natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
57 executive summary iv. the commission would like to remark that the concept of the measures subject to court’s audit is broad. the objectives of the diversification measures are not strictly and solely linked to growth and jobs. other objectives as defined by Ms in their rdps could also be addressed by these measures.1 the commission would like to point out that the third core objective of the rural development policy is the improvement of the quality of life in rural areas and encouragement of diversification of economic activities. v. the legal framework, which is currently in place, provides for a broad scope and purpose of the measures, which provides for a large flexibility in the implementation. the principles of subsidiarity and shared management hands considerable discretion to Member states and regions. according to these principles, project selection including the setting up of project selection criteria lies within the responsibility of Member states. nevertheless, in its supervisory role, the commission has insisted on several occasions on the need for greater selec-tivity2 and targeting in the implementation of the measure. 
Mitmekesistamismeetmed ei piirdu tingimata ja üksnes majanduskasvu ja töökohtadega. Kõnealuste meetmetega võib täita ka muid eesmärke, mille liikmesriigid on määratlenud oma maaelu arengukavades1. Komisjon soovib juhtida tähelepanu asjaolule, et maaelu arengu poliitika kolmas põhieesmärk on elukvaliteedi parandamine maapiirkondades ning majandustegevuse mitmekesistamise soodustamine. v. Praegu kehtiva õigusraamistikuga on ette nähtud laia ulatuse ja paljude eesmärkidega meetmed, mis võimaldavad rakendamisel suurt paindlikkust.
1 council decision of 20 february 2006 on community strategic guidelines for rural development (programming period 2007 to 2013), 2006/144/Ec, section 3.3. 
1 Nõukogu otsus, 20. veebruar 2006, ühenduse maaelu arengu strateegiasuuniste kohta (programmiperiood 2007–2013), 2006/144/EÜ, punkt 3.3.
2 for example, during annual meetings, notably, at the beginning of the programming period a letter was sent from the commission to the managing authorities of all programmes inviting them to take into account the importance of well-defined selection criteria for an effective implementation throughout the whole period. furthermore, in 2009, another letter asked all Member states to make sure that adequate selection criteria are specified and used for the allocation of funds. rEply of tHE CoMMISSIoN the commission takes the view that needs and opportunities were described with sufficient clarity to make programming of the audited measures appropriate and possible even if the analyses in question could have been improved in some cases. the commission considers that the purpose of the eligibility criteria defined by the Ms is not, per se, to exclude a specific company of an economic sector from Eu support. instead eligibility criteria should aim, at the level of supported operation, at better targeting the support to the actual needs of the territory concerned, on the basis of the strategic programming and the sWot analysis. the legislation itself already favours micro-enterprises, rural tourism activities and farm diversification activities. as concerns targeting, the commission agrees with the court that improvements in better targeting the support are needed at the level of Ms. targeting can also take the form of detailed eligibility rules, regional and sectorial differentiation, differentiation of aid intensities as well as aid ceilings by which Member states can make a pre-selection among potential beneficiaries. 
2 Näiteks iga-aastaste koosolekute ajal, täpsemalt programmitöö alguses, saatis komisjon kõikide programmide korraldusasutustele kirja, milles palus neil võtta arvesse hästi määratletud valikukriteeriumide tähtsust tõhusa rakendamise jaoks terve perioodi jooksul. Peale selle saadeti 2009. aastal teine kiri, milles paluti kõikidel liikmesriikidel veenduda, et rahaliste vahendite eraldamiseks on kasutusel täpsustatud ja asjakohased valikukriteeriumid.
While noting that the measures subject to audit have wider objectives than barriers to employment and growth, the commission agrees that the rdps should present measureable objectives contributing to the policy aims. the commission, being aware of some weaknesses in this field, has proposed, for the Eafrd for the next programming period 2014–20, to strengthen the legal framework so that ex ante quantified targets are set for each of the focus areas of the union priorities. the content of the programme shall contain a description of the strategy, and that the selected measures in relation to the union priorities are based on sound intervention logic supported by an ex ante evaluation. 
Suunamine võib toimuda ka üksikasjalike toetuskõlblikkuse eeskirjade, piirkondade ja sektorite eristamise, abi osatähtsuse eristamise, aga ka abi ülemmäärade kehtestamise kaudu, mille põhjal liikmesriikidel on võimalik teha toetusesaajate seas eelvalik. Kuigi komisjon märgib, et auditeeritud meetmete eesmärgid on laiemad kui tööhõive ja majanduskasvu tõkete kõrvaldamine, nõustub ta, et maaelu arengukavades tuleks esitada mõõdetavad eesmärgid, mis aitavad saavutada poliitilisi eesmärke.
58 vi. the targeting requirement of investment support (article 43 of commission regulation (Ec) no 1974/2006) was first explicitly introduced in this programming period, among other aspects, to counter deadweight and displacement effects. support to projects should be granted on the basis of the assessment whether the project contributes to the objectives of the rdp. the commission agrees that the current framework could be improved. 
58 vi. Praegusel programmitöö perioodil võeti esmakordselt kasutusele sõnaselge investeerimistoetuse suunamise nõue (komisjoni määruse (EÜ) nr 1974/2006 artikkel 43), muu hulgas tühimõju ja tegevuse ümberpaiknemise mõju tasakaalustamiseks.
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN vii. the commission considers that, as a matter of principle, the cMEf3 is a valid instrument to monitor and evaluate progress towards achieving the Eu’s rural development policy objectives and has turned out to have much strength, although some difficulties have also been encountered. to remedy the weaknesses in methodologies developed by Member states (Ms) to assess some indicators, the commission established, distributed and explained methodological guidelines in 2010 to those in charge of the evaluation within the Ms. More reliable figures are now expected. the strategic approach in rural development and for each Ms is defined in the respective national strategy plan (nsp). rdps should comply with the strategic approach identified in the nsps and should aim at developing support options in line with the Eu legislation that can contribute to the achievement of the Eu and Ms strategic priorities, including the one on creation of employment in rural areas. for the next programming period the commission is developing a new version of the cMEf, together with the Member states, which will allow the assessment, for each rdp, of progress in implementation against commonly defined target indicators for the priorities and focus areas selected for the programme. at the basis is an indicator plan which for each focus area sets the target and the planned outputs and expenditure for the measures that will be used to achieve the targets and objectives of the programme. the indicator plan represents more accurately the quantified intervention logic for each individual programme than does the current rigid axis structure. 
Tõhusate rakendusmehhanismide ja hästi toimivate haldusmenetluste tagamise eest riikide/piirkondade tasandil vastutavad aga liikmesriigid. Komisjoni vastused vii. Komisjon leiab, et põhimõtteliselt on ühine järelevalve-ja hindamisraamistik3 sobilik vahend ELi maaelu arengu poliitika eesmärkide saavutamisel tehtavate edusammude jälgimiseks ja hindamiseks ning see on osutunud väga tõhusaks, kuigi ilmnenud on ka teatavaid probleeme.
59 viii. the commission notes that many of the following recommendations are addressed to the Member states and that the principle of subsidiarity and shared management hands considerable discretion to Member states and regions. — When approving the rdps, the commission carries out an analysis to assess that programmes and measures are consistent with the community strategic guidelines, the relevant national strategy plans and that they comply with the relevant legal provisions4. 
59 viii. Komisjon täheldab, et mitu järgnevat soovitust on suunatud liikmesriikidele ning et subsidiaarsuse ja liikmesriikidega koostöös toimuva eelarve täitmise põhimõtted annavad liikmesriikidele ja piirkondadele märkimisväärse kaalutlusõiguse. – Maaelu arengukavade heakskiitmisel teostab komisjon analüüsi, et hinnata, kas programmid ja meetmed on kooskõlas ühenduse strateegiasuuniste, asjakohaste riiklike strateegiakavade ja asjaomaste õigusnormidega4.
While noting that the measures subject to audit have wider objectives than just redressing market failures related to barriers to employment and growth, the commission agrees that the rdps should present measureable objectives contributing to the policy aims. the commission, being aware of some weaknesses in this field, has proposed, for the Eafrd for the next programming period 2014–20, to strengthen the legal framework so that ex ante quantified targets are set for each of the focus areas of the union priorities. the content of the programme shall contain a description of the strategy, and that the selected measures in relation to the union priorities are based on sound intervention logic supported by an ex ante evaluation. 
Kuigi komisjon märgib, et auditeeritud meetmete eesmärgid on laiemad kui tööhõive ja majanduskasvu tõketega seotud turutõrgete kõrvaldamine, nõustub ta, et maaelu arengukavades tuleks esitada mõõdetavad eesmärgid, mis aitavad saavutada poliitilisi eesmärke. Komisjon on teadlik teatavatest puudustest kõnealuses valdkonnas ning on soovitanud Euroopa Maaelu Arengu Põllumajandusfondil tugevdada järgmisel programmitöö perioodil (2014–2020) õigusraamistikku, et kehtestada kõikides liidu prioriteetidega seotud põhivaldkondades eelnevalt kvantifitseeritud eesmärgid.
Where a proposed programme does not contain such a strategy and adequate targets, the commission will not approve it. 
Kui kavandatud programm ei sisalda sellist strateegiat ja piisavaid eesmärke, ei kiida komisjon seda heaks.
4 council regulation (Ec) no 1698/2005 and commission regulation (Ec) no 1974/2006 (article 18 of council regulation (Ec) no 1698/2005). 
4 Nõukogu määrus (EÜ) nr 1698/2005 ja komisjoni määrus (EÜ) nr 1974/2006 (nõukogu määruse (EÜ) nr 1698/2005 artikkel 18).
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN — the broad scope of the audited measures should be recognised, as they not only bring impact on employment and income but also contribute to the sustainability of rural areas. the commission has insisted on several occasions during the current programming period on the need for greater selectivity and is prepared to further encourage Member states to do so. the application of selection criteria or equivalent targeting mechanism is examined by the commission in its audit missions and several observations in this regard have been made to the Member states. if needed, the commission proposes financial corrections. the commission agrees with the recommendation and has, in the proposal5 on the Eu rural development policy for programming period 2014–20 foreseen that the selection criteria shall be defined for all measures and shall aim to ensure equal treatment of applicants, better use of financial resources and targeting of measures in accordance with the union priorities for rural development. the use of selection criteria is proposed to be generally compulsory even in the case where available funds are sufficient, except in case of some compensatory area and animal-related measures. the commission also agrees that the project selection system of the Member states should take into account the quality of the projects and use a minimum scoring system. the commission will present guidelines to the Member states on the use of eligibility and selection criteria for the next programming period. 
Komisjon on praegusel programmitöö perioodil mitmel korral rõhutanud vajadust suurema valivuse järele ning on valmis ka edaspidi kutsuma liikmesriike üles seda tagama.
Special report No 6/2013 – Have the Member States and the Commission achieved value for money with the measures for diversifying the rural economy? 60 — the commission agrees with the recommendation and is prepared to organise exchange of best practices on the mitigation of deadweight and displacement risks with the Member states. the legislation provided that the general state aid rules apply for support under article 52(a) of regulation (Ec) no 1698/2005. these rules require that expenditure is eligible from the submission of the aid application. this requirement is stated in the state aid rules to establish the necessary incentive element to prevent the deadweight.6 the same rules should apply to co-financed measures as for separate aid schemes notified under state aid regime. taking account of the beneficiaries’ financial capacity in isolation to assess deadweight may entail the risk of supporting non-viable projects and increased administrative costs for the authorities and increased administrative burden for the beneficiaries. — the commission covers the issue of evaluation of the reasonableness of costs during its audit missions on investment measures. it verifies that the Member state has established an effective system to evaluate the reasonableness of costs. 
Eriaruanne nr 6/2013 – Kas liikmesriigid ja komisjon saavutasid maamajanduse mitmekesistamise meetmetega kulutustele vastavat tulu? 60 – Komisjon nõustub soovitusega ning on valmis korraldama koos liikmesriikidega parima tava vahetamise tühimõju ja ümberpaiknemise ohu leevendamise kohta.
However, there are always uncertainties and external factors in the achievement of the targets set, so the targets should also be able to be adjusted accordingly, if need be. 6 article 8 of commission regulation (Ec) no 800/2008. its paragraph 2 states: aid granted to sMEs, covered by this regulation, shall be considered to have an incentive effect if, before work on the project or activity has started, the beneficiary has submitted an application for the aid to the Member state concerned. 
Kehtestatud sihtide saavutamisel on aga alati tegemist ebakindluse ja väliste teguritega, mistõttu selliseid sihte peaks olema võimalik vajaduse korral vastavalt kohandada. 6 Komisjoni määruse (EÜ) nr 800/2008 artikkel 8. Selle lõikes 2 on sätestatud: „Käesoleva määruse alusel VKEdele antaval abil loetakse olevat ergutav mõju, kui abisaaja on enne projekti või tegevuse teostamiseks töö alustamist esitanud asjaomasele liikmesriigile abi saamiseks taotluse”.
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN the commission agrees with the recommendation and is taking care that in the preparation of the common Monitoring and Evaluation framework for the future period, which is currently being elaborated7, weaknesses observed during this period are taken into account. therefore, for the next programming period, result indicators will rather be assessed as part of the rdp evaluation. it will also be done by developing more precise explanatory documents (fiches) for each indicator to avoid potential inconsistencies in data collection through misinterpretation. for the next programming period 2014–20 the commission is developing a cMEf, together with the Member states, which will allow the assessment, for each rdp, of progress in implementation against commonly defined target indicators for the priorities and focus areas selected for the programme. at the basis is an indicator plan which for each focus area sets the target and the planned outputs and expenditure for the measures that will be used to achieve the targets and objectives of the programme. the indicator plan represents more accurately the quantified intervention logic for each individual programme than does the current rigid axis structure. — the commission is encouraging Ms in different contexts (e.g. in monitoring committees and annual review meetings) to shorten the delay for project approval procedures and payments to beneficiaries, and is informed that the situation is improving during the current programming period. for the next programming period 2014–20 the commission is foreseeing further reduction of the administrative burden in the form of introducing simplified costs. as a result, the processes of claiming, administering and auditing reimbursement for payments made will be easier for both the beneficiaries and the administration itself. 
Komisjoni vastused Komisjon nõustub soovitusega ja hoolitseb selle eest, et praegu sõnastatava tulevase perioodi ühise järelevalve-ja hindamisraamistiku7 koostamisel võetakse arvesse praegusel perioodil täheldatud puudusi. Seepärast hinnatakse tulevasel programmitöö perioodil tulemusnäitajaid maaelu arengukavade hindamise osana. Seda tehakse muu hulgas iga näitaja kohta täpsemate selgitavate dokumentide (infolehtede) väljatöötamise teel, et vältida väärtõlgendamisest tulenevaid võimalikke lahknevusi andmete kogumisel.
7 the legal basis is the proposal for the Horizontal Legislation art.110, the proposal for the rd regulation title Vii, as well as the related implementing/ delegated acts. see coM(2011) 628 final/2 dated 19.10.2011 and coM(2011) 627 final/2 dated 19.10.2011. 
7 Õiguslik alus on horisontaalse õigusakti ettepaneku artikkel 110, maaelu arengu määruse ettepaneku VII jaotis, samuti seotud rakendusaktid / delegeeritud aktid. Vt KOM(2011) 628 (lõplik/2), 19.10.2011, ja KOM(2011) 627 (lõplik/2), 19.10.2011.
61 intrOductiOn 3. recital 47 from council regulation (Ec) no 1698/2005, also applies to axis 3. the commission would like to point out that recital 11 and article 4 of regulation (Ec) no 1698/2005 define the third core objective of the rural development policy to be the improvement of the quality of life in rural areas and encouragement of diversification of economic activities. 
61 SiSSejuhatuS 3. Nõukogu määruse (EÜ) nr 1698/2005 põhjendust 47 kohaldatakse ka 3. telje suhtes. Komisjon soovib juhtida tähelepanu asjaolule, et määruse (EÜ) nr 1698/2005 põhjenduses 11 ja artiklis 4 on määratletud maaelu arengu poliitika kolmanda põhieesmärgina elukvaliteedi parandamine maapiirkondades ning majandustegevuse mitmekesistamise soodustamine.
5. the community strategic guidelines state in addition that: ‘in promoting training, information and entrepreneurship, the particular needs of women, young people and older workers should also be considered’. 
5. Peale selle on ühenduse strateegiasuunistes sätestatud: „Koolituse, teavitamise ja ettevõtluse edendamisel tuleks arvesse võtta naiste, noorte ja vanemate inimeste konkreetseid vajadusi”.
8 — third indent typical projects such as recreational infrastructure and small-scale infrastructure (information centres and sign posting of tourist sites) as described by article 55 of council regulation (Ec) no 1698/2005, are also important for the assessment of axis 3. 
8.; kolmas taane 3. telje hindamisel on olulised ka sellised levinud projektid nagu puhkemajanduse infrastruktuur ja väikeinfrastruktuur (infopunktid ja vaatamisväärsuste tähistamine), mida on kirjeldatud nõukogu määruse (EÜ) nr 1698/2005 artiklis 55. tähelePanekud 16.
ObservatiOns 16. the objectives of the diversification measures are not strictly and solely linked to growth and jobs. other objectives as defined by Ms in their rdps could also be addressed by these measures.8 therefore the analysis of the situation in terms of strengths and weaknesses is a general one covering the whole programming area and goes beyond the mere drivers of employment and growth (annex ii, point 3.1 of commission regulation (Ec) no 1974/2006). 
Mitmekesistamismeetmed ei ole tingimata ja üksnes seotud majanduskasvu ja töökohtadega. Kõnealuste meetmetega võib täita ka muid eesmärke, mille liikmesriigid on määratlenud oma maaelu arengukavades8. Seepärast on olukorra tugevate külgede ja puuduste analüüs üldine, hõlmates tervet programmipiirkonda, ning läheb kaugemale üksnes tööhõive ja majanduskasvu hoobadest (komisjoni määruse (EÜ) nr 1974/2006 II lisa punkt 3.1).
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN 18. When approving the rdps, the commission carries out an analysis to assess that programmes and measures are consistent with the community strategic guidelines, the relevant national strategy plans and that they comply with the relevant legal provisions. its observations have been communicated to the Member states, resulting in improvements of the programmes. the intervention logic that characterises each rdp covers the whole architecture of a programme and its delivery mechanism, and thus each rdp contained the necessary information that allowed its approval according to the legal framework. the commission considers that in general needs and opportunities were described with sufficient clarity to make programming of audited measures appropriate and possible in each case. the study on the ‘synthesis of ex ante evaluations of 2007– 13 rdps’9 which was finalised in 2008 concluded that that ‘substantial efforts have been made in the Ms to identify needs, and that these have been carefully considered in the programming phase. 
Komisjoni vastused 18. Maaelu arengukavade heakskiitmisel koostab komisjon analüüsi, et hinnata, kas programmid ja meetmed on kooskõlas ühenduse strateegiasuuniste, asjakohaste riiklike strateegiakavade ja vastavate õigusnormidega.
Ms devoted considerable efforts in the development of their strategies which are based on a thorough assessment of needs’. 
Liikmesriigid on „teinud märkimisväärseid pingutusi oma strateegiate arendamiseks, mis põhinevad [---] vajaduste põhjalikul hindamisel”.
Most of the rdp-level ex ante reports found an appropriate and strategic choice of measures. box 2 the rdp for uK (England) explains that the regional/local authorities ‘will have particular regard to rural economic underperformance and disadvantage ... when deciding, with their regional and local partner, which areas resources will be allocated to’ (section 5.3.1.3, paragraph 553). 
2. selgitus Ühendkuningriigi (Inglismaa) maaelu arengukavas on selgitatud, et piirkondlikud/kohalikud ametiasutused „pööravad eritähelepanu maamajanduse ebatõhususele ja ebasood-samale olukorrale [---], otsustades koos oma piirkondlike ja kohalike partneritega, millistesse piirkondadesse vahendeid eraldatakse” ( jagu 5.3.1.3, punkt 553). 19.
19. see reply to point 18. 
Vt vastus punktile 18.
9 study on ‘synthesis of ex ante evaluations of rural development programmes 2007–13’, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/ reports/rurdev/index_en.htm. 
9 Uuring „Maaelu arengu programmide 2007–2013 eelhindamise kokkuvõte, kättesaadav aadressil http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/ reports/rurdev/index_en.htm.
Member states can always set additional indicators than those identified in the cMEf, if this proves necessary. the commission has proposed, for the next programming period, that appropriate targets should be set for each of the focus areas of the union priorities, on the basis of common indicators, and that the selected measures in relation to the union priorities should be based on sound intervention logic supported by an ex ante evaluation. box 3 — czech republic all three measures belong to the same priority within axis 3 (job creation and support of using renewable energy sources) and as such have identical global objectives. nevertheless, with regards to the specificity of each measure, the three measure fiches, under heading ‘profile of the measure’ (characteristics of the measure), illustrate the nature of the projects to be funded. 
Kui see on vajalik, võivad liikmesriigid alati kehtestada täiendavaid näitajaid lisaks nendele, mis on kindlaks määratud ühises järelevalve-ja hindamisraamistikus. Komisjon on soovitanud kehtestada järgmiseks programmitöö perioodiks kõikides liidu prioriteetidega seotud põhivaldkondades ühiste näitajate põhjal sobilikud eesmärgid ning tagada, et liidu prioriteedega seotud valitud meetmed põhinevad usaldusväärsel sekkumisloogikal, mida toetab eelhindamine.