natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Instead the scheme has had the result of directing the aid to large producer organisations with high value production. 
Selle asemel on kava tulemusena suunatud vahendid krge vrtusega toodanguga suurtele tootjaorganisatsioonidele.
The Commission lacks information on the differences in performance of producer organisations and other growers and so cannot explain why the sector outside producer organisations appears to be growing at a faster rate than producer organisations. 
Komisjonil puudub teave tootjaorganisatsioonide ja muude tootjate tulemuste erinevuste kohta, seega ei suuda komisjon selgitada, miks sektor vljaspool tootjaorganisatsioone kasvab kiiremini kui tootjaorganisatsioonid.
To explain the lack of progress in the concentration of supply, it is also necessary to find out why growers do not join producer organisations. 
Et seletada vheseid edusamme pakkumise koondamise vallas, on vajalik kindlaks teha, miks tootjad tootjaorganisatsioonidega ei hine.
The Commission has not questioned producers in any systematic way to find the real reasons for this. 
Komisjon ei ole nimetatud asjaolu teliste phjuste vljaselgitamiseks tootjaid sstemaatiliselt ksitlenud.
In its reply to the CourtŐs Annual Report 2000, the Commission stated Ôif the majority of producers ... prefer not to join an effective producer organisation, they must also take the consequences of their decision. 
Oma vastuses kontrollikoja 2000. eelarveaasta aastaaruandele vitis komisjon: Ňkui tootjate enamik ... eelistab thusa tootjaorganisatsiooniga mitte liituda, peavad nad oma otsuse tagajrgede eest vastutama.
A comparison of the income of those belonging to producer organisations and that of non-members will show which choice was betterŐ. 
Tootjaorganisatsioonidesse kuuluvate ja mittekuuluvate tootjate sissetulekute vrdlus nitab, milline otsus oli paremÓ.
However, the Commission has not monitored the revenues of producer organisation members to be able to make this comparison. 
Komisjon ei ole tootjaorganisatsioonide liikmete tulu jlginud, et seda vrdlust teha.
20.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/49 Diagram 12 Producer organisationsŐ share of the total value of marketed production 2000-2004 Rural development 84. 
20.11.2006 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 282/49 12. diagramm Tootjaorganisatsioonide osa turustatud toodangu koguvrtusest 2000.Đ2004. a Maaelu arendamine 84. he komisjoni poolt varajases etapis mratletud riskina vib maaelu arendamise toetuse kttesaadavus vhendada motiveeritust tootjaorganisatsioonidega hineda vi neid luua.
One particular risk, identified by the Commission at an early stage, is that the availability of rural development funding may have undermined the incentive to join or form producer organisations by offering aid similar to operational programmes without requiring the growers to be members of producer organisations (see Text box 18). 
Maaelu arendamise toetuse raames antakse rakenduskavadega sarnast toetust, esitamata nudmist, et tootjad peaksid kuuluma tootjaorganisatsioonidesse (vt 18. selgitus).
Although the rural development regulation addressed this issue (by providing that fruit and vegetable producers are not eligible for rural development aid to the extent that similar aid is available under operational programmes), exceptions were allowed. 
Olgugi et maaelu arendamise mrus lahendas selle ksimuse (stestades, et puu-ja kgivilja-tootjatele ei anta maaelu arendamise toetust, juhul kui sarnane toetus on kttesaadav rakenduskavade raames), lubati erandeid.
As a result of these exceptions, Rural Development funding is available for a similar range of activities, from irrigation projects to packaging machinery, for producer organisations and other growers alike. 
Nende erandite tulemusena antakse maaelu arendamise toetust sarnastele tegevustele, niisutusprojektidest pakkimismasi-nateni, vrdselt tootjaorganisatsioonidele ja muudele tootjatele.
A significant proportion of Rural Development projects under the measures Ôinvestments in agricultural holdingsŐ and Ôimproving the processing and marketing of agricultural productsŐ concern fruit and vegetables. 
Suur osa maaelu arendamise projektide meetmeid, nagu investeeringud pllumajandusettevtetesse ja pllumajandustoodangu ttlemise ja turustamise parandamine, hlmavad puu-ja kgiviljakasvatust.
Despite the potential importance of the risk of the Rural Development programmes undermining producer organisations, which are the cornerstone of the EUŐs policy for fruit and vegetable producers, the Commission has not checked the operation of Member StatesŐ procedures for ensuring consistency, or collected information or undertaken any assessment of the extent to which this may have occurred. 
Olgugi et maaelu arendamise programmid kujutavad endast potentsiaalselt olulist riski ELi puu-ja kgiviljapoliitika nur-gakiviks olevatele tootjaorganisatsioonidele, ei ole komisjon kontrollinud liikmesriikide kehtestatud jrjepidevuse tagamise menetluste toimimist ega kogunud andmeid vi koostanud hinnangut selgitamaks, mil mral seda oleks olnud vimalik teha.
CONCLUSIONS The effectiveness of operational programmes Has the aid scheme been implemented in a way to ensure that operational programmes are likely to be effective? 
JRELDUSED Rakenduskavade mjusus Kas toetuskava rakendati viisil, mis tenoliselt tagab rakenduskavade thususe?
Member States have focused on the eligibility of operational programme actions by the nature of the expenditure, without also considering whether they represent a step forward for the producer organisation towards achieving the operational programme objectives. 
Liikmesriigid hindasid rakenduskavade meetmete abiklblikkust, lhtudes kulude iseloomust, mitte sellest, kas meetmed aitavad tootjaorganisatsioonidel rakenduskavade eesmrke saavutada.
As a result, Member StatesŐ procedures do not Text box 18 Key features of the two aid schemes Aid only available to producer organisations? 
Selle tulemusel ei taga liikmesriikide menetlused rakenduskava kikide meetmete tenolist tulemuslikkust.
Measures proposed, implemented and co-funded by beneficiary? 
Kas meetmed on toetusesaaja poolt esitatud, rakendatud ja kaasfinantsee-ritud?
Measures approved and checked by Member State? 
Kas meetmed on liikmesriigi poolt heaks kiidetud ja kontrollitud?
Evaluation at end of programme? 
Kas programmi lpus toimub hindamine?
Rural Operational development programmes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 
Maaelu Rakendus-arendamine kavad Ei Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah Jah
Commission checks have focused on compliance with the criteria for the eligibility of expenditure and not on whether the Member State procedures for approving and monitoring operational programmes operate in a way to ensure that the programmes are likely to be effective. 
Komisjoni kontrollid keskendusid kulude abiklblikkuskriteeriumide jrgimisele ja mitte sellele, kas liikmesriikide rakenduskavade heakskiitmise ja jrelevalve menetlused tenoliselt tagavad kavade thususe.
The aid scheme has been costly to implement for the Member State administrations and for producer organisations. 
Toetuskava rakendamine oli liikmesriikide ametiasutustele ja tootjaorganisatsioonidele kulukas.
The criteria for the eligibility of expenditure were not clear, resulting in uncertainty and an increased need for controls to ensure compliance. 
Kulude abiklblikkuskriteeriumid polnud selged ja see phjustas ebakindlust ning tekitas vajaduse teha rohkem kontrolle mruse jrgimise tagamiseks.
Almost half of the actions financed in operational programmes resulted in a significant advance from the producer organisationsŐ initial situation towards at least one of the 11 objectives, and can therefore be considered effective. 
Peaaegu poolte rahastatud meetmete puhul tehti tootjaorganisatsioonide esialgse olukorraga vrreldes mrkimisvrseid edusamme vhemalt he eesmrgi suunas 11st ja neid vib seetttu tulemuslikuks hinnata.
In these cases, the aid could be more effective if better targeted. 
Sellistel juhtudel oleks paremini suunatud toetus tulemuslikum olnud.
Progress made by producer organisations Have producer organisations made progress towards achieving the objectives set for the aid scheme? 
Tootjaorganisatsioonide poolt tehtud edusammud Kas tootjaorganisatsioonid tegid toetuskava eesmrkide saavutamisel edusamme?
Producer organisations have adapted to the changing demand and made progress towards the objectives set in the Council regulation. 
Tootjaorganisatsioonid on muutuva nudlusega kohane-nud ja teinud nukogu mruses stestatud eesmrkide saavutamisel edusamme.
Operational programmes have contributed to this, but are not the only factor. 
Rakenduskavad aitasid sellele kaasa, kuid mitte ainsa tegurina.
Market forces put pressure on all producers to meet higher environmental standards, improve product quality and control costs. 
Turul valitseva konkurentsi tttu peavad kik tootjad jrgima krgemaid keskkonnastandardeid, parandama tootekvaliteeti ja jrelevalvekulusid.
Despite the availability of EU aids to members of producer organisations, the majority of growers in the main fruit and vegetable producing Member States choose not to participate. 
Hoolimata tootjaorganisatsioonide liikmetele antavatest ELi toetustest ei soovinud enamik peamiste puu-ja kgiviljatoot-jariikide tootjatest nendega hineda.
The policy has so far not succeeded in concentrating supply in most Member States. 
Enamikus liikmesriikides ei ole poliitika pakkumise koondamise osas siiani tulemusi andnud.
When the Court reported on the fruit and vegetable sector in 2000, around 40 % of the EUŐs fruit and vegetable production was marketed by producer organisations. 
Kontrollikoja 2000. aasta puu-ja kgiviljasektorit ksitlenud aruande phjal turustati 40 % toodangust tootjaorganisatsioonide kaudu.
The CommissionŐs latest data shows that this has fallen to about one-third. 
Komisjoni viimased andmed nitasid selle vhenemist hele kolmandikule.
On current trends, the CommissionŐs target for producer organisations to reach a 60 % share of the total value of marketed production by 2013 will not be achieved. 
Kui praegune suundumus jtkub, ei saavutata komisjoni kehtestatud eesmrki suurendada tootjaorganisatsioonide osakaalu turustatud toodangu kogumahus 2013. aastaks 60 protsendini.
The Commission has not assessed the reasons for this lack of participation in producer organisations, including whether Member StatesŐ procedures have been sufficient to ensure that Rural Development funding has not undermined the incentive for growers to join. 
Komisjon ei ole hinnanud phjuseid, miks tootjad tootjaorganisatsioonidega vhesel mral liituvad, sealhulgas seda, kas liikmesriikide menetlused on olnud piisavad, et maaelu arendamise toetus ei vhendaks toetajate motiveeritust tootjaorganisatsioonidega liituda.
RECOMMENDATIONS 94. 
SOOVITUSED 94.
The conclusions presented above show that the overall policy objective of concentrating supply in producer organisations has not been achieved in most Member States, and the Commission lacks the information on the reasons for this that would be necessary for reviewing the policy. 
Eespool toodud jreldused nitavad, et ldist poliitika eesmrki, milleks on pakkumise koondamine tootjaorganisat-sioonidesse, ei ole enamikus liikmesriikides saavutatud. Komisjonil puudub teave selle phjuste kohta, kuigi vastav teave oleks vajalik poliitika lbivaatamiseks.
Pending a review of this, which should take account of the results of the evaluation of producer organisations due in 2009, the Commission should bring forward proposals to make the aid scheme for operational programmes simpler and more effective. 
Kuni sellise lbivaatamiseni, milles tuleks arvesse vtta 2009. aastaks kavandatud tootjaorganisatsioonide hindamise tulemusi, peab komisjon esitama ettepanekud, kuidas rakenduskavade toetuskava lihtsustada ja thustada.
Make the aid for operational programmes simpler and more effective 95. 
Rakenduskavadele antavat toetust tuleb lihtsustada ja thustada 95.
The Commission should consider the merits of the following alternative approaches to improve the operational programme aid scheme: (i) simplify and reduce the costs of the scheme by clarifying the criteria for eligible expenditure and removing the programming requirements; (ii) simplify and improve the effectiveness of the aid by reviewing the objectives set for operational programmes and the eligibility lists to encourage Member States to approve operational programmes based on effectiveness criteria; (iii) improvecoherence,simplifyadministrationandreducecosts by aligning the schemeŐs procedures and rules for the eligibility of expenditure with those of the Rural Development investment measures. 
Rakenduskavade toetuskavade thustamiseks peaks komisjon kaaluma jrgmiste alternatiivsete lhenemisviiside vrtusi: i) toetuskava lihtsustamiseks ja selle kulude vhendamiseks selgitama kulude abiklblikkuskriteeriume ja loobuma programmit nuetest; ii) toetuse lihtsustamiseks ja toetuse mjususe parandamiseks vaatama le rakenduskavade eesmrgid ja abiklblikkuse nimekirjad, et innustada liikmesriike heaks kiitma mjususe kriteeriumil phinevaid rakenduskavasid; iii) edendama sidusust, lihtsustama haldustegevust ja vhendama kulusid, viies toetuskava menetlused ja kulude abiklblikkuse eeskirjad vastavusse maaelu arendamise investeerimismeetmetega.
The Commission should improve its data collection on operational programmes and producer organisations, focusing on a few key indicators that will allow it to monitor the effectiveness of the aid scheme and provide useful information for periodic evaluation. 
Komisjon peaks parandama oma andmete kogumist rakenduskavade ja tootjaorganisatsioonide kohta ja keskenduma paarile peamisele indikaatorile, mis vimaldavad toetuskava mjusust hinnata ja toimivad perioodiliste hindamiste puhul kasuliku teabeallikana.
20.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/51 Better target the policy to achieve the overall objectives of concentration and adaptation 97. 
20.11.2006 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 282/51 Poliitika peaks olema suunatud koondamise ja kohandamisega seotud ldeesmrkide saavutamisele 97.
The Commission should use the evaluation planned for 2009 to obtain a better understanding of the reasons for the lack of progress in the concentration of supply in producer organisations. 
Komisjon peaks 2009. aastaks kavandatud hindamisuuringut kasutama mratlemaks, miks pakkumise koondamine tootjaorganisatsioonidesse pole kavandatud viisil edenenud.
It should assess whether producer organisations have improved the situation of their members in relation to other growers, and how the policy coexists with rural development. 
Komisjon peaks hindama, kas tootjaorganisatsioonid on oma liikmete olukorda vrreldes muude tootjatega parandanud ning kuidas poliitika elluviimine koos maaelu arendamise poliitikaga on nnestunud.
If these studies confirm that producer organisations are an effective mechanism for strengthening the position of growers, the policy should be better targeted to achieve this. 
Kui need uuringud kinnitavad, et tootjaorganisatsioonid on tulemuslikuks tootjate positsiooni tugevdamise vahendiks, peaks poliitika keskenduma selle saavutamisele.
The Commission should propose changes to encourage membership of producer organisations, particularly in the main fruit and vegetable producing Member States. 
Komisjon peaks tegema muudatusettepanekuid, et edendada tootjaorganisatsioonidega liitumist, eriti nendes liikmesriikides, kus toodetakse suurem osa puu-ja kgiviljatoodangust.
The Commission should also consider if the policy aim of adapting production to the changing market demands could be better achieved if the aid was targeted at those who have the most need of adaptation by introducing new criteria, in addition to turnover, for allocating funding to producer organisations. 
Komisjon peaks kaaluma, kas poliitika eesmrki, milleks on tootmise kohandamine muutuva turuolukorraga, ei saavutataks paremini toetuse suunamisega neile, kes kohandamist kige rohkem vajavad, vttes tootjaorganisatsioonide rahastamisega seoses kasutusele ka muid kriteeriume peale kibe.
Question the policy of encouraging producer organisations 99. 
Tootjaorganisatsioonide toetamise poliitika tuleb ksitavuse alla seada 99.
The Commission should also use the planned evaluation to establish whether the benefits of concentration of supply achieved by the policy are sufficient to compensate for the inequality caused by limiting the aid to one particular structure of fruit and vegetable growers: producer organisations. 
Samuti peaks komisjon kavandatavat hindamisuuringut kasutama mratlemaks, kas poliitika rakendamisega saavutatud pakkumise koondamise eelised on piisavad kompenseerimaks ebavrdsust, mida phjustab toetuse suunamine ainult hele puu-ja kgiviljakasvatajate struktuurile ehk tootjaorganisatsioonidele.
A policy choice was made in 1996 to exclude growers who are not in producer organisations from the benefits of the EU aid. 
1996. aastal otsustati poliitikat muuta ja anda ELi toetust ainult tootjaorganisatsioonidega liitunud tootjatele.
If the Commission cannot demonstrate that the support for producer organisations produces real gains in terms of strengthening their position in the market place, the rationale for excluding other producers from the EU aid should be questioned and the Commission should reconsider this mechanism for supporting the EUŐs fruit and vegetable growers. 
Kui komisjon ei suuda nidata, et tootjaorganisatsioonide toetamine nende turupositsiooni reaalselt tugevdab, tuleks teistele tootjatele ELi toetuse mitteandmine ksitavuse alla seada ja komisjon peaks kaaluma selle ELi puu-ja kgiviljakasvatajate toetamise vahendi vajalikkust.
This Report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 28 June 2006. 
Kontrollikoda vttis kesoleva aruande vastu 28. juuni 2006. aasta istungil Luxembourgis.
The operational programme should contain a description of the initial situation, in particular concerning production, marketing and equipment. 1. 
Rakenduskavad peaksid sisaldama esialgse olukorra kirjeldust, iseranis tootmise, turustamise ja vahendite osas. 1.
The description should show the starting situation in relation to each of the operational programmesŐ objectives. 2. 
Kirjelduses tuleks kehtestada vrdlusnitaja selle kohta, milliseid eesmrkide suunas tehtud edusamme on vimalik hinnata.
Operational programme objectives 1. 
Rakenduskava eesmrgid 1.
Operational programmes should include several of the 11 EU objectives (the environment objective is compulsory). 2. 
Rakenduskavad peaksid hlmama suurt osa ELi 11 eesmrgist (keskkonnaeesmrk on kohustuslik). 2.
The operational programme should describe the objectives of the programme, bearing in mind the outlook for production and markets. 
Rakenduskavas tuleks kirjeldada programmi eesmrke, pidades silmas toodangu ja turgude vlja-vaateid.
The Member State should check the compliance of the objectives with the regulation. 1. 
Liikmesriik peaks kontrollima eesmrkide vastavust mrusele. 1.
The objectives should be SMART: specific so that there is no doubt about what the producer organisation aims to achieve; measurable (and timed) so that their achievement can be monitored; achievable through implementing the actions proposed in the programmes; and relevant: coherent with the producer organisationŐs situation and market outlook, and with the EUŐs 11 objectives. 2. 
Eesmrgid peaksid olema ŇSMARTÓ (ingl k targad): tpsed, et ei oleks mingit kahtlust, mida tootjaorganisatsioonid saavutada soovivad; mdetavad (ja ajaliselt piiritletud), et nende saavutuste le oleks vimalik jrelevalvet teostada; saavutatavad, rakendades kavades esitatud meetmeid; ja asjakohased: htima tootjaorganisatsiooni olukorra ja turuvljavaadetega ning ELi 11 eesmrgiga. 2.
In particular, targets, indicators or quantified objectives should be given to allow the achievements of the programme to be monitored and to demonstrate to the Member States the expected impact of the programme on its objectives. 
Selleks et vimaldada kavasaavutuste jrelevalvet ja nidata liikmesriikidele programmi oodatavat mju eesmrkidele, tuleb kindlasti esitada eesmrgid, indikaatorid vi mdetavad eesmrgid.
Operational programme actions 1. 
Rakenduskava meetmed 1.
Operational programmes should include a detailed description of the actions. 
Rakenduskavad peaksid sisaldama meetmete ksikasjalikku kirjeldust.
The Member State should check the technical quality of the programme and the soundness of its estimates. 
Liikmesriik peaks kontrollima kava tehnilist kvaliteeti ja selle eesmrkide usaldusvrsust.
Final reports (end-of-programme evaluations by the producer organisation) 1. 
Lpparuanded (tootjaorganisatsiooni poolt kava lpus esitatav hindamine) 1.
Producer organisations should prepare annual reports describing implementation of the programme, and in the Ôfinal reportŐ include an assessment of the extent to which the programmesŐ objectives have been achieved. 
Tootjaorganisatsioonid peaksid aastaaruannetes kirjeldama kava rakendamist, lpparuanne peaks hlmama kava eesmrkide saavutamise ulatuse hindamist.
Member States should take account of final reports when approving new programmes or amendments in order to avoid inclusion of actions likely to be ineffective (for that and for other producer organisations). 
Uute kavade vi muudatuste heakskiitmisel peaksid liikmesriigid lhtuma lpparuannetest, et vltida vimalikke ebat-husaid meetmeid (nii asjaomase kui ka teiste tootjaorganisatsioonide puhul).
Member States and the Commission should use the final report information to monitor the effectiveness of the policy (the extent to which producer organisations are achieving the operational programme objectives). 
Liikmesriigid ja komisjon peaksid kasutama lpparuannet poliitika tulemuslikkuse (tootjaorganisatsioonide-poolse rakenduskavade eesmrkide saavutamise ulatuse) jlgimiseks.
Approval of operational programmes 1. 
Rakenduskava heakskiitmine 1.
In addition to the above requirements, the Member State should check the economic consistency of the programme; 2. ...and the eligibility of the proposed expenditure. 
Lisaks eelnevatele nuetele peaks liimesriik kontrollima kava majanduslikku jrjepidevust; 2. ...ja kavandatavate kulude abiklblikkust.
The Member State should approve, reject, or require amendments to the programme. 
Liikmesriik peaks kava heaks kiitma, tagasi lkkama vi nudma muudatuste tegemist.
Member States should ensure that aid is granted in accordance with the principles of sound financial management: economy, efficiency and effectiveness. 
Liikmesriik peaks tagama toetuse andmise koosklas usaldusvrse finantsjuhtimise phimte-tega (sstlikkus, thusus ja mjusus).
Member States should approve actions for which the producer organisation has sufficiently demonstrated that they are likely to achieve a significant advance towards the EU operational programme objectives for a reasonable cost. 
Liikmesriik peaks heaks kiitma meetmed, mille puhul tootjaorganisatsioon on piisavalt testanud, et ELi eesmrkide suunas on vimalik mdukate kuludega teha mrkimisvrseid edusamme.
Decisions to approve operational programmes should be sufficiently documented to demonstrate that they were taken according to the principles of sound financial management. 
Rakenduskavade heakskiitmise otsused peaksid olema piisavalt dokumenteeritud nitamaks, et otsuse tegemisel lhtuti usaldusvrse finantsjuhtimise phimtetest.
20.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/53 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. The scheme provides financial support for the operational programmes of fruit and vegetable growers who market their products via producer organisations. 
20.11.2006 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 282/53 KOMMENTEERITUD KOKKUVÍTE I. Kava raames antakse rakenduskavade jaoks finantstoetust puu-ja kgiviljakasvatajatele, kes turustavad oma tooteid tootjaorganisatsioonide kaudu.