natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Subsequently the Commission took a number of steps to ask for the position of the JTS to be improved. (b) The Spain-Portugal programme proposal was found inadmissible after the check of the first proposal of 18 December 2000. 
Subsequently the Commission took a number of steps to ask for the position of the JTS to be improved. (b) The Spain-Portugal programme proposal was found inadmis-sible after the check of the first proposal of 18 December 2000.
The exceeding of the time limit for the approval of programmes was largely due to delays in programme authoritiesŐ revision of their proposals, which first had to be agreed with their partners (see the CourtŐs observation in paragraph 37(c)). 
The exceeding of the time limit for the approval of programmes was largely due to delays in programme authorities’ revision of their proposals, which first had to be agreed with their partners (see the Court’s observation in paragraph 37(c)).
The Commission has announced that programme complements will be dropped for the next programming period. 
The Commission has announced that programme com-plements will be dropped for the next programming period.
C 303/32 EN Official Journal of the European Union 7.12.2004 39. 
C 303/32 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 7.12.2004 39.
The Commission would refer to methodology working document No 2 ÔEx ante evaluation of Structural Fund operationsŐ which recommends an independent and objective evaluation, underlines the principle of proportionality, advocates an interactive link between ex ante evaluation and preparation of the strategy and proposes that the work of the evaluators be transmitted to the Commission either as an annex or as a document or series of separate documents. 
The Commission would refer to methodology working document No 2 ‘Ex ante evaluation of Structural Fund operations’ which recommends an independent and objective evaluation, underlines the principle of proportionality, advocates an interactive link between ex ante evaluation and preparation of the strategy and proposes that the work of the evaluators be transmitted to the Commission either as an annex or as a document or series of separate documents.
57. effectiveness of regional development policies and instruments, the Commission believes that it is for the decentralised public authorities to identify areas of cooperation. 
57. fectiveness of regional development policies and instruments, the Commission believes that it is for the decentralised public authorities to identify areas of cooperation.
This is a tricky problem which takes time to resolve, as it involves developing cooperation between administrations and organisations of all kinds on both sides of the border. 
This is a tricky problem which takes time to resolve, as it involves developing cooperation between administrations and organisations of all kinds on both sides of the border.
They also confirm the CommissionŐs opinion that regions should have considerable scope to choose for themselves the types of cooperation they find most urgent. 
They also confirm the Commission’s opinion that regions should have considerable scope to choose for themselves the types of cooperation they find most urgent.
It is true that the bottom-up approach, which the Commission considers essential in regional development, is potentially at odds with the principle of concentrating financial resources Ôon a limited number of topics and measuresŐ (point 11 of the guidelines). 
It is true that the bottom-up approach, which the Commission considers essential in regional development, is potentially at odds with the principle of concentrating financial resources ‘on a limited number of topics and measures’ (point 11 of the guidelines).
In focusing strand C on the objective of improving the 
In focusing strand C on the objective of improving the ef-
7.12.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/33 60. 
7.12.2004 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 303/33 60.
Finally, in the field of cross-border cooperation, even with more targeting the problems connected with borders would not all be resolved, some of them (e.g. differences between taxation and social security systems) are outside the scope of the ERDF or can only be addressed in part (e.g. judicial and administrative cooperation Ń See Annex II, point 7). 
Finally, in the field of cross-border cooperation, even with more targeting the problems connected with borders would not all be resolved, some of them (e.g. differences between taxation and social security systems) are outside the scope of the ERDF or can only be addressed in part (e.g. judicial and administrative cooperation — See Annex II, point 7).
As regards transnational CIPs, the Commission can go along with the CourtŐs analysis and its criticism of inadequate targeting. 
As regards transnational CIPs, the Commission can go along with the Court’s analysis and its criticism of inadequate targeting.
In future consideration should be given, for this strand, to developing more top-down working methods involving national administrations. 
In future consideration should be gi-ven, for this strand, to developing more top-down working methods involving national administrations.
C 303/34 EN Official Journal of the European Union 7.12.2004 73. 
C 303/34 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 7.12.2004 73.
What the Commission has seen so far is that one point criticised in a good many reports is that project partners can each determine their own indicators; in its official reaction to the reports the Commission will recommend that project partners be required to use the indicators stipulated in the programming documents (programme and complement). 
What the Commission has seen so far is that one point criticised in a good many reports is that project partners can each determine their own indicators; in its official reaction to the reports the Commission will recommend that project partners be required to use the indicators stipulated in the programming documents (programme and com-plement).
As regards quantifiable indicators, i.e. of outputs and outcomes, as a rule it is the beneficiaries who state in their reports what has been achieved or, for some indicators, it is the joint secretariat. 
As regards quantifiable indicators, i.e. of outputs and out-comes, as a rule it is the beneficiaries who state in their reports what has been achieved or, for some indicators, it is the joint secretariat.
It reminded Member States of this recommendation in the simplification exercise (Communication of 25 April 2003 (C(2003) 1255)). 
It reminded Member States of this recommendation in the simplification exercise (Commu-nication of 25 April 2003 (C(2003) 1255)).
Where, on occasion, it was unable to impose its demands, this was because it was involved in complex negotiations with a set of partners who also had to negotiate the adjustments requested between themselves. 
Where, on occasion, it was unable to impose its de-mands, this was because it was involved in complex negotiations with a set of partners who also had to negotiate the adjustments requested between themselves.
7.12.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/35 88. 
7.12.2004 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 303/35 88.
The objective set by the Commission in its guidelines for strand C, namely Ôimproving regional development policies and instrumentsŐ, responds to a need which can be identified only by the public authorities concerned by comparing their own policies with those of their counterparts in other Member States. 
The objective set by the Commission in its guidelines for strand C, namely ‘improving regional development policies and instruments’, responds to a need which can be identified only by the public authorities concerned by comparing their own policies with those of their counterparts in other Member States.
As explained in the reply to paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach involves taking account of the partnersŐ opinions in determining objectives and not just the SWOT analysis. 
As explained in the reply to paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach involves taking account of the partners’ opinions in determining objectives and not just the SWOT analysis.
The Interact programme is an indication of the importance the Commission and the Member States attach to improving the design and implementation of these programmes by exchanging methods and experience between managers, Member States and the Commission. (a) The Commission is looking into the problems with indicators in the mid-term reviews (see reply to paragraph 73). (b) The Court itself observes (paragraph 67) that most of the projects selected so far satisfy the trans-European criterion. 
The Interact programme is an indication of the importance the Commission and the Member States attach to improving the design and implementation of these programmes by exc-hanging methods and experience between managers, Member States and the Commission. (a) (b) 98. The Commission is looking into the problems with indicators in the mid-term reviews (see reply to paragraph 73). The Court itself observes (paragraph 67) that most of the projects selected so far satisfy the trans-European criterion.
The Commission does not believe that projects should be concerned solely with resolving specific border-related problems (see paragraphs 58 and 63). 98. (a) The Interact programme also helps to prepare the future. 
The Commission does not believe that projects should be concerned solely with resolving specific border-related problems (see paragraphs 58 and 63). (a) (b) (e) (g) (h) (i) The Interact programme also helps to prepare the future.
However, the Commission believes that in view of the different situations which exist, the analyses must be conducted border by border within a wide-ranging partnership on the responsibility of the authorities in charge of the cross-border programmes and not on the CommissionŐs responsibility. (b) For all the objectives of the forthcoming programming period 2007 to 2013, the Commission will propose that the Council adopt strategic EU guidelines for cohesion policy. 
However, the Commission believes that in view of the different situations which exist, the analyses must be conducted border by border within a wide-ranging partnership on the responsibility of the authorities in charge of the cross-border programmes and not on the Commission’s responsibility. For all the objectives of the forthcoming programming period 2007 to 2013, the Commission will propose that the Council adopt strategic EU guidelines for cohesion policy.
4.2.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 29/1 I (Information) COURT OF AUDITORS SPECIAL REPORT No 6/2004 The organisation of the system for the identification and registration of bovine animals in the European Union together with the CommissionŐs replies (pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 248(4) of the EC Treaty) (2005/C 29/01) Photograph: Animal wearing the two statutory ear tags 
4.2.2005 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 29/1 I (Teave) KONTROLLIKODA ERIARUANNE nr 6/2004 Veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteemi kasutuselevtt Euroopa Liidus koos komisjoni vastustega (vastavalt E asutamislepingu artikli 248 like 4 teisele ligule) (2005/C 29/01) Foto: Kahte igusaktidega ettenhtud krvamrki kandev veis
C 29/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union CONTENTS SUMMARY ................................................................ 
C 29/2 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 4.2.2005 SISUKORD KOKKUVÍTE ...................................................................
INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 
SISSEJUHATUS .................................................................. ldinekontekst..............................................................
ROLES AND LEGAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE VARIOUS PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE CATTLE IDENTIFICATIONANDREGISTRATIONSYSTEM.................................. 
Kontrollikojaaudit ...........................................................
TheCouncilandtheEuropeanParliament .................................... 
Veisekasvatussektorithtsus ....................................................
TheMemberStates ...................................................... 
SSTEEMIS OSALEVATE ERINEVATE OSAPOOLTE LESANDED JA ÍIGUSLIKUD KOHUSTUSED ........................................................................
FINDINGS CONCERNING THE DESIGN OF THE SYSTEM AT COMMUNITY LEVEL . . . . . . . 
EuroopaLiiduNukogujaEuroopaParlament......................................
The Commission has no mandate to adopt implementing measures in respect of national databases.............................................................. 
Komisjon...................................................................
Absence of criteria for recognition of the fully operational character of databases SupervisionbytheCommission ............................................ Inconsistenciesinthemanagementofpremiums ............................... 
Liikmesriigid ................................................................ Erinevadloomapidajad ........................................................ LEIUDSEOSESSSTEEMILESEHITUSEGAHENDUSETASANDIL .......................
Bovine premiums subject to controls in the context of the Integrated Administration andControlSystem ................................................. 
Sissejuhatus.................................................................
CONCLUSIONANDRECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... 
Mrusedeistestaandmebaasidevahelistteabevahetust .............................. henduseigusaktideiolepiisavalttpsed ........................................
TheCommissionŐsreplies .............................................................. 
Komisjonivastused .....................................................................
31 4.2.2005 Paragraph Page I-X 3 1-6 4 1-3 4 4-6 4 7-32 5 7-10 5 11-17 9 18-26 9 27-32 12 27 12 28 13 29-31 13 32 13 33-46 13 33-34 13 35-37 13 38-39 14 40-41 15 42-46 17 47-78 18 47-54 18 55-64 20 65-71 22 72-77 24 72-74 24 75-77 24 78-91 25 92-99 29 
31 Punkt Lk IĐIX 3 1Đ6 4 1Đ3 4 4Đ6 4 7Đ26 5 7Đ10 5 11Đ17 9 18Đ26 9 27Đ32 12 27 12 28 13 29Đ31 13 32 13 33Đ46 13 33Đ34 13 35Đ37 13 38Đ39 14 40Đ41 15 42Đ46 17 47Đ77 18 47Đ54 18 55Đ64 20 65Đ71 22 72Đ77 24 72Đ74 24 75Đ77 24 78Đ91 25 92Đ99 29
4.2.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union SUMMARY I. Identifying and registering the bovine herd is an essential prerequisite in guaranteeing the traceability of beef and veal and is also an element in the conditions attached to the various bovine premiums. 
4.2.2005 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja KOKKUVÍTE I. Veiste identifitseerimine ja registreerimine on veiseliha jlgitavuse peamiseks eelduseks ning heks tingimuseks erinevate veisekasvatajatele makstavate lisatasude saamiseks.
These premiums amounted to more than 7 000 million euro in 2002 and more than 8 000 million euro in 2004. 
2002. aastal vljastati selliseid lisatasusid 7 miljardi euro, 2004. aastal le 8 miljardi euro vrtuses.
The main objective of the audit was to evaluate the cattle identification and registration system, at the Commission (design, implementation controls and follow-up) and in the Member States (operational system allowing effective monitoring of animals from birth until slaughter and allowing verification of correct payment of all direct aid). 
Auditi peamine eesmrk oli hinnata veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteemi nii komisjoni (lesehitus, rakendamisalane ja jrelkontroll) kui liikmesriikide tasandil (toimiv ssteem, mis vimaldab loomade efektiivset jlgimist alates snnist kuni tapmiseni ja kigi otsetoetuste maksmise kontrollimist).
The audit was carried out in the four Member States with the largest bovine herds (Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom). 
Audit viidi lbi neljas suurima veisekarjaga liikmesriigis (Saksamaa, Prantsusmaa, Itaalia ja hendkuningriik).
The identification system has four components: ear tags, passports, herd registers and the computerised database containing the details of all cattle. 
Identifitseerimisssteemi kuulub neli komponenti: krvamrgid, loomapassid, karjaregister ja karja kohta ksikasju sisaldav elektrooniline andmebaas.
This database is one component of the system and was to be operational on 31 December 1999 at the latest. 
Andmebaas on ssteemi ks osa ja see planeeriti kivitada hiljemalt 31. detsembril 1999. aastal.
Cattle identification and registration systems were set up in the four Member States more than two years after the target date of 31 December 1999 and still have some weaknesses. 
Veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteem veti neljas auditeeritud liikmesriigis kasutusele enam kui kaks aastat prast 31. detsembriks 1999 mratud thtaega ning selles esineb siiani puudusi.
For example, the passports of animals traded between Member States are not monitored, there is no exchange of information between national databases, there are delays in updating the databases and the level of reliability of the information contained in the databases must often be considered inadequate. 
Niteks puudub jrelevalve liikmesriikide vahel kaubeldavate loomade passide le, siseriiklikud andmebaasid ei vaheta ksteisega teavet, andmebaaside kaasajastamises esineb viivitusi ja neis sisalduvat teavet ei saa tihti pidada usal-dusvrseks.
The main finding is that the cattle identification and registration system that was designed does not guarantee the traceability of intra-Community or extra-Community cattle movements. 
Auditi peamine leid on, et veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteem praegusel kujul ei taga ei hendusesisese ega -vlise veiste liikumise jlgitavust.
These movements nevertheless involve approximately three million head of cattle per year (approximately 4 % of the herd). 
Ometi on sellesse liikumisse kaasatud igal aastal umbkaudu 3 miljonit veist (ca 4 % karjast).
V. The general framework of the system was laid down by the Parliament and the Council. 
V. Ssteemi ldise raamistiku panid paika parlament ja nukogu.
The Commission was given the task of implementing certain components of the system, but responsibility for implementing the system lies with the Member States. 
Komisjoni lesanne oli ssteemi mningaid osi puudutavate rakendusmeetmete elluviimine, kogu ssteemi rakendamise eest vastutasid aga liikmesriigid.
All attempts to reconcile information from the various databases have failed. 
Kik katsed erinevatest andmebaasidest teavet hankida on ebannestunud.
The Member States interpreted certain elements of Community regulations in different ways, in respect of the deadlines for tagging and reporting, the fundamental concept of Ôkeeper of bovine animalsŐ and return of animal passports. 
Liikmesriigid tlgendasid henduse mruste mningaid elemente erinevalt, eriti mis puudutab mrgistamise ja aruandluse thtaegadest kinnipidamist, phimistet ŇloomapidajaÓ ja loomapasside tagastamist.
The Commission was not given responsibility for adopting implementing measures for setting up and checking the databases. 
Komisjonile ei antud pdevust rakendusmeetmete vastuvtmiseks andmebaaside loomise ja kontrolli osas.
In addition, the databases contain certain data, such as retagging rates and delays in registration, which the Member States do not use as control instruments. 
Lisaks sisaldavad andmebaasid teavet (taasmrgista-mise mrad, viivitused teavitamisel), mida liikmesriigid kontrollivahendina ei kasuta.
No standardised management rules have been issued and no quality indicator has been developed as regards the operation of the databases. 
Mingeid eeskirju htse halduse osas ei vljastatud, samuti ei ttatud vlja kvaliteedinitajaid andmebaaside toimimise kohta.
The Commission should be given adequate resources to take on a genuine guiding role in the system, in particular by drawing up standardised management rules, quality indicators and a format for the exchange of data between national databases. 
Komisjonile tuleks anda piisavalt vahendeid, vimaldamaks sel tita ssteemi tegeliku juhendamise-ga seotud lesandeid; esmajrjekorras tuleks luua htse halduse eeskirjad, kvaliteedinitajad ja formaat teabe vahetamiseks siseriiklike andmebaaside vahel.
C 29/4 EN Official Journal of the European Union 4.2.2005 IX. 
C 29/4 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 4.2.2005 IX.
The administrative checks applied in the various Member States should also be compared and specifications provided for cross-checks to be carried out between the identification and registration databases and the IACS databases before the various premiums are paid. 
Samuti tuleks vrrelda erinevates liikmesriikides kasutuselolevaid halduskontrolle ning tpsustada enne erinevate lisatasude vljamaksmist veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteemi ning htse haldus-ja kontrollissteemi vahelise vastastikuse kontrolli korda.
The system of on-the-spot checks should also be reviewed, including the penalty mechanisms, and specific approaches for the different types of keepers of cattle should be drawn up and an approach imposed which is fully integrated with IACS. 
Kohapealsete kontrollide ssteem, kaasa arvatud sanktsioonimehhanismid, tuleks samuti le vaadata ning vlja arendada erinevad lhenemisviisid eri loomapidajate osas ja kasutada lhenemisviisi, mis on tielikult hildatud htse haldus-ja kontrollissteemiga.
INTRODUCTION General context 1. 
SISSEJUHATUS ldine kontekst 1.
The specific regulation concerning the identification and registration of bovine animals (1) (cattle), on the one hand, establishes a system for the identification and registration of cattle at the production stage and, on the other, creates a specific Community labelling system in the beef sector. 
Veiste registreerimist ksitleva mrusega (1) luuakse veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteem tootmistasandil ning mratletakse veiseliha sektoris spetsiifiline henduse mr-gistamisssteem.
These two systems are interdependent: the fact that cattle can be traced by means of the identification and registration system is a prerequisite for guaranteeing the safety of the food chain through the labelling system. 
Need kaks ssteemi on omavahel seotud, kuivrd identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteem muudab loomade liikumise jlgitavaks, mis omakorda on eelduseks toiduahela ohutuse tagamisele mrgistamisssteemi abil.
This report focuses on the cattle identification and registration system and does not deal with the labelling of the marketed products. 
Kesoleva aruande aluseks on veiste identifitseerimise ja registreerimise ssteem ning selles ei ksitleta turustatud toodete mrgistamist.
The system comprises ear tags as a means of identifying individual animals, animal passports, individual registers kept on each holding and computerised databases set up by the Member States. The computerised databases, which were to be set up by all Member States by 31 December 1999, are an important part of the system. 
Nimetatud ssteem hlmab krvamrke loomade individuaalseks identifitseerimiseks, loomapasse, majandites peetavaid individuaalseid registreid ja liikmesriikide poolt koostatud elektroonilisi andmebaase. Ssteemi oluliseks osaks on elektroonilised andmebaasid, mis peavad olema loodud kikides liikmesriikides 31. detsembriks 1999.
They must contain all the data on all the movements of all cattle from birth through to slaughter. 
Nimetatud andmebaasid peavad sisaldama kogu teavet kikide loomade liikumise kohta alates nende snnist kuni tapmiseni.