïõ åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá áõîÞèçêå óôáèåñÜ ìåôáîý 1990 êáé 1993 , áíôáíáêëþíôáò êõñßùò ôçí áýîçóç ôùí ôñå ÷ ïõóþí ìåôáâéâÜóåùí ( âë . Ðßíáêá 6 ) óôï ðëáßóéï ôçò åðéâñÜäõíóçò ôçò ïéêïíïìéêÞò äñáóôçñéüôçôáò êáé ôçò áýîçóçò ôçò áíåñãßáò .
Moving on to examine trends in other fiscal indicators , it can be seen from Chart 4 that the general government total expenditure ratio rose steadily between 1990 and 1993 , mainly reflecting an increase in current transfers ( see Table 6 ) in the context of the slowdown in the economy and higher unemployment .
Ï ëüãïò ìåéþèçêå ìåôÜ ôï 1993 .
After 1993 the ratio declined .
ÓõíïëéêÜ , ï ëüãïò ôùí äáðáíþí ôï 1997 Þôáí ðåñßðïõ 5 åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò ÷ áìçëüôåñïò áðü ü , ôé ôï 1990 , áíôáíáêëþíôáò ôçí êáèïäéêÞ ðïñåßá üëùí ôùí óçìáíôéêþí êáôçãïñéþí ôùí äçìüóéùí äáðáíþí .
On balance , the expenditure ratio in 1997 was nearly 5 percentage points lower than in 1990 , reflecting a downward movement in all major items of government spending .
Åðßóçò , ôá äçìüóéá Ýóïäá ùò ðïóïóôü ôïõ ÁÅÐ Ýôåéíáí íá áõîÜíïíôáé óçìáíôéêÜ Ýùò ôï 1993 , áëëÜ áñãüôåñá ìåéþèçêáí óå åðßðåäá ÷ áìçëüôåñá áðü åêåßíá ðïõ ðáñáôçñÞèçêáí óôéò áñ ÷ Ýò ôçò äåêáåôßáò ôïõ 1990 , åíþ ôï 1997 óçìåßùóáí ìéêñÞ áýîçóç .
Government revenue in relation to GDP also tended to increase sharply until 1993 , but thereafter declined to levels below those observed at the beginning of the 1990s before experiencing a small increase in 1997 .
Óýìöùíá ìå ôç ìåóïðñüèåóìç óôñáôçãéêÞ äçìïóéïíïìéêÞò ðïëéôéêÞò ôçò Ïëëáíäßáò , üðùò ðáñïõóéÜóôçêå óôï Ðñüãñáììá Óýãêëéóçò 1995-1998 ðïõ áíáèåùñÞèçêå ôï ÄåêÝìâñéï 1996 , ðñïâëÝðåôáé ìåßùóç Þ óôáèåñïðïßçóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò êáé ðôùôéêÞ ôÜóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ôï 1998 .
184 According to the Dutch medium-term fiscal policy strategy , as presented in the Convergence Programme for 1995-98 updated in December 1996 , a declining or stabilising trend in the deficit ratio and a declining trend in the debt ratio are projected for 1998 .
Ç äéáìüñöùóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ôï 1997 ïöåßëåôáé óôï 202 üôé ïé åðéäüóåéò ôçò ïéêïíïìßáò Þôáí êáëýôåñåò áðü ü , ôé ðñïâëåðüôáí óôï áñ ÷ éêü ðñüãñáììá ãéá ôï 1998 .
The outcome for the debt ratio in 1997 reflects a better performance than was envisaged in the original programme for 1998 .
Ëüãù ôçò åíôïíüôåñçò ïéêïíïìéêÞò áíÜðôõîçò áðü ôçí ðñïâëåðüìåíç , ï ðñïûðïëïãéóìüò ôïõ 1998 åìöáíßæåé ìåãáëýôåñç ìåßùóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò áðü ü , ôé Þôáí ï óôü ÷ ïò ôïõ ðñïãñÜììáôïò .
Against the background of stronger economic growth than foreseen , the budget for 1998 shows a larger reduction in the deficit ratio than planned in the programme .
Ôï óçìåñéíü ðñüãñáììá äåí ðåñéëáìâÜíåé ðñïâëÝøåéò ðÝñáí ôïõ 1998 , ïé ïëëáíäéêÝò áñ ÷ Ýò üìùò Ý ÷ ïõí äåóìåõèåß íá óõììïñöùèïýí ìå ôï ìåóïðñüèåóìï óôü ÷ ï ôïõ Óõìöþíïõ Óôáèåñüôçôáò êáé ÁíÜðôõîçò , ðïõ èá ôåèåß óå éó ÷ ý áðü ôï 1999 êáé ìåôÜ . ÂÜóåé ôïõ óôü ÷ ïõ áõôïý , ï ðñïûðïëïãéóìüò ðñÝðåé íá åßíáé ó ÷ åäüí éóïóêåëéóìÝíïò Þ ðëåïíáóìáôéêüò .
While the current programme does not contain projections beyond 1998 , the Dutch authorities have committed themselves to complying with the medium-term objective of the Stability and Growth Pact , effective from 1999 onwards , of having a budgetary position that is close to balance or in surplus , which entails a need for further substantial fiscal consolidation compared with projections for 1998 .
´ Åôóé , åßíáé áíÜãêç íá õðÜñîåé ðåñáéôÝñù óçìáíôéêÞ äçìïóéïíïìéêÞ åîõãßáíóç óå óýãêñéóç ìå ôéò ðñïâëÝøåéò ãéá ôï 1998 . Ùò ðñïò ôï äéÜóôçìá ðïõ èá áðáéôçèåß ãéá íá ìåéùèåß ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò óôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 60 % ãéá ôéò ÷ þñåò ðïõ Ý ÷ ïõí ëüãï ÷ ñÝïõò óáöþò Üíù ôïõ 60 % áëëÜ êÜôù ôïõ 80 % ôïõ ÁÅÐ , ôï ÅÍÉ ðáñïõóéÜæåé ôïõò õðïëïãéóìïýò ðïõ öáßíïíôáé áíáëõôéêüôåñá óôï ÄéÜãñáììá 5 .
With regard to the future horizon for reducing the debt ratio to the 60 % reference value for countries with a debt ratio of clearly above 60 % but below 80 % of GDP , the EMI presents calculations , as detailed in Chart 5 .
Ìå âÜóç ôçí õðüèåóç üôé èá åðéôåõ ÷ èåß ç óõíïëéêÞ äçìïóéïíïìéêÞ êáôÜóôáóç êáé ïé ëüãïé ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò üðùò ðñïâëÝðïíôáé áðü ôçí ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ãéá ôï 1998 , ç éóïóêÝëéóç ôïõ ðñïûðïëïãéóìïý áðü ôï 1999 êáé ìåôÜ èá ìåéþóåé ôï ëüãï ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò óå åðßðåäï êÜôù ôïõ 60 % ôïõ ÁÅÐ ôï 2002 .
On the assumption that overall fiscal positions and debt ratios as projected by the European Commission for 1998 are achieved , realising a balanced budget from 1999 onwards would reduce the debt ratio to below 60 % of GDP in 2002 .
Ôï ßäéï ìðïñåß åðßóçò íá åðéôåõ ÷ èåß áí äéáôçñçèåß ôï ðñùôïãåíÝò ðëåüíáóìá ôïõ 1998 ( 3,3% ) , áëëÜ ç ìåßùóç ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò èá åßíáé âñáäýôåñç .
This would also be achieved by maintaining the 1998 primary surplus of 3.3% of GDP but debt reduction would be slower .
Áíôßèåôá , ç äéáôÞñçóç ôïõ óõíïëéêïý åëëåßììáôïò ôïõ 1998 , ôï ïðïßï âñßóêåôáé óå åðßðåäï 1,6% ôïõ ÁÅÐ , èá ðáñáôåßíåé áõôÞ ôç äéáäéêáóßá ìÝ ÷ ñé ôï 2005 .
Instead , maintaining the 1998 overall deficit of 1.6% of GDP would prolong the process to 2005 .
Áõôïß ïé õðïëïãéóìïß âáóßæïíôáé óôçí êáíïíéóôéêÞ õðüèåóç üôé ôï ïíïìáóôéêü åðéôüêéï èá ðáñáìåßíåé áìåôÜâëçôï óôï 6 % ( 4 % ìÝóï ðñáãìáôéêü êüóôïò åîõðçñÝôçóçò äçìüóéïõ ÷ ñÝïõò óõí 2 % ðëçèùñéóìüò ) êáé óôçí õðüèåóç üôé ï ñõèìüò áýîçóçò ôïõ ðñáãìáôéêïý ÁÅÐ èá åßíáé óôáèåñüò óôï 3,1% , üðùò åêôéìÜôáé áðü ôçí ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ãéá ôçí áýîçóç ôçò ôÜóçò ôïõ ðñáãìáôéêïý ÁÅÐ ôï 1998 .
Such calculations are based on the normative assumption of a constant nominal rate of interest of 6 % ( average real cost of public debt outstanding of 4 % and 2 % inflation ) and the assumption of a constant real GDP growth rate of 3.1% , as estimated by the Commission for real trend GDP growth in 1998 .
Ïé ðáñáðÜíù õðïëïãéóìïß åßíáé êáèáñÜ åíäåéêôéêïß êáé äåí ìðïñïýí óå êáìßá ðåñßðôùóç íá èåùñçèïýí ùò ðñïâëÝøåéò , ùóôüóï ðñïâÜëëïõí áíÜãëõöá ôçí áíÜãêç íá õðÜñîåé ðåñáéôÝñù óçìáíôéêÞ ðñüïäïò áðü ðëåõñÜò åîõãßáíóçò ðñïêåéìÝíïõ íá ìåéùèåß ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò óôçí Ïëëáíäßá óôï 60 % ôïõ ÁÅÐ Þ ÷ áìçëüôåñá ìÝóá óå åýëïãï ÷ ñïíéêü äéÜóôçìá .
While such calculations are purely illustrative , and can by no means be regarded as forecasts , they provide an illustration of the need for further substantial progress in consolidation in order to bring the debt ratio in the Netherlands down to 60 % of GDP or below within an appropriate period of time .
Åðßóçò , üðùò ôïíßæåôáé óôïí Ðßíáêá 7 , áðü ôï 2010 ðåñßðïõ êáé Ýðåéôá áíáìÝíåôáé óçìáíôéêÞ ãÞñáíóç ôïõ ðëçèõóìïý .
In addition , as is highlighted in Table 7 , from around 2010 onwards a marked ageing of the population is expected .
Ç åîÝëéîç ôçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò Ôï ïëëáíäéêü öéïñßíé óõììåôÝ ÷ åé óôï ÌÓÉ áðü ôçí ÝíáñîÞ ôïõ óôéò 13 Ìáñôßïõ 1979 , äçë . åðß äéÜóôçìá ðïëý ìåãáëýôåñï ôùí äýï åôþí ðñéí áðü ôçí åîÝôáóç ( âë .
Exchange rate developments The Dutch guilder has been participating in the ERM since its inception on 13 March 1979 , i.e. for much longer than two years prior to the examination ( see Table 8a ) .
Ç Ïëëáíäßá êáé ç Ãåñìáíßá Ý ÷ ïõí óõíÜøåé óõìöùíßá âÜóåé ôçò ïðïßáò ôï ðåñéèþñéï äéáêýìáíóçò ìåôáîý ôïõ ïëëáíäéêïý öéïñéíßïõ êáé ôïõ ãåñìáíéêïý ìÜñêïõ Ý ÷ åé ïñéóôåß óå ± 2,25% .
The Netherlands and Germany have an agreement whereby the fluctuation margin between the guilder and the Deutsche Mark is set at -- 2.25% .
Åéäéêüôåñá óôçí ðåñßïäï áíáöïñÜò ( ÌÜñôéïò 1996 ÖåâñïõÜñéïò 1998 ) , ç éóïôéìßá ôïõ íïìßóìáôïò êéíÞèçêå êáôÜ êáíüíá êïíôÜ óôéò êåíôñéêÝò ôïõ éóïôéìßåò Ýíáíôé ôùí Üëëùí íïìéóìÜôùí ôïõ ÌÓÉ êáé ðïëý êïíôÜ óôéò éóïôéìßåò Ýíáíôé ôïõ âåëãéêïý öñÜãêïõ , ôïõ ãåñìáíéêïý ìÜñêïõ êáé ôïõ áõóôñéáêïý óåëéíßïõ ( âë . ÄéÜãñáììá 6 êáé Ðßíáêá 8á ) .
Focusing on the reference period from March 1996 to February 1998 , the currency has normally traded close to its central rates against other ERM currencies and very close to those vis - - vis the Belgian franc , the Deutsche Mark and the Austrian schilling ( see Chart 6 and Table 8a ) .
Ïé ìÝãéóôåò áðïêëßóåéò ðñïò ôá Üíù êáé ðñïò ôá êÜôù áðü ôéò êåíôñéêÝò éóïôéìßåò , ìå âÜóç ôïõò êéíçôïýò ìÝóïõò 10 åñãÜóéìùí çìåñþí , Þôáí 2,8% êáé - 2,8% áíôßóôïé ÷ á , ìå åîáßñåóç ôçí éñëáíäéêÞ ëßñá ðïõ áêïëïýèçóå áõôüíïìç áíïäéêÞ ðïñåßá ( âë . Ðßíáêá 8á ) .
The maximum upward and downward deviations from central rates , on the basis of 10 business day moving averages , were 2.8% and - 2.8% respectively , abstracting from the autonomous upward trend of the Irish pound ( see Table 8a ) .
Ôá åðåéóüäéá áõôþí ôùí áðïêëßóåùí Þôáí ðñïóùñéíÜ , ï âáèìüò ìåôáâëçôüôçôáò ôçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò Ýíáíôé ôïõ ãåñìáíéêïý ìÜñêïõ Þôáí äéáñêþò ðïëý ÷ áìçëüò ( âë . Ðßíáêá 8â ) êáé ïé äéáöïñÝò ôùí âñá ÷ õðñüèåóìùí åðéôïêßùí Ýíáíôé ôùí ÷ ùñþí ôçò ÅÅ ìå ôá ÷ áìçëüôåñá 203
The episodes in which such deviations occurred were temporary , the degree of exchange rate volatility vis - - vis the Deutsche Mark was continuously very low ( see Table 8b ) and short-term interest rate differentials against those EU countries with the lowest shortterm interest rates were insignificant .
Áðü ðéï ìáêñïðñüèåóìç óêïðéÜ , äåßêôåò ôçò ðñáãìáôéêÞò óôáèìéóìÝíçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò ôïõ ïëëáíäéêïý öéïñéíßïõ Ýíáíôé ôùí íïìéóìÜôùí ôùí Êñáôþí-Ìåëþí ðïõ óõììåôÝ ÷ ïõí óôï ÌÓÉ , üðùò åìöáíßæïíôáé óôïí Ðßíáêá 9 , õðïäçëþíïõí üôé ôá óçìåñéíÜ åðßðåäá åßíáé ðáñáðëÞóéá ìå ôéò ôéìÝò ðïõ Ý ÷ ïõí óçìåéùèåß êáôÜ êáéñïýò .
In a longer-term context , measures of the real effective exchange rate of the Dutch guilder vis - - vis the currencies of ERM participating Member States depicted in Table 9 suggest that current levels are close to historical values .
¼ óïí áöïñÜ ôéò Üëëåò åîùôåñéêÝò åîåëßîåéò , ç Ïëëáíäßá äéáôÞñçóå ìåãÜëá ðëåïíÜóìáôá óôï éóïæýãéï ôñå ÷ ïõóþí óõíáëëáãþí êáé óçìáíôéêÞ èåôéêÞ êáèáñÞ åîùôåñéêÞ èÝóç ( âë . Ðßíáêá 10 ) .
As regards other external developments , the Netherlands has maintained large current account surpluses and a sizable net external asset position ( see Table 10 ) .
Óçìåéþíåôáé üôé ç Ïëëáíäßá äéáèÝôåé ìéá ìéêñÞ áíïéêôÞ ïéêïíïìßá êáé , óýìöùíá ìå ôá ðéï ðñüóöáôá äéáèÝóéìá óôïé ÷ åßá , ï ëüãïò åîùôåñéêïý åìðïñßïõ / ÁÅÐ áíÝñ ÷ åôáé óå 63 % ãéá ôéò åîáãùãÝò êáé 56 % ãéá ôéò åéóáãùãÝò , åíþ ôï ðïóïóôü åíäïêïéíïôéêïý åìðïñßïõ öèÜíåé ôï 78 % ãéá ôéò åîáãùãÝò êáé ôï 60 % ãéá ôéò åéóáãùãÝò .
It may also be recalled that the Netherlands is a small open economy with , according to the most recent data available , a ratio of foreign trade to GDP of 63 % for exports and 56 % for imports , and a share of intra-EU trade of 78 % for exports and 60 % for imports .
ÄéÜãñáììá 7â ) . Ôá êõñéüôåñá áßôéá áõôÞò ôçò ôÜóçò Þôáí ï ó ÷ åôéêÜ ÷ áìçëüò ñõèìüò ðëçèùñéóìïý , ç óôáèåñüôçôá ôçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò ôïõ ïëëáíäéêïý öéïñéíßïõ , ç Üóêçóç íïìéóìáôéêÞò ðïëéôéêÞò ðáñüìïéáò ìå áõôÞí ðïõ áêïëïõèÞèçêå óôéò ðñïáíáöåñüìåíåò ÷ þñåò êáé ç âåëôßùóç ôùí äçìüóéùí ïéêïíïìéêþí ôçò ÷ þñáò .
Long-term interest rates have been on a broadly declining trend since the early 1990s ( see Chart 7a ) . A close convergence of Dutch long-term interest rates with those prevailing in the EU countries with the lowest bond yields has been observed for most of the period since the beginning of the 1990s ;
Ç ðñüóöáôç ìÝôñéá Üíïäïò ôùí ðëçèùñéóôéêþí ðéÝóåùí äåí öáßíåôáé íá Üóêçóå óçìáíôéêÞ åðßäñáóç óôéò ãåíéêüôåñåò ðñïïðôéêÝò ôçò ÷ ñçìáôïðéóôùôéêÞò áãïñÜò óôçí Ïëëáíäßá . Óýíïøç óõìðåñáóìÜôùí ÊáôÜ ôçí ðåñßïäï áíáöïñÜò , ç Ïëëáíäßá ðÝôõ ÷ å ðëçèùñéóìü ( ÅíÄÔÊ ) 1,8% , äçë .
in the more recent period the ( typically negative ) differential has been close to zero ( see Chart 7b ) . The main factors underlying this trend were the comparatively low rate of inflation , the stability of the Dutch guilder s exchange rate , the pursuit of a similar monetary policy stance to that followed in the abovementioned countries and the improvement in the fiscal position .
ÊáôÜ ôçí ðåñßïäï áíáöïñÜò , Þôáí ðåñßðïõ óôáèåñü , ãåíéêþò êïíôÜ óôéò êåíôñéêÝò äéìåñåßò éóïôéìßåò ôïõ , ðïõ ðáñÝìåéíáí áìåôÜâëçôåò , êáé äåí ÷ ñåéÜóôçêå íá ëçöèïýí ìÝôñá ãéá ôç óôÞñéîç ôçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò . Ôá ìáêñïðñüèåóìá åðéôüêéá Þôáí 5,5% , äçë .
ERM for much longer than two years . Over the reference period it remained broadly stable , generally close to its unchanged central parities , without the need for measures to support the exchange rate .
áñêåôÜ ÷ áìçëüôåñá áðü ôçí áíôßóôïé ÷ ç ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò . Ôï 1997 ç Ïëëáíäßá ðÝôõ ÷ å ëüãï äçìïóéïíïìéêïý åëëåßììáôïò 1,4% ôïõ ÁÅÐ , äçë .
The level of long-term interest rates was 5.5% , i.e. well below the respective reference value .
Ç åîÝëéîç ôùí ìáêñïðñüèåóìùí åðéôïêßùí ÊáôÜ ôçí ðåñßïäï áíáöïñÜò ( ÖåâñïõÜñéïò 1997-ÉáíïõÜñéïò 1998 ) ôá ìáêñïðñüèåóìá åðéôüêéá óôçí Ïëëáíäßá Þôáí ðåñßðïõ 5,5% óå ìÝóï üñï , äçë . ðïëý ÷ áìçëüôåñá áðü ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò ôïõ êñéôçñßïõ ôùí åðéôïêßùí 7,8% , ðïõ ïñßæåôáé ìå âÜóç ôá ôñßá ÊñÜôç-ÌÝëç ìå ôéò êáëýôåñåò åðéäüóåéò áðü Üðïøç óôáèåñüôçôáò ôéìþí .
In 1997 the Netherlands achieved a fiscal deficit ratio of 1.4% of GDP , i.e. well below the reference value , and the outlook is for an increase to 1.6% in 1998 .
áýîçóçò óå 1,6% ôï 1998 . Ï ëüãïò ÷ ñÝïõò / ÁÅÐ õðåñâáßíåé ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 60 %.
The debt-toGDP ratio is above the 60 % reference value .
¼ óïí áöïñÜ ôç äéáôçñçóéìüôçôá ôùí äçìïóéïíïìéêþí åîåëßîåùí , õðÜñ ÷ åé ðñïïðôéêÞ ãéá ìåßùóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ðñïò ôï ÁÅÐ óå 70,0% ôï 1998 .
Regarding the sustainability of fiscal developments , the , outlook is for a decrease in the debt ratio to 70.0% of GDP in 1998 .
Óå Ýíáí åõñýôåñï ÷ ñïíéêü ïñßæïíôá , ç äéáôÞñçóç ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò óôá óçìåñéíÜ åðßðåäá äåí èá áñêåß ãéá íá ìåéùèåß ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò êÜôù áðü 60 % ôïõ ÁÅÐ ìÝóá óå åýëïãï ÷ ñïíéêü äéÜóôçìá . ¸ ôóé õðÜñ ÷ åé áíÜãêç ãéá ðåñáéôÝñù óçìáíôéêÞ ðñüïäï áðü ðëåõñÜò åîõãßáíóçò .
Looking further ahead , keeping the deficit ratio at current levels would not be sufficient to bring the debt ratio down to 60 % of GDP within an appropriate period of time , thus pointing to the need for further substantial progress in consolidation .
ï óçìåñéíüò ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò åßíáé Üíù ôïõ 70 % ôïõ ÁÅÐ , åÜí åðéôåõ ÷ èåß ç äçìïóéïíïìéêÞ êáôÜóôáóç ðïõ ðñïâëÝðåôáé ãéá ôï 1998 êáé ðñáãìáôïðïéåßôáé éóïóêÝëéóç ôïõ ðñïûðïëïãéóìïý êáôüðéí , ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò èá ìåéùèåß êÜôù áðü 60 % ôï 2002 .
Given the current debt ratio of above 70 % of GDP , achieving the fiscal position forecast for 1998 and realising a balanced budget thereafter would reduce the debt ratio to below 60 % in 2002 .
Ùò ðñïò ôïõò Üëëïõò ðáñÜãïíôåò , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ôï 1996 êáé ôï 1997 äåí õðåñÝâç ôï ëüãï äçìüóéùí åðåíäýóåùí / ÁÅÐ êáé ç Ïëëáíäßá äéáôÞñçóå óçìáíôéêÜ ðëåïíÜóìáôá óôï éóïæýãéï ôñå ÷ ïõóþí óõíáëëáãþí , üðùò êáé èåôéêÞ êáèáñÞ åîùôåñéêÞ èÝóç .
With regard to other factors , in 1996 and 1997 the deficit ratio did not exceed the ratio of public investment to GDP , and the Netherlands maintained large current account surpluses as well as a net external asset position .
ÊáôÜëïãïò ðéíÜêùí êáé äéáãñáììÜôùí * ÏËËÁÍÄÉÁ É Ç åîÝëéîç ôùí ôéìþí Ðßíáêáò 1 Ïëëáíäßá : Ðëçèùñéóìüò âÜóåé ôïõ ÅíÄÔÊ ÄéÜãñáììá 1 Ïëëáíäßá : Ç åîÝëéîç ôùí ôéìþí Ðßíáêáò 2 Ïëëáíäßá : Äåßêôåò ðëçèùñéóìïý êáé óõíáöåßò äåßêôåò Ðßíáêáò 3 Ïëëáíäßá : Ðñüóöáôåò ôÜóåéò ðëçèùñéóìïý êáé ðñïâëÝøåéò ( á ) Ðñüóöáôåò ôÜóåéò ôïõ ðëçèùñéóìïý ôéìþí êáôáíáëùôÞ ( â ) ÐñïâëÝøåéò ãéá ôïí ðëçèùñéóìü
List of Tables and Charts * NETHERLANDS I Price developments Table 1 Chart 1 Table 2 Table 3 Netherlands : HICP inflation Netherlands : Price developments Netherlands : Measures of inflation and related indicators Netherlands : Recent inflation trends and forecasts ( a ) Recent trends in consumer price inflation ( b ) Inflation forecasts II
ÄçìïóéïíïìéêÝò åîåëßîåéò Ðßíáêáò 4 Ïëëáíäßá : ¸ ëëåéììá êáé ÷ ñÝïò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ÄéÜãñáììá 2 Ïëëáíäßá : ÁêáèÜñéóôï ÷ ñÝïò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ( á ) Åðßðåäá ( â ) ÅôÞóéåò ìåôáâïëÝò êáé ðñïóäéïñéóôéêïß ðáñÜãïíôåò Ðßíáêáò 5 Ïëëáíäßá : ÄéÜñèñùóç áêáèÜñéóôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ÄéÜãñáììá 3 Ïëëáíäßá : Ðëåüíáóìá (+) / Ýëëåéììá (-) åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ( á ) Åðßðåäá ( â ) ÅôÞóéåò ìåôáâïëÝò êáé ðñïóäéïñéóôéêïß ðáñÜãïíôåò ÄéÜãñáììá 4 Ïëëáíäßá : ÄáðÜíåò êáé Ýóïäá åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá Ðßíáêáò 6 Ïëëáíäßá : ¸ óïäá êáé äáðÜíåò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ÄéÜãñáììá 5 Ïëëáíäßá : ÄõíçôéêÞ åîÝëéîç ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ìå åíáëëáêôéêÝò ðáñáäï ÷ Ýò ãéá ôá äçìïóéïíïìéêÜ áðïôåëÝóìáôá Ðßíáêáò 7 Ïëëáíäßá : Äåßêôçò åîÜñôçóçò çëéêéùìÝíùí : ðñïâëÝøåéò
Fiscal developments Table 4 Netherlands : General government financial position Chart 2 Netherlands : General government gross debt ( a ) Levels ( b ) Annual changes and underlying factors Table 5 Netherlands : General government gross debt - structural features Chart 3 Netherlands : General government surplus (+) / deficit (-) ( a ) Levels ( b ) Annual changes and underlying factors Chart 4 Netherlands : General government expenditure and receipts Table 6 Netherlands : General government budgetary position Chart 5 Netherlands : Potential future debt ratios under alternative assumptions for fiscal balance ratios Table 7 Netherlands : Projections of elderly dependency ratio