natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The existence of eligibility lists does not absolve Member States from their responsibility in ensuring that what is approved is likely to be both eligible and effective, and should not be seen as an endorsement by the Commission of the so-called Ôsubsidy approachŐ. 
Abiklblikkusni-mekirjade olemasolu ei vabasta liikmesriike kohustusest tagada, et see, mis heaks kiidetakse, oleks htaegu nii abiklblik kui ka tulemuslik, ning seda ei tohiks ksitada komisjonipoolse heakskii-duna niinimetatud Ňsubsiidiumide meetodileÓ.
It is for the national authorities to ensure that the programmes they approve harmonise not only with these guidelines, but also with the overall objectives set by the regulations. 
Siseriiklike asutuste lesanne on tagada, et nende poolt heaks kiidetavad kavad oleksid koosklas mitte ksnes nende suuniste, vaid ka mrustega kehtestatud ldiste eesmrkidega.
Eligibility lists and the Ôprogramming modelŐ do not necessarily conflict. 
Abiklblikkusnimekirjad ja Ňprogrammit mudelÓ ei ole tingimata vastuolus.
Even in a more framed policy (for example rural development) both elements coexist. 
Isegi piiritletuma poliitika puhul (niteks maaelu areng) eksisteerivad mlemad elemendid ksikes.
C 282/56 EN Official Journal of the European Union 20.11.2006 63. 
C 282/56 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 20.11.2006 63.
The Commission considers that even if an action may not appear effective in achieving a significant advance towards one of the objectives specified in Article 15(4) of the Council Regulation, the aid should be considered effective in terms of improving producersŐ incomes through improving their competitiveness, which is one of the overall policy aims. 
Komisjon leiab, et isegi kui meede ei tundu nukogu mruse artikli 15 likes 4 esitatud eesmrkide poole liikumisel olulisi tulemusi andvat, tuleks abi siiski lugeda tulemuslikuks seoses tootjate sissetuleku suurendamisega nende konkurentsivime suurendamise lbi, mis on ks ldistest poliitilistest eesmrkidest. hise turukorralduse eelseisva reformi kigus ksitletakse abi parema suunamise ksimust.
PART II: PROGRESS MADE BY PRODUCER ORGANISATIONS 69. 
II OSA: TOOTJAORGANISATSIOONIDE EDUSAMMUD 69.
The evaluation concerning producer organisations shall be launched in 2007, with a contract to be established in 2008 and a report due in 2009. 
Tootjaorganisatsioonide hindamine algab 2007. aastal, leping peaks justuma 2008. aastal ja aruande thtaeg on 2009. aastal.
The collection of data on operational programmes is part of monitoring the implementation of the policy; it follows an input-output logic (how much money is spent (input) and for what kind of activities (output). 
Andmete kogumine rakenduskavade kohta on osa poliitika rakendamise jrelevalvest; see jrgib sisendi-vljundi loogikat (kui palju raha kulutatakse (sisend) ja mis laadi tegevuseks (vl-jund)).
The Commission agrees with the Court that the amount of data contained in Member StatesŐ reports deserves a proper management IT system. 
Komisjon on kontrollikojaga hel nul, et liikmesriikide aruannetes sisalduvate andmete hulga haldamiseks on vaja korralikku IT-ssteemi.
It continues its efforts to improve the management and reliability of data. 
Komisjon jtkab pdlusi andmete halduse ja usaldusvrsuse parandamiseks.
Looking to the future, DG AGRI is starting an IT project in 2006 with the aim of having a detailed database in place from 2007. 
Tulevikku vaadates algatab pllumajanduse peadirektoraat 2006. aastal IT-projekti eesmrgiga panna 2007. aastast tle ksikasjalik andmebaas.
Indirect indicators exist as far as the objective of improving quality (the increasing number of Geographic Indicators and quality labels related to Fruit and Vegetable products) is concerned, although this information does not show specifically the progress made by producer organisations. 
Kuivrd kne all on kvaliteedi parandamise (puu-ja kgiviljatoodetega seotud geograafiliste indikaatorite ja kvaliteedimrkide kasvav arv) eesmrk, on olemas kaudsed indikaatorid, ehkki see teave ei nita konkreetselt tootjaorganisatsioonide edusamme.
The reduction of withdrawals (in quantity and in expenditure) indicates that supply has been adapted to demand. 
Turult krvaldamiste vhenemine (kvantiteedi ja kulude osas) nitab seda, et pakkumine on nudlusega vastavusse judnud.
The dramatic decrease in withdrawals is witnessed also by the low percentage of Operational Funds (only 2 %, when the ceiling is 30 %) devoted to this purpose. 
Turult krvaldamiste suur kasv annab tunnistust ka selleks otstarbeks meldud rakendusfondide vikesest protsendist (ainult 2 %, samas kui lagi on 30 %).
The Commission shares the CourtŐs concerns. 
Komisjon jagab kontrollikoja muret.
The instrument has been used in very different ways in different Member States, and results are not uniformly negative. 
Seda vahendit on eri liikmesriikides kasutatud vga erineval viisil ning tulemused ei ole sugugi htlaselt negatiivsed.
Other more encouraging data should be highlighted, in particular the formation of associations of producer organisations (APOs) and the emergence of big producer organisations in some Member States since the reform of the policy in 1996 (in particular BE, NL and IT), some of which are already able to counterbalance the bargaining power of big retailers. 
Rhutada tuleks teisi julgustavamaid andmeid, eelkige tootjaorganisatsioonide liitude loomist ja suurte tootjaorganisatsioonide teket prast poliitilist 1996. aasta reformi mnes liikmesriigis (eelkige Belgia, Madalmaad ja Itaalia). Mned neist tootjaorganisatsioonidest ja liitudest suudavad juba suurte jaemjate turupositsioonile vastukaaluks olla.
The Commission is aware of this issue, which will constitute one of the major concerns to be tackled in the forthcoming CMO reform. 
Komisjon on teadlik sellest ksimusest, mis on ks suurimaid hise turukorralduse eelseisva reformi kigus ksitletavaid probleeme.
These issues will be considered in the context of the forthcoming evaluation. 
Neid ksimusi ksitletakse eelseisva hindamise raames.
The evaluation concerning the producer organisations is included in the evaluation programme of the DG AGRI for the year 2007 with the contract to be established in 2008 with a report due in 2009. 
Tootjaorganisatsioonide hindamine on lisatud pllumajanduse peadirektoraadi 2007. aasta hindamisprogrammi, leping on kavas kehtestada 2008. aastal ja aruande thtaeg on 2009. aastal.
The observations of the Court will be taken into account when defining the scope of the evaluation and the evaluation questions. 
Kontrollikoja thelepanekuid vetakse arvesse hindamise ulatuse ja hindamisksimuste mratlemisel.
The Commission compared the evolution of producer organisationsŐ value of marketed production (VMP) to the VMP of producers which were not producer organisation members. 
Komisjon vrdles tootjaorganisatsioonide turustatud toodangu vrtuse arengut tootjaorganisatsiooni mittekuuluvate tootjate turustatud toodangu vrtusega.
Depending on the future role of producer organisations in the forthcoming reform, the Commission is prepared to investigate whether more direct income information could be obtained. 
Olenevalt tootjaorganisatsioonide tulevikust on komisjon valmis uurima, kas sissetulekute kohta on vimalik saada otsesemat teavet.
The matter will require discussion with, and the cooperation of, Member States. 84 and 85. 
Selleks on tarvis liikmesriikidega aru pidada ja koostd teha. 84.Đ85.
Exceptions have to be justified by objective criteria and after consultation with Member States. 
Erandeid tuleb phjendada objektiivsete kriteeriumidega ning prast liikmesriikidega konsulteerimist.
The Commission services are systematically involved in ex ante assessments of Member StatesŐ requests for exceptions. 
Komisjoni talitused osalevad sstemaatiliselt liikmesriikide eranditaotluste eelhindamises.
The Commission requested Member States to include a clear demarcation in their rural development programmes, whereby measures are differentiated by nature or by value; this determines whether they are rural development-or operational programme-financed. 
Komisjon nudis, et liikmesriigid teeksid oma maaelu arenguprogrammides meetmete vahel laadi vi vrtuse alusel selget vahet; see mrab ra, kas neid rahastatakse maaelu arenguprogrammide vi rakenduskavade raames.
According to Article 37(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999, it is the role of rural development (RD) programming to prove that a request for an exception does not undermine the coherence between the first and second pillar. 
Nukogu mruse (E) nr 1257/1999 artikli 37 like 3 kohaselt on maaelu arengu programmit lesanne testada, et eranditaotlus ei kahjusta 1. ja 2 samba sidusust.
CONCLUSIONS 87. Under the shared management system, Member States are primarily responsible for evaluating and controlling the effectiveness of any given action. 
JRELDUSED 87. hise haldusssteemi raames vastutavad liikmesriigid eelkige iga konkreetse meetme thususe hindamise ja kontrollimise eest.
The Commission regularly discusses the functioning of the aid scheme, including issues related to effectiveness, with Member States in the Management Committee meetings. 
Komisjon arutab korralduskomitee istungitel liikmesriikidega korrapraselt abikava toimimist, sealhulgas tulemuslikkuse ksimusi.
Furthermore, matters requiring clarification are dealt with in bilateral meetings between the Commission and Member States. 
Lisaks ksitletakse selgitamist vajavaid ksimusi komisjoni ja liikmesriikide kahepoolsetel kohtumistel.
20.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/57 During its various Clearance of Accounts missions and desk audits, the Commission paid particular attention to ensuring that Member StatesŐ systems of management and control offer reasonable assurance that expenditure declared conforms to the regulatory requirements. 
20.11.2006 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 282/57 Oma mitmesuguste raamatupidamisarvestuse kontrollimise ja heakskiitmise lhetuste ja dokumentaalauditite kigus pras komisjon erilist thelepanu sellele, et liikmesriikide haldus-ja kontrollissteemid tagaksid piisava kindlusega deklareeritud kulude vastavuse regulatiivsetele nuetele.
Weaknesses are followed up via the Clearance of accounts process and give rise, where necessary, to financial corrections against the Member State concerned. 
Puudusi kontrollitakse raamatupidamisarvestuse kontrollimise ja heakskiitmise protsessi kigus ja vajaduse korral rakendatakse nende tttu asjaomase liikmesriigi suhtes finantskorrektsioone.
The Commission recognises the CourtŐs concerns. However, some progress towards the related objectives could either be clearly seen or assumed in over 70 % of cases the Court audited. The Commission introduced eligibility lists, which (as far as was reasonably possible) clearly set out what could be funded. 
Samas vis enam kui 70 % puhul kontrollikoja auditeeritud juhtudest selgesti nha vi eeldada mningaid edusamme asjaomaste eesmrkide saavutamisel. Komisjon seadis sisse abiklblikkusnimekirjad, milles (kuivrd reaalselt vimalik) stestati selgelt, mida saab rahastada.
Member States decide on their own detailed administrative arrangements and the Commission verifies that these are in compliance with the regulations, which fix the control rate at a reasonable level. 
Liikmesriigid otsustavad ise oma ksikasjaliku halduskorra le ning komisjon kontrollib, kas see on vastavuses eeskirjadega, mis fikseerivad kontrolli mistlikul tasemel.
The CommissionŐs observations arising from its 2005 audit missions indicate several cases where the Member States interpreted EU law very broadly. 
Komisjoni 2005. aasta auditeerimis-lhetustest tulenevad thelepanekud viitavad mitmele juhtumile, mille puhul liikmesriigid tlgendasid ELi igust vga vabalt.
The Commission is pleased to note that the CourtŐs findings give a positive global picture of progress made by producer organisations thanks to Community support. 
Komisjonil on hea meel mrkida, et kontrollikoja jreldused loovad positiivse ldmulje edusammudest, mis tootjaorganisatsioonid on saavutanud tnu henduse toetusele.
The Commission considers that even if an action may not appear effective in achieving a significant advance towards one of the objectives specified in Article 15(4) of the Council Regulation, the aid should be considered effective in terms of improving producersŐ incomes through improving their competitiveness, which is one of the overall policy aims. 
Komisjon leiab, et isegi kui meede ei tundu nukogu mruse artikli 15 likes 4 mratletud eesmrkide poole liikumisel olulisi tulemusi andvat, tuleks abi siiski lugeda tulemuslikuks seoses tootjate sissetuleku suurendamisega nende konkurentsivime suurendamise lbi, mis on ks ldistest poliitilistest eesmrkidest.
However, it does agree that the aid can be more effective if better targeted, and it will address this issue in the on-going impact assessment. 
Samas leiab komisjon, et abi vib olla thusam, kui see oleks sihtotstarbelisem, ning ksitleb seda ksimust kimasolevas mju hindamises.
The Commission acknowledges that operational programmes effects cannot be seen as the only factor pushing producers towards the objectives set in the Council Regulation. 
Komisjon tunnistab, et rakenduskavade mju ei saa lugeda ainsaks teguriks, mis tukab tootjaid nukogu mruses stestatud eesmrkide poole.
However, they do contribute to a more market oriented approach. 
Samas soodustavad need rohkem turule orienteeritud lhenemisviisi.
Market forces, particularly recently, have put producers under enormous pressure, resulting in major crises for leading EU products (i.e. peaches, citrus, table grapes, tomatoes, tomatoes for processing). 
Turul toimivate judude tttu on tootjad eriti viimasel ajal tohutu surve all, mille tagajrjeks on tsised kriisid ELi juhtivate toodete (st virsikud, tsitruselised, laua-viinamarjad, tomatid, ttlemiseks meldud tomatid) osas.
As a result of these crises, in a struggle for economic survival and having cost reduction as a priority, producers may pay less attention to quality aspects and neglect environmental concerns. 
Nende kriiside tagajrjel vivad tootjad majandusliku enesesili-tamise eest heideldes ja kulude vhendamise prioriteedi sunnil prata vhem thelepanu kvaliteediksimustele ja keskkonnaprobleemid hooletusse jtta.
This risk makes the operational programmes an important element for keeping producers focussed on quality and environment issues in their actions. 
Selle ohu tttu on rakenduskavad olulised selleks, et tootjad arvestaksid oma tegevuses jtkuvalt kvaliteedi-ja keskkonnaksimustega.
The Commission is aware of the shortcomings pointed out by the Court. 
Komisjon on kontrollikoja poolt vlja toodud puudustest teadlik.
However, this policy approach, having in mind the increased market access implied by the Doha Development Agenda and the increasing concentration of the demand side, is still the best instrument to try to achieve a better balanced chain (from producer to consumer). One of the aims of the incoming reform is to address the weaknesses and to reinforce the available instruments, in particular by favouring mergers between producer organisations, Associations of producer organisations, cooperation between producer organisations, and producer organisations with a transnational dimension. 
See poliitiline lhenemisviis on Doha arenguprogrammist tulenevat turulepsu suurendamist ja nudluse poole kasvavat kontsentratsiooni silmas pidades endiselt parim vahend, et rita-da ahel paremini tasakaalu viia (tootjalt tarbijale). ks ligineva reformi eesmrkidest on tegeleda puudustega ja tugevdada olemasolevaid vahendeid, eelkige soodustades tootjaorganisatsioonide liitumisi, tootjaorganisatsioonide omavahelist koostd ning rahvusvahelisi tootjaorganisatsioone.
The Commission considers that the ex ante check made by its services on Member StatesŐ requests for exceptions under Article 37(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 were sufficient to ensure coherence between the two instruments. 
Komisjon leiab, et tema talituste tehtud eelkontroll seoses liikmesriikide eranditaotlustega vastavalt nukogu mruse (E) nr 1257/1999 artikli 37 likele 3 oli kahe vahendi sidususe tagamiseks piisav.
The reasons for the unsatisfactory participation of producers in the scheme will be assessed in future evaluations. 
Tootjate ebapiisava kavas osalemise phjuseid hinnatakse tulevaste hindamiste kigus.
This issue will be assessed and appropriately addressed in the forthcoming review of the CMO (end 2006), with the aim of making the aid scheme simpler and more effective in the future. 
Seda ksimust ksitletakse ja hinnatakse asjakohaselt hise turukorralduse eelseisvas lbivaatamises (2006. aasta lpus) eesmrgiga muuta abikava tulevikus lihtsamaks ja thusamaks.
The results of the evaluation could lead to additional legislative initiatives from the Commission, if these are considered to help achieve the schemeŐs objectives. 
Hindamise tulemused vivad viia komisjonipoolsete tiendavate seadusandlike algatusteni, kui leitakse, et need aitavad saavutada kava eesmrke.
The Commission will improve its capacity to collect data and develop relevant indicators. 
Komisjon parandab oma suutlikkust koguda andmeid ja ttada vlja asjaomaseid indikaatoreid.
The observations of the Court will be taken into account. 
Kontrollikoja thelepanekud vetakse arvesse.
The Commission will address in its forthcoming reform proposal the issue of lack of organisation in the main fruit and vegetable producing Member States by encouraging membership of producer organisations more effectively. 
Komisjon ksitleb oma ettepanekus eelseisva reformi kohta organiseerituse puudumist peamistes puu-ja kgivilju tootvates liikmesriikides, propageerides thusamalt tootjaorganisatsioonidega liitumist.
C 282/58 EN Official Journal of the European Union 20.11.2006 99 and 100. 
C 282/58 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 20.11.2006 99.Đ100.
In a sector where supply is facing ever stronger bargaining power from the demand side, the concentration of supply is, and will be, a valid tool for ensuring a more balanced market. 
Sektoris, kus pakkumist puudutab ha tugevam tu-rupositsioon nudluse poole pealt, on pakkumise kontsentratsioon nii praegu kui ka edaspidi sobiv vahend tasakaalustatuma turu kindlustamiseks.
C 178/24 EN Official Journal of the European Union 31.7.2007 CORRIGENDA Corrigendum to Special Report No 2/2007 concerning the InstitutionsŐ expenditure on buildings together with the InstitutionsŐ replies (Official Journal of the European Union C 148 of 2 July 2007) (2007/C 178/02) On page 11, footnote 31: for: ÔRegulation (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Commission of 19 March 2001 (OJ L 114, 24.4.2001, p. 
C 178/24 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 31.7.2007 PARANDUSED Eriaruande nr 2/2007 (institutsioonide hoonetega seotud kulude kohta koos institutsioonide vastustega) parandus (Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 148, 2. juuli 2007) (2007/C 178/02) Lehekljel 11 joonealuses mrkuses 31 asendatakse ăEuroopa Parlamendi ja komisjoni 19. mrtsi 2001. aasta mrus (E) nr 761/2001 (ET L 114, 24.4.2001, lk 1)Ó jrgmisega: ăEuroopa Parlamendi ja nukogu 19. mrtsi 2001. aasta mrus (E) nr 761/2001 (ET L 114, 24.4.2001, lk 1)Ó.
31.7.2007 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 178/1 IV (Notices) NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES COURT OF AUDITORS SPECIAL REPORT No 3/2007 concerning the management of the European Refugee Fund (2000 to 2004) together with the CommissionŐs replies (pursuant to Article 248(4), second subparagraph, EC) (2007/C 178/01) TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ................................................................ INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 
31.7.2007 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 178/1 IV (Teave) TEAVE EUROOPA LIIDU INSTITUTSIOONIDELT JA ORGANITELT KONTROLLIKODA ERIARUANNE nr 3/2007 Euroopa Pagulaste Fondi juhtimise kohta (2000–2004) koos komisjoni vastustega (vastavalt EÜ asutamislepingu artikli 248 lõike 4 teisele lõigule) (2007/C 178/01) SISUKORD KOKKUVÕTE ..............................................................
Background............................................................ 
Taustateave ............................................................
TheEuropeanRefugeeFund ............................................... 
KAS RAHALISTE VAHENDITE JAGAMINE LIIKMESRIIKIDELE OLI USALDUSVÄÄRNE? . . .
Auditscope,objectivesandapproach........................................ 
Tõlgenduserinevusedliikmesriikidevahelmoonutavadalust ......................
Basisforthedistributionofamounts ........................................ 
Fondirakendamiseeskirjadavaldativiivitusega .................................
Lowefficiencyoftheallocationprocedure .................................... DifferentinterpretationofERFrulesbyMemberStates .......................... PositiveexamplesofERFmanagement ....................................... 
Positiivsednäitedfondijuhtimisest .......................................... Komisjoni järelevalve ja parandusmeetmete tulemused olid ebapiisavad . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Paragraph I-VIII 1-16 1 2-9 10-13 14-16 17-25 17-19 20-22 23 24-25 26-39 26 27-33 34-36 37 38-39 Page 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 
Punkt I–VIII 1–16 1 2–9 10–13 14–16 17–25 17–19 20–22 23 24–25 26–39 26 27–33 34–36 37 38–39 Lk 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8
C 178/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union 31.7.2007 Paragraph Page WHAT WAS THE IMPACT OF THE ERF ON NATIONAL EFFORTS IN THE AREA OF ASY-LUM?..................................................................... 
45–50 9 SOOVITUSED..............................................................
40-44 9 CONCLUSION ............................................................. 
51–54 10 I lisa — Euroopa Pagulaste Fondi käsitlevate ühenduse määruste võrdlus ajavahemike 2000–2004 (fon-diIetapp)ja2005–2010(fondiIIetapp)kohta ......................................
45-50 9 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................... 
15 III lisa — Fondi esialgsete summade liikmesriikidele eraldamise kord aastatel 2000–2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15 AnnexIII Ń ERFallocationprocedureofprovisionalamountstoMemberStates .................... 16 TheCommissionŐsreplies .............................................................. 
16 Komisjonivastused....................................................................
19 31.7.2007 EN Official Journal of the European Union SUMMARY I. The European Refugee Fund (ERF or the Fund) was established in September 2000 for an initial five-year period ending in 2004, with a financial reference amount of 216 million euro. 
19 31.7.2007 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 178/3 KOKKUVÕTE I. Euroopa Pagulaste Fond (edaspidi ka „fond”) asutati 2000. aasta septembris esialgselt viieaastaseks perioodiks 2004. aastani, fondile eraldatud võrdlussumma oli 216 miljonit eurot.
The FundŐs creation occurred at a time of increased EU activity in the rapidly evolving field of asylum and immigration. 
Fondi asutamine langes samale ajavahemikule ELi tegevuse kasvamisega kiiresti arenevas varjupaigapoliitika ja sisserände valdkonnas.
The aim of the ERF was to support and encourage the efforts made by the Member States in receiving and bearing the consequences of receiving refugees and displaced persons. 
Fondi eesmärgiks oli edendada ja toetada liikmesriikide pingutusi pagulaste ja ümberasustatud isikute vastuvõtmisel ja selle tegevuse tagajärgede kandmisel.
The management of the Fund was shared between the Commission and the Member States. 
Fondi juhtimine jagunes komisjoni ja liikmesriikide vahel.
The Commission had the overall responsibility for the correct implementation of the Fund, while the Member States were in charge of carrying out the actual measures. 
Komisjon vastutas fondi üldise rakendamise seaduslikkuse eest, liikmesriigid vastutasid meetmete tegeliku elluviimise eest.
Fundable measures were divided into three groups: conditions for the reception, integration, and repatriation of refugees and displaced persons. 
Rahastatavad meetmed olid jagatud kolme valdkonda: pagulaste ja ümberasustatud isikute vastuvõtmis-, integreerimis-ja repatrieerimismeetmed.