natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The mid-point of this range, the so-called most likely error, is 2.6 % (see Figure 2). 
Selle vahemiku keskpunkt ehk nn kige tenolisem veamr on 2,6 % (vt joonis 2).
We are 95 % confident that the level of error for the population lies in the range between the lower and upper error limits (for more details, see Chapter 1, Annex 1.1 of the 2018 annual report). 
Meil on 95 % suurune kindlus, et andmekogumi veamr jb alumise ja lemise veapiiri vahele (tiendavad andmed on esitatud 2018. aasta aastaaruande 1. peatki lisas 1.1).
The way EU funds are disbursed has an impact on the risk of error Our 2018 audit results confirm our findings for 2016 and 2017: namely, the way expenditure is disbursed has an impact on the risk of error. 
Veariski mjutab ELi vahendite vljamaksmise viis 2018. aasta auditi tulemused kinnitavad meie 2016. ja 2017. aasta leide, mille kohaselt mjutab veariski vahendite vljamaksmise viis.
Errors were confined mainly to high-risk expenditure where payments from the EU budget are made to reimburse costs previously incurred by beneficiaries, and which can be subject to complex rules. 
Vigu esines peamiselt suure riskiga kuludes, mille puhul tehakse makseid ELi eelarvest, et hvitada toetusesaajatele nende varem kantud kulud, mille suhtes vidakse kohaldada keerukaid eeskirju.
Such cost reimbursements can be subject to complex eligibility conditions, which in turn may lead to errors. 
Selliste kulude hvitamise suhtes vib kohaldada keerukaid toetusklblikkuse tingimusi, mis omakorda vivad phjustada vigu.
This type of expenditure accounted for around 51 % of our audit population in 2018 and the estimated level of error was 4.5 %. 
Seda liiki kulud moodustasid meie 2018. aasta andmekogumist umbes 51 % ja hinnanguline veamr oli 4,5 %.
At the same time, the most likely error rate estimate for low-risk expenditure (which accounts for the remaining 49 % of our audit population and mainly includes entitlement-based payments) was below our materiality threshold of 2 % (see Figure 3). 
Samas ji vikese riskiga kulude (mis moodustavad lejnud 49 % meie andmekogumist ja hlmavad peamiselt toetusigustel phinevaid makseid) hinnanguline kige tenolisem veamr alla meie 2 % suuruse olulisuse piirmra (vt joonis 3).
Figure 3 Đ About half of the 2018 expenditure audited was free from material error We therefore conclude that error is not pervasive and that, with the exception of high-risk expenditure, 2018 payments were legal and regular. 
Joonis 3. Ligikaudu pool 2018. aasta auditeeritud kulutustest ei olnud olulisel mral vigadest mjutatud Seetttu jreldame, et vead ei ole lbiva iseloomuga ning kui suure riskiga kulud vlja arvata, olid 2018. aasta maksed seaduslikud ja korrektsed.
12 What are entitlement and cost reimbursement payments? 
12 Mis on toetusigustel phinevad maksed ja kulude hvitamisel phinevad maksed?
EU spending is characterised by two types of expenditure involving distinct patterns of risk: Ń entitlement payments, which are based on beneficiaries meeting certain (less complex) conditions: these include, for example, student and research fellowships (under ÔCompetitivenessŐ), direct aid for farmers (ÔNatural resourcesŐ) and salaries and pensions for EU staff (ÔAdministrationŐ); Ń cost reimbursements, where the EU reimburses eligible costs for eligible activities (involving more complex rules): these include, for example, research projects (under ÔCompetitivenessŐ), investment in regional and rural development (ÔCohesionŐ and ÔNatural resourcesŐ) and development aid projects (ÔGlobal EuropeŐ). 
ELi kulutused tehakse peamiselt kahte liiki programmide raames, millest mlemat iseloomustavad teatud liiki riskid: Ń toetusigustel phinevad maksed, mis sltuvad teatud (vhem keerukate) tingimuste titmisest toetusesaajate poolt, hlmavad niteks lipilaste ja teadlaste stipendiumeid (ăKonkurentsivimeŇ), pllumajandustootjatele makstavaid otsetoetusi (ăLoodusvaradŇ) ning ELi ttajate palku ja pensioneid (ăHaldusŇ); Ń kulude hvitamine, mille kigus hvitab EL toetusklblike tegevuste (mille suhtes kehtivad keerulisemad eeskirjad) rahastamisklblikud kulud. Need hlmavad niteks teadusuuringute projekte (rubriik ăKonkurentsivimeŇ), regionaal-ja maaelu arengu investeeringuid (rubriigid ăhtekuuluvus ja ăLoodusvaradŇ) ja arenguabi projekte (rubriik ăGlobaalne EuroopaŇ).
ÔNatural resourcesŐ had the largest share of audited expenditure (48 %). 
Kige suurema osa auditeeritud kulutustest moodustavad loodusvarade valdkonna kulutused (48 %).
ÔDirect supportŐ, consisting mainly of direct aid payments to farmers, accounted for 72 % of this area and was free of material error. ÔRural development, market measures, the environment, climate action and fisheriesŐ is the other component of ÔNatural resourcesŐ. ÔCohesionŐ, the second largest share of audited expenditure (20 %), was affected by material error, mainly due to the reimbursement of ineligible costs and infringements of internal market rules. 
Otsetoetused, mis hlmavad peamiselt otsetoetusi pllumajandustootjatele, moodustasid sellest valdkonnast 72 % ning ei sisaldanud olulisel mral vigu. ăMaaelu areng, turumeetmed, keskkond, kliimameetmed ja kalandusŇ on rubriigi ăLoodusvaradŇ teine komponent. htekuuluvuse valdkond, mis moodustab auditeeritud kuludest teiseks suurima osa (20 %), oli olulisel mral vigadest mjutatud, peamiselt rahastamisklbmatute kulude hvitamise ning siseturueeskirjade rikkumise tttu.
Our estimated level of error for ÔCompetitivenessŐ is lower than in 2016 and 2017, but still material. 
Rubriigi ăKonkurentsivimeŇ veamr on meie hinnangul madalam kui 2016. ja 2017. aastal, kuid siiski oluline.
This year we found most errors in research expenditure, mainly due to beneficiaries overdeclaring costs, such as personnel costs, other direct costs, overheads or ineligible subcontracting costs. ÔAdministrationŐ was free from material error. 
Vaadeldaval aastal leidsime kige rohkem vigu teadusuuringute kulutustes, mis peamiselt tulenesid kulude, nagu personalikulud, muud otsesed kulud, ldkulud vi rahastamisklbmatud alltvtukulud, enamdeklareerimisest toetusesaajate poolt.
Most expenditure in this area takes the form of salaries, pensions and allowances paid by EU institutions and bodies. 
Suurema osa rubriigi kulutustest moodustavad ELi institutsioonide ja asutuste makstavad palgad, pensionid ja hvitised.
Figure 4 compares the estimated levels of error in the various spending areas between 2016 and 2018. 
Joonisel 4 vrreldakse eri kuluvaldkondade hinnangulisi veamrasid aastatel 2016Đ2018.
Further information on results in revenue and each spending area is given on pages 21 to 42 and in the relevant chapters of the 2018 annual report. 
Lisateave tulude ja iga kuluvaldkonna tulemuste kohta on esitatud leheklgedel 21-42 ning 2018. aasta aastaaruande vastavates peatkkides. Joonis 4.
Figure 4 Đ Comparison between estimated levels of error for EU spending areas (2016-2018) 13 Estimated level of error (%) 4.8 4.1 4.2 2.0 Competitiveness forgrowth and jobs 5.0 2016 2017 2018 3.0 2.5 2.4 2.4 Spending area Economic, social and territorial cohesion Natural resources Free from material error Administration Note: The estimated level of error is based on quantifiable errors, which we identified through our work, notably the testing of a sample of transactions. 
Hinnanguliste veamrade vrdlus ELi kuluvaldkondade kaupa (2016Đ2018) 13 Mrkus: hinnanguline veamr phineb meie t kigus avastatud kvantifitseeritud vigadel, eelkige tehingutest koostatud valimi testimisel.
We use standard statistical techniques to draw this sample and to estimate the level of error (see Chapter 1, Annex 1.1 to the 2018 annual report). 
Valimi koostamiseks ja veamra hindamiseks kasutame statistilisi meetodeid (vt 2018. aasta aastaaruande 1. peatki lisa 1.1).
Comparison between the CommissionŐs estimate of the amount at risk at payment and our estimated level of error In the context of the attestation approach for our statement of assurance, we compared our estimated level of error with the CommissionŐs estimate of the amount at risk at payment, which represents its estimate of the amount, at the moment of payment, that has not been paid in accordance with the applicable rules. 
Komisjoni hinnangulise makse tegemisel veariski sisaldava summa vrdlus meie hinnangulise veamraga Kinnitava avalduse suhtes kohaldatava teiste tle tugineva lhenemisviisi kigus vrdlesime enda hinnangulist veamra komisjoni hinnanguga makse tegemisel veariski sisaldava summa kohta, mis on tema hinnang selle kohta, kui suur summa ei ole vljamaksmise hetkel vastanud kohaldatavatele eeskirjadele.
Each Commission Directorate-General (DG) produces an annual activity report. 
Kik komisjoni peadirektoraadid koostavad aasta tegevusaruande.
This includes a declaration in which the Director-General provides assurance that the report properly presents financial information and that transactions under his/her responsibility are legal and regular. 
See sisaldab avaldust, milles peadirektor kinnitab, et aruanne annab finantsinformatsioonist ige levaate ning et peadirektori vastutusalas tehtud tehingud on seaduslikud ja korrektsed.
All Directorates-General provided estimates of their levels of error, which are close to our estimated level of error for ÔCompetitivenessŐ and ÔNatural resourcesŐ and lower than ours for ÔCohesionŐ. 
Kik peadirektoraadid esitasid enda hinnangulise veamra, mis on ligilhedased meie hinnangule ăKonkurentsivimeŇ ja ăLoodusvaradeŇ rubriikides ning meie omast madalamad ăhtekuuluvuseŇ rubriigis.
Overall, the CommissionŐs estimate of the amount at risk at payment for 2018 is 1.7 %. 
Kokkuvttes on komisjoni hinnanguline makse tegemisel veariski sisaldav summa 2018. aastal 1,7 %.
This is below our error estimate which is in a range between 1.8 % and 3.4 %. 
See on viksem kui meie hinnanguline veamr, mis jb vahemikku 1,8Đ3,4 %.
We reported nine cases of suspected fraud to OLAF Fraud is an act of deliberate deception to derive benefit. 
Edastasime heksa pettusekahtlusega juhtumit OLAFile Pettus on tahtlik tegevus kasu saamise eesmrgil.
Our estimate of the level of error in the EU budget is therefore neither a measure of fraud nor of inefficiency or waste. 
Meie ELi eelarve kohta arvutatud hinnanguline veamr ei mda seega ei pettuste hulka, ebathusust ega raiskamist.
Rather, it is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations. 
Tegu on hinnanguga selle kohta, kui suurt summat ei oleks tohtinud vlja maksta, kuna seda ei kasutatud koosklas asjaomaste igusnormidega.
During 2018, we communicated to OLAF nine cases of suspected fraud (2017: 13). 
2018. aastal edastasime OLAFile teabe heksa pettusekahtluse juhtumi kohta (2017. aastal 13).
The instances of suspected fraud concerned the artificial creation of the necessary conditions for EU financing, the declaration of costs not meeting the eligibility criteria and procurement irregularities. Some of these suspected fraud cases involved several irregularities. 
Pettusekahtluse juhtumid puudutasid ELi rahastamise saamiseks vajalike tingimuste kunstlikku tekitamist, rahastamisklblikkuse kriteeriumidele mittevastavate kulude deklareerimist ja hanke-eeskirjade rikkumist.
Full information on the main findings can be found in Chapter 1 of our 2018 annual report. 
Tielik teave peamiste leidude kohta on esitatud meie 2018. aasta aastaaruande 1. peatkis.
The full text of our annual report can be found on our website (eca.europa.eu). 14 
Meie aastaaruanne on ties mahus avaldatud meie veebisaidil (eca.europa.eu). 14
Budgetary and financial management faces challenges Significant increase in claims for the ESI funds In 2018, the EU used both commitment and payment appropriations almost entirely. 
Eelarve haldamisel ja finantsjuhtimisel on probleeme Euroopa struktuuri-ja investeerimisfondide maksetaotluste mrkimisvrne suurenemine 2018. aastal kasutas EL nii kulukohustuste kui ka maksete assigneeringud peaaegu tielikult ra.
Out of Ű160.7 billion available for commitments, Ű159.9 billion were used (99.5 %) and of the Ű144.8 billion available for payments, Ű142.7 billion were made (98.6 %). 
Kulukohustuste katmiseks kasutada olnud 160,7 miljardist eurost kasutati ra 159,9 miljardit (99,5 %) ja maksete assigneeringuteks ette nhtud 144,8 miljardist eurost kasutati ra 142,7 miljardit eurot (98,6 %).
The number of ESI funds claims in 2018, which account for around 43 % of the 2014-2020 MFF, has significantly increased. 
ESI fondide 2018. aasta maksetaotluste arv, mis moodustab 2014.Đ2020. aasta finantsraamistikust umbes 43 %, on mrkimisvrselt suurenenud.
This is mainly because of the relatively low level of ESI fund payment claims by Member States in the early years of the 2014-2020 programmes. 
See tuleneb peamiselt asjaolust, et liikmesriigid esitasid perioodi 2014Đ2020 programmide esimestel aastatel suhteliselt vhe ESI fondide maksetaotlusi.
Implementation of the MFF affected by delays in the implementation of ESI funds Delays in the implementation of the ESI fundsŐ continue to affect the final years of this MFF. 
Mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku rakendamist mjutasid viivitused Euroopa struktuuri-ja investeerimisfondide rakendamisel Viivitused ESI fondide rakendamisel mjutavad jtkuvalt kesoleva mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku viimaseid aastaid.
Payment claims for a substantial value have been delayed and will be submitted in future years. 
Maksetaotluste esitamine on olulises summas ajakavast maas ja need esitatakse alles jrgnevatel aastatel.
This has affected the use of pre-financing and outstanding commitments, and will affect payment appropriation needs at the start of the next MFF. 
See on mjutanud eelmaksete ja titmata kulukohustuste kasutamist ning mjutab maksete assigneeringute vajadusi jrgmise mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku alguses.
We recommend that the Commission takes measures to avoid undue pressure on the level of payment appropriations in the first years of the 2021-2027 MFF. 
Soovitame vtta komisjonil meetmeid, et vltida liigset survet maksete assigneeringute tasemele mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku (2021Đ2027) esimestel aastatel.
The absorption of ESI funds gained momentum in 2018, the fifth year of the current MFF. 
ESI fondide vahendite kasutamine hoogustus 2018. aastal, mis on praeguse mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku viies aasta.
By the end of the year, on average only 27.3 % of total allocations for the whole MFF had been paid to the Member States, compared with 33.4 % by the end of 2011, the corresponding year of the previous MFF. 
Aasta lpuks oli kogu mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku kogueraldistest liikmesriikidele vlja makstud keskmiselt vaid 27,3 %, vrreldes 33,4 %-ga 2011. aasta lpus, mis oli eelmise mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku viies aasta.
The low absorption of ESI Funds has contributed to increasing ESI funds outstanding commitments. 
ESI fondide vhene kasutamine on suurendanud ESI fondide titmata kulukohustusi.
Figure 5 shows each Member StateŐs ESI funds outstanding commitments, both as an amount in euros and as a percentage of its 2018 general government expenditure. 
Joonisel 5 on esitatud iga liikmesriigi Euroopa struktuuri-ja investeerimisfondide titmata kulukohustused nii eurodes kui ka protsendina riigi 2018. aasta valitsemissektori kulutustest.
In our rapid case review on outstanding commitments in the EU budget, we highlight the significant risks that a high level of outstanding commitments can create for the EU budget and present possible solutions. 15 
Oma teema kiirlevaates ELi eelarve titmata kulukohustuste kohta rhutame mrkimisvrseid ohte, mida titmata kulukohustuste suur arv vib ELi eelarve jaoks kaasa tuua, ja osutame vimalikele lahendustele. 15
The increase in guarantees adds to the EU budgetŐs exposure to risk Guarantees supported by the EU budget have increased in recent years, mainly due to the addition of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) guarantee and the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) guarantee. 
Tagatiste kasv suurendab riski ELi eelarvele ELi eelarvest antavad tagatised on viimastel aastatel kasvanud, peamiselt tnu Euroopa Strateegiliste Investeeringute Fondi (EFSI) tagatise ja Euroopa Kestliku Arengu Fondi (EFSD) tagatise lisamisele.
This increases the EU budgetŐs exposure to risk. 
See suurendab ka ELi eelarve riskipositsiooni.
The level of losses expected by the Commission is covered by guarantee funds, which the new MFF will pool into a common provisioning fund. 
Komisjoni oodatava kahju tase on kaetud tagatisfondidega, mille uus mitmeaastane finantsraamistik koondab hisesse eraldisfondi.
We recommend that the Commission, as soon as the common provisioning fund is established, ensures the effective management and up-to-date monitoring of the EU budgetŐs exposure to the related guarantees, and bases its calculation of the effective provisioning rate on a prudent methodology based on recognised good practice. 
Soovitame komisjonil niipea, kui luuakse hine eraldisfond, tagada thus haldamine ja ajakohane jrelevalve tagatistest tuleneva ELi eelarve riskipositsiooni le, ning tugineda tegeliku eraldiste mra arvutamisel usaldusvrsele metoodikale, mis phineb tunnustatud headel tavadel.
The European Investment Bank Đ an integral part of the EUŐs architecture, but different accountability arrangements The European Investment Bank Group (the EIB Group) grants loans, guarantees and other kinds of support on a non-profit-making basis in order to serve EU policy objectives. 
Euroopa Investeerimispank Đ ELi struktuuri lahutamatu osa, kuid teistsugune aruandluskord Euroopa Investeerimispanga grupp (EIP grupp) annab laene, tagatisi ja muud liiki toetust mittetulunduslikel alustel, et tita ELi poliitikaeesmrke.
At the end of 2018, the aggregate total of outstanding loans granted by the EIB Group was Ű536 billion (2017: Ű548 billion). 
EIP grupi antud tagasi maksmata laenude kogusumma oli 2018. aasta lpus 536 miljardit eurot (2017. aastal 548 miljardit eurot).
The EIB Group is not an EU institution. 
EIP grupp ei ole ELi institutsioon.
In order to take account of its special nature, it has different management and governance arrangements compared to the rest of the EU budget. 
EIP grupi eripra tttu on sellel erinev haldus-ja juhtimiskord vrreldes lejnud ELi eelarvega.
In recent years, the EU has increasingly made use of financial instruments and budgetary guarantees provided to the EIB Group. 
Viimastel aastatel on EL ha enam kasutanud EIP grupile antud rahastamisvahendeid ja eelarvetagatisi.
This trend is expected to continue during the next MFF. 
See suundumus peaks jrgmise mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku ajal jtkuma.
At present, our audit mandate does not cover EIB Group operations that are not financed by the EU budget but serve the same EU objectives. 
Praegu puuduvad meil auditeerimisvolitused EIP grupi tegevuste suhtes, mida ei rahastata ELi eelarvest, kuid mis teenivad samu ELi eesmrke.
This means that the ECA is unable to provide a full picture of the link between EIB Group operations and the EU budget. 
See thendab, et kontrollikoda ei saa anda tielikku levaadet EIP grupi tegevuse ja ELi eelarve vahelisest seosest.
In our briefing paper on the future of EU finances, we proposed that we should also be invited to audit the EIBŐs non-EU-budget-related operations. 
Meie infodokumendis ELi rahanduse tuleviku kohta tegime ettepaneku, et peaksime kontrollima ka EIP ELi eelarvega mitteseotud toiminguid.
The European Parliament supported our proposal in its resolution on the Annual Report on the control of the financial activities of the EIB for 2017. 
Euroopa Parlament toetas meie ettepanekut oma resolutsioonis, mis ksitleb EIP finantstegevuse kontrolli 2017. aasta aastaaruannet.
We recommend that the Commission provides the budgetary authority with relevant information to support its work on the scrutiny of the EIB Group and its operations while also increasing the transparency of such operations. 
Soovitame komisjonil anda eelarvepdevatele institutsioonidele asjakohast teavet, et toetada EIP grupi ja selle tegevuse kontrollimisega seotud td ning suurendada selliste toimingute lbipaistvust.
Full information on the main findings on budgetary and financial management can be found in Chapter 2 of our 2018 annual report. 17 
Tielik teave peamistest leidudest eelarve haldamise ja finantsjuhtimise teemal on esitatud meie 2018. aasta aastaaruande 2. peatkis. 17
Further emphasis on performance of the EU spending needed Each year we analyse a number of aspects relating to performance, the results achieved by the EU budget, which is implemented by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States. 
Tuleb prata suuremat thelepanu ELi kulutuste tulemuslikkusele Igal aastal analsime mitmeid tulemuslikkusega seotud aspekte: komisjoni poolt koosts liikmesriikidega tidetava ELi eelarve tulemusi.
This year we have looked specifically at the EU budget performance indicators, the main results from our 2018 special reports on performance and the implementation of the recommendations we made in the special reports we published in 2015. 
Sel aastal oleme erilise thelepanu alla vtnud ELi eelarve tulemusnitajad, meie 2018. aasta tulemusalaste eriaruannete thtsaimad jreldused ja meie 2015. aastal avaldatud eriaruannetes esitatud soovituste titmise.
Performance indicators show significant variation in achievements and suggest moderate progress overall We reviewed the quantitative information provided by performance indicators. 
Tulemusnitajatest ilmneb, et saavutused erinevad mrkimisvrselt ja ldine edenemine on olnud mdukas Vaatasime le tulemuslikkuse nitajatega saadud kvantitatiivse teabe.
For our analysis, we selected 22 out of the 60 spending programmes, choosing the four programmes with the highest planned expenditure for each 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) heading, plus two programmes for special instruments. 
Analsiks valisime 60 rahastamisprogrammist 22, mis hlmasid iga 2014.Đ2020. aasta mitmeaastase finantsraamistiku rubriigi nelja kige suuremate kavandatud kuludega programmi, ning lisaks veel kaks erivahendite programmi.
The 22 selected programmes covered 97 % of the financial programming for the seven-year period. 
22 valitud programmi hlmasid 97 % seitsmeaastase perioodi finantsplaneerimisest.
We found that the indicators show significant variation in achievements and moderate progress overall. 
Leidsime, et nitajate phjal erinevad tulemused mrkimisvrselt ja ldine edenemine on olnud mdukas.
The late, slow start for both the cohesion and rural development programmes was an important limiting factor. 
Oluline piirav tegur oli nii htekuuluvuspoliitika kui ka maaelu arengu programmide hiline ja aeglane kivitamine.
Indicators did not always provide a good picture of actual progress Our analysis revealed weaknesses in the framework of EU budget performance indicators. 
Nitajad ei andnud alati tegelikust olukorrast head levaadet Meie anals ti ilmsiks puudusi ELi eelarve tulemusnitajate raamistikus.
Many indicators were not well chosen for instance because they did not measure the achievements of the EU budget or because they were mostly focused on inputs and outputs rather than results and impacts. 
Paljud nitajad ei olnud hsti valitud niteks seetttu, et nad ei mtnud ELi eelarve saavutusi, vi selleprast, et nad keskendusid peamiselt sisenditele ja vljunditele, mitte tulemustele ja mjule.
Furthermore, progress could not be calculated for many indicators and when it could, the data available was sometimes of insufficient quality. 
Lisaks ei olnud paljude nitajate puhul vimalik nende saavutamist vlja arvutada, ja kui see oli vimalik, olid kttesaadavad andmed mnikord ebapiisava kvaliteediga.
As regards the targets we noted that a number of them are not sufficiently ambitious. 
Eesmrkide puhul theldasime, et mitmed neist ei ole piisavalt nudlikud.