natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
M. tuleks parandada teaduse ja tööstuse, eriti VKEde vahelisi sidemeid , eelkõige toetades ettevõtluskogukonda ja akadeemilisi institutsioone siduvaid kohalikke võrgustikke; kuigi käimas on elav arutelu Euroopa tehnoloogiliste algatuste sisseseadmise üle, on ühenduse patendi rakendamine eeltingimuseks Euroopa eduka teadusuuringute poliitika saavutamisele;
M. better connections between the world of research and industry, especially SMEs, should be pursued, in particular by supporting local networks linking the business community and academic institutions; whereas an intensive discussion is under way on the establishment of European technology initiatives, and implementation of the Community patent is a condition precedent to achieving a successful European research policy,
N. tuleb teha jõupingutusi tõhusama teadus- ja innovatsioonipoliitika toetamiseks, võttes arvesse selliseid kõrvalpoliitikaid nagu siseturu väljakujundamine, ning omandi kaitse süsteemi kehtestamine, mille eesmärgiks on parem tasakaal kaitse ja konkurentsi vahel, mis annab VKEdele parema juurdepääsu ning ergutab era- ja avaliku sektori investeeringuid uutesse tehnoloogiatesse ja sisusse;
N. an effort must be made towards supporting a more efficient research and innovation policy by giving consideration to flanking policies such as the completion of the internal market, and the establishment of an intellectual property regime which seeks a balance between protection and competition, gives better access for SMEs and promotes private and public sector investment in new technologies and content,
O. Euroopa majanduse konkurentsivõime probleem tuleneb osaliselt teatavast paradoksist teaduslikult põhjendatud teadmiste loomise (mida ELis on küllaldaselt) ja ebapiisava suutlikkuse vahel neid teadmisi innovatsioonis ja eelkõige tootmises ära kasutada; tööstuse kaasamine rahalise toetuse prioriteetide määramisse võib seda olukorda parandada ja sellest tulenevalt on vaja teha jõupingutusi tööstuse kaasamiseks ning VKEde positsiooni parandamiseks seitsmendas raamprogrammis;
O. the competitiveness problem of the European economy arises partly from the existence of a ‘paradox’ between the generation of scientific knowledge, (which is abundantly present in the EU) and the insufficient ability to convert this knowledge into innovation and in particular into production; whereas the involvement of industry in allocating the priorities for financial support may improve this situation, and therefore an effort needs to be made towards involving industry, and improving the position of SMEs in FP7,
P. VKEde praeguse marginaliseerumise peatamiseks oleks soovitatav uurida uute spetsiaalselt nende jaoks mõeldud võimaluste potentsiaali nende rolli toetamiseks innovatsioonis, sealhulgas
P. in order to stop the current marginalisation of SMEs, it would be advisable to explore the potential of new specifically tailored modes of supporting their role in innovation, including:
– lihtsustatud rahastamise ja haldamisreeglite abil, eelkõige väikeste projektide puhul, mida rahastatakse korraga ja hinnatakse tegevuse lõppedes;
- simplified funding and management rules, in particular for small ‘fund once and evaluate at the end’ actions,
– temaatiliste piirkondlike klastrite ja nende Euroopa tasandi võrgustike toetamise kaudu, pöörates tähelepanu asjaolule, et suurem osa eraldatud rahalistest vahenditest peab tegelikult jõudma innovaatiliste VKEdeni (piirangud klaster- ja võrgustikorganisatsioonidele eraldatavale osale);
- support for thematic regional clusters and their European networking, paying attention to the need for the largest part of allocated funding actually to reach innovative SMEs (limits on the share allocated to clustering/networking organisations),
Q. parandada tuleks teadustöö eelarve, struktuurfondide ja kõikide teiste riiklikul ning erakapitalil põhinevate rahastamisallikate vahelist koordineeritust Euroopa Liidu ning riiklikul ja regionaalsel tasandil.
Q. better coordination should be pursued between the research budget, Structural Funds and all others public and private funding sources at EU, national and regional level,
Euroopa väärib paremat
Europe deserves better
6. kutsub struktuurifondidest toetust saavaid liikmesriike kasutama arvestatavat osa nendest vahenditest oma mahajäämuse kõrvaldamiseks teadusuuringute valdkonnas;
Calls on those Member States which are eligible for Structural Funds to utilise a significant part of these resources to eliminate their disadvantages in the field of research;
nõuab, et Euroopa Komisjoni tegevuse parema koordineerimise nimel, peaks raamprogrammide kestus langema ajaliselt kokku finantsperspektiivide kestusega, seda juhul kui finantsperspektiivide vastuvõtmine iga viie aasta järel langeb kokku parlamendi ametiajaga; sätestada tuleks libisev programmisüsteem , mis hõlmaks ka vahehindamist, et oleks võimalik eesmärke vajadusel jooksvalt kohandada , koos menetlustega, mis võimaldavad Euroopa Parlamendil selliste kohandamiste kohta oma arvamuse esitada;
12.Calls for the duration of FPs to be synchronised with the duration of financial perspectives, if and when the financial perspectives are agreed upon every five years concurrently with the Parliamentary term, for a better coordination of the Commission's planning activities; provision should be made for a rolling programme system, including a mid-term review, in order to allow a readjustment of objectives when and if needed, together with procedures to enable the European Parliament to deliver an opinion on such readjustments;
14. on seisukohal, et teadusuuringutealast rahvusvahelist koostööd tuleb tugevdada eelkõige Euroopa naabruspoliitika kontekstis ELi naaberriikidega, nagu Vahemere ja Balkani riigid, Venemaa ja uued sõltumatud riigid ning liitumisläbirääkimiste käigus;
Takes the view that international cooperation in the field of research must be strengthened, primarily, in the context of the European Neighbourhood Policy, with the EU’s neighbours, such as the Mediterranean and Balkan countries, Russia and the Newly Independent States, and within accession negotiations;
Alusuuringud ja Euroopa teadusnõukogu
Basic research and European Research Council
19. usub, et Euroopa teadusnõukogu peaks toetama alusuuringuid Euroopa tasandil, lähtudes teaduslikust kvaliteedist, pakkudes kõrgetasemelist Euroopa lisandväärtust üle-euroopalise konkurentsi ja loovuse edendamise näol;
Firmly believes that the ERC should support basic research at European level on the basis of scientific excellence, conferring a European added value through Europe-wide competition and promotion of creativity at the highest level;
23. ergutab liikmesriike uuesti hindama oma haridussüsteeme, eesmärgiga suurendada teaduse osakaalu kooli- ja ülikoolihariduses ning toetada õpilasi, kes soovivad õppida nendel aladel;
Encourages Member States to reassess their education systems with a view to a greater take-up of science in schools and universities, and to support students intending to pursue careers in this area;
24. usub kindlalt, et edukat Marie Curie' programmi, mida taotlejad on kõrgelt hinnanud, tuleb jätkata olemasolevate vahenditega ja samuti peab tagama, et juhtivad teadlased, sealhulgas noorema põlvkonna teadlased, valiksid teadustegevuseks Euroopa; tunnustab Marie Curie' programmi edu ja soovitab selle rahastamist märkimisväärselt suurendada;
24.Firmly believes that the successful Marie Curie Programme, which has been welcomed by applicants, should be continued with the existing instruments and ought also to ensure that top-level international scientists, including those of the younger generation, will opt for European research work; recognises the success of the Marie Curie actions and recommends a substantial increase in funding for them;
28. soovitab Euroopa ülikoolidel, teadusuuringute keskustel või teadusuuringutega tegelevatel ettevõtetel muuta paindlikumaks oma karjääristruktuure ja hierarhiat, et pakkuda noortele ja novaatorlikele teadlastele stiimuleid, muuhulgas võimalust tulemustest majanduslikku kasu saada ja teisi kompensatsiooni vorme, samuti leiab, et seitsmendast raamprogrammist toetuse saamiseks peaks eeltingimuseks olema sellise struktuuri olemasolu;
28.Urges European universities, research establishments and research-orientated companies to loosen up their career structures and hierarchies so as to provide their young and most innovative scientists with incentives, including access to major financial rewards in the form of spin-offs and other forms of enhanced compensation, and considers that evidence of this sort of structure should be a prerequisite for qualifying for funding under FP7 ;
30. tervitab Euroopa "tehnoloogiaplatvormide" ettepanekut ja ühiseid tehnoloogiaalgatusi kui vahendeid strateegilise teadusuuringute ja arenguprogrammi rakendamiseks teatud tehnoloogia valdkondades; rõhutab tehnoloogiaplatvormide kui märkimisväärse mehhanismi tähtsust tööstuse, teadusasutuste, kohalike institutsioonide ja teiste huvirühmade ühendamisel, ja rõhutab vajadust VKEde osalust soodustavate meetmete järele;
Welcomes the proposal of European ‘technology platforms’ and Joint Technology Initiatives as tools to implement the strategic research and development agendas in specific technology areas; underlines the importance of technology platforms as a significant mechanism to bring together industry, research organisations, local institutions and other stakeholders, and stresses the need for measures to facilitate the participation of SMEs;
36. kutsub Euroopa institutsioone ja liikmesriike üles, piirkondlikke ametivõime ja institutsioone kaasates (pangad, ühendused jne) edendama kõrgtehnoloogiliste algatuskeskuste loomist;
Calls on the European institutions and Member States to promote, including with the involvement of regional authorities and institutions (banks, foundations etc.), the establishment of incubators to favour high-technology start-ups;
Prioriteetsed teemad
Thematic priorities
43 usub, et Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu tulevases otsuses seitsmenda raamprogrammi kohta peaks temaatiliste prioriteetide määratlemine peegeldama Lissaboni agenda strateegilisi prioriteete; see peaks olema Euroopa, riiklike ja piirkondlike institutsioonide, teadusringkonna ja ettevõtlussektori vahelise aktiivse arutelu tulemus;
43 Believes that the definition of thematic priorities, to be included in the forthcoming decision of the European Parliament and the Council on FP7, should reflect the strategic priorities of the Lisbon agenda; moreover it should be the result of an active debate among European, national and regional Institutions, the scientific community and the businesses sector;
a) bioteadused (sealhulgas biotehnoloogia, neuroteadus, ennetav tervishoid ja rahvatervis),
(a) life sciences (including biotechnology, neuroscience and preventive and public health),
b) kõik olemasolevad ja tulevased süsihappegaasi mitteeraldavad energiaallikad (kaasa arvatud tuumaenergia)
(b) all existing and future non-CO2-emitting energy sources (including nuclear energy),
d) nanotehnoloogia, uued materjalid ja tootmisprotsessid,
(d) nanotechnology, new materials and production processes ,
47. kutsub komisjoni üles tegutsema loomakaitsega asjakohaselt, esiteks toetades loomkatsete alternatiive, ja teiseks vähendades miinimumini loomkatsete arvu komisjoni poolt rahastatavates projektides;
Calls on the Commission to show a proper concern for animal protection firstly by supporting alternatives to animal testing and secondly by reducing to a minimum the number of animal tests in the projects it finances;
The Lisbon Summit endorsed the creation of a European Research Area (ERA), while at the Barcelona European Council it was agreed that “overall spending on R&D in the Union should be increased with the aim of approaching 3% of GDP by 2010 [with] two-thirds of this new investment [coming] from the private sector”.
The Lisbon Summit endorsed the creation of a European Research Area (ERA), while at the Barcelona European Council it was agreed that “overall spending on R&D in the Union should be increased with the aim of approaching 3% of GDP by 2010 [with] two-thirds of this new investment [coming] from the private sector”.
The implementation of this new approach began with the 6th RTD Framework Programme (2002 – 2006; FP6 )
The implementation of this new approach began with the 6th RTD Framework Programme (2002 – 2006; FP6 )
OJ L 232, 29.8.2002, p.
OJ L 232, 29.8.2002, p.
FP6 marked a break with past practice, by introducing new instruments aimed at integrating the European research effort and focusing on the creation of an ERA.
FP6 marked a break with past practice, by introducing new instruments aimed at integrating the European research effort and focusing on the creation of an ERA.
The ERA will be possible if an increasing proportion of funding for research can be managed at European level.
The ERA will be possible if an increasing proportion of funding for research can be managed at European level.
The FP6 budget represents only 5.4 % of the total public research spending in Europe.
The FP6 budget represents only 5.4 % of the total public research spending in Europe.
The same determination that was manifested in the pursuit of the Single Market and the European Monetary Union should now be applied to building the ERA.
The same determination that was manifested in the pursuit of the Single Market and the European Monetary Union should now be applied to building the ERA.
FP7 has to be seen as a continuation of FP6.
FP7 has to be seen as a continuation of FP6.
The rapporteur believes the latter was in itself a qualitative leap forward from the past, in that it created a new dynamic for research, and above all defined a means of intervention consistent with the objective of establishing an ERA.
The rapporteur believes the latter was in itself a qualitative leap forward from the past, in that it created a new dynamic for research, and above all defined a means of intervention consistent with the objective of establishing an ERA.
The report namely endorses the FP6 instruments and underlines the necessity of continuity in the planning of research programmes, but proposes a series of correcting measures, which should make the instruments more flexible and easier to use.
The report namely endorses the FP6 instruments and underlines the necessity of continuity in the planning of research programmes, but proposes a series of correcting measures, which should make the instruments more flexible and easier to use.
At the same time the ERC would strengthen the ERA by giving a European profile to science.
At the same time the ERC would strengthen the ERA by giving a European profile to science.
– Identifying the thematic priorities for FP7 funding should be the subject of an active debate among the European Institutions.
– Identifying the thematic priorities for FP7 funding should be the subject of an active debate among the European Institutions.
While agreeing to include space research and the relatively new area of security research among the thematic priorities, as proposed by the Commission, the rapporteur believes that FP7 should equally support, among others, research in the areas of life sciences, energy and nanotechnology.
While agreeing to include space research and the relatively new area of security research among the thematic priorities, as proposed by the Commission, the rapporteur believes that FP7 should equally support, among others, research in the areas of life sciences, energy and nanotechnology.
Teadus ja tehnoloogia – Euroopa Liidu poliitika suunised teaduse toetamiseks
Science and technology - Guidelines for future European Union policy to support research
Šarūnas Birutis, Jan B?ezina, Renato Brunetta, Jerzy Buzek, Joan Calabuig Rull, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Giles Chichester, Gianni De Michelis, Lena Ek, Nicole Fontaine, Adam Gierek, Andr?s Gyürk, Fiona Hall, David Hammerstein Mintz, Rebecca Harms, Ján Hudacký, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Werner Langen, Anne Laperrouze, Pia Elda Locatelli, Eluned Morgan, Angelika Niebler, Reino Paasilinna, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Paul Rübig, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Catherine Trautmann, Nikolaos Vakalis, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca
Šarūnas Birutis, Jan Březina, Renato Brunetta, Jerzy Buzek, Joan Calabuig Rull, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Giles Chichester, Gianni De Michelis, Lena Ek, Nicole Fontaine, Adam Gierek, András Gyürk, Fiona Hall, David Hammerstein Mintz, Rebecca Harms, Ján Hudacký, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Werner Langen, Anne Laperrouze, Pia Elda Locatelli, Eluned Morgan, Angelika Niebler, Reino Paasilinna, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Paul Rübig, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Catherine Trautmann, Nikolaos Vakalis, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca
Euroopa Liidu 2005. eelarveaasta paranduseelarve projekt nr 1/2005
on draft amending budget No 1/2005 of the European Union for the financial year 2005
Euroopa Liidu 2005. eelarveaasta paranduseelarve projekt nr 1/2005, III eelarveosa – Euroopa Komisjon
on Draft amending budget No 1/2005 of the European Union for the financial year 2005, Section III – Commission
– võttes arvesse nõukogu 25. juuni 2002. aasta määrust (EÜ, Euratom) nr 1605/2002, mis käsitleb Euroopa ühenduste üldeelarve suhtes kohaldatavat finantsmäärust
– having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities
– võttes arvesse Euroopa Liidu 2005. aasta üldeelarvet, mis võeti lõplikult vastu 16. detsembril 2004
– having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2005, as finally adopted on 16 December 2004
Sel kuupäeval vastu võetud tekstid, P6_TA(2004)0103 . ;
Texts Adopted of that date, P6_TA(2004)0103 . ,
– võttes arvesse 6. mail 1999. aastal Euroopa Parlamendi, nõukogu ja Euroopa Komisjoni vahel sõlmitud institutsioonidevahelist kokkulepet eelarvedistsipliini ja eelarvemenetluse parandamise kohta
– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure
– võttes arvesse Euroopa Komisjoni poolt 28. jaanuaril 2005 esitatud Euroopa Liidu 2005. eelarveaasta paranduseelarve nr 1/2005 esialgset projekti ( KOM(2005)0025 );
– having regard to Preliminary draft amending budget No 1/2005 of the European Union for the financial year 2005, which the Commission presented on 28 January 2005 ( COM(2005)0025 ),
– võttes arvesse nõukogu poolt 3. märtsil 2005 koostatud paranduseelarve nr 1/2005 projekti (06876/2005 – C6‑0052/2005 );
– having regard to Draft amending budget No 1/2005, which the Council established on 3 March 2005 (06876/2005 – C6‑0052/2005 ),
– võttes arvesse eelarvekomisjoni raportit ( A6‑0047/2005 );
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets ( A6‑0047/2005 ),
A. arvestades vajadust kohandada 2005. aasta eelarve Euroopa Komisjoni eelarveosa vastavalt muudatustele, mis tehti eri teenistuste organigrammides uue komisjoni nimetamise käigus;
A. whereas it is necessary to adapt the Commission's section of the 2005 budget to the changes made under the revision of the services’ organisation charts in connection with the appointment of the new Commission,
B. arvestades, et käesoleva paranduseelarve projekti eesmärk on teha 2005. aasta eelarvesse vajalikud tehnilised, eelarve suhtes neutraalsed muudatused;
B. whereas the aim of the present draft amending budget is to make the necessary technical, budgetary neutral modifications to the 2005 budget,
Euroopa Liidu 2005. eelarveaasta paranduseelarve projekt nr 1/2005, III eelarveosa – Euroopa Komisjon
Draft amending budget No 1/2005 of the European Union for the financial year 2005, Section III - Commission
Artiklid 272 (EÜ) ja 177 (Euratom)
Articles 272 EC and 177 Euratom
konsulteerimise kuupäev
Date of referral
tähtaeg esitamiseks komisjoni jaoks
Date presented by Commission
No 1/2005 – COM(2005)0025
No 1/2005 – COM(2005)0025
Paranduseelarve projekti esitamise tähtaeg nõukogu jaoks
Date draft amending budget established by the Council
Paranduseelarve projekti edastamise tähtaeg nõukogu jaoks
Date draft amending budget forwarded by the Council
Euroopa Parlamendi kalkulatsioonid Euroopa Liidu 2005. eelarveaasta paranduseelarve osas (palkade korrigeerimine)
on the estimates of the European Parliament for an Amending Budget of the European Union for the financial year 2005 (salary adjustment)
PE 355.463v02-00
PE 355.463v02-00
– võttes arvesse Euroopa Liidu 2005. eelarveaasta üldeelarvet, mis võeti lõplikult vastu 16. detsembril 2004
– having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2005, as finally adopted on 16 December 2004
– võttes arvesse esialgse eelarvestuse projekti, mille juhatus võttis vastu 7. märtsil 2005;
– having regard to Preliminary draft estimates adopted by its Bureau on 7 March 2005,
– võttes arvesse eelarvekomisjoni raportit ( A6‑0048/2005 );
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets ( A6‑0048/2005 ),
A. arvestades, et personali palkade korrigeerimine oli 2004. aastal loodetust väiksem;
A. whereas the 2004 salary adjustment for staff was lower than expected,
B. arvestades, et eelarvepädevad asutused nõudsid institutsioonidele palkade korrigeerimise tulemusena kalkulatsioonide esitamist oma halduskulude korrigeerimiseks;
B. whereas the budgetary authority requested the institutions to submit estimates to adjust their administrative expenditure as a result of the salary adjustment,
C. arvestades, et finantsvajadused hoonetele on parlamendi 2005. eelarveaasta eelarves varem kavandatust madalamad;
C. whereas financial requirements for buildings in Parliament's budget for 2005 are lower than previously projected,
2. märgib võimaliku ülejäägi olemasolu parlamendi eelarves 2005. eelarveaastal; nõuab, et peasekretär vaataks olukorra 2005. aasta juulis uuesti läbi ja esitaks juhatusele vajaduse korral ettepaneku paranduseelarve esialgse eelarvestuse projekti, et vältida assigneeringute tühistamist aasta lõpul;
Notes the existence of a potential surplus in Parliament's budget for 2005; requests its Secretary-General to re-examine the situation in July 2005 and, if appropriate, to present to the Bureau a proposal for preliminary draft estimates for an amending budget to avoid cancellation of appropriations at the end of the year;
The 2004 salary adjustment adopted by the Council at the end of 2004 was only 0.7% instead of the 2.6% rate projected when institutions' budgets were being prepared.
The 2004 salary adjustment adopted by the Council at the end of 2004 was only 0.7% instead of the 2.6% rate projected when institutions' budgets were being prepared.
Therefore institutions are in the position to reduce expenditure related to personnel in the 2005 budget.
Therefore institutions are in the position to reduce expenditure related to personnel in the 2005 budget.
Parliament's resolution on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2005, adopted on 16 December 2004, calls for an amending budget in order to take into account the effects of this lower than expected salary increase
Parliament's resolution on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2005, adopted on 16 December 2004, calls for an amending budget in order to take into account the effects of this lower than expected salary increase
Paragraph 22, Adopted Texts, P6_TA(2004)0103 . .
Paragraph 22, Adopted Texts, P6_TA(2004)0103 . .
In line with the Joint Declaration of the Council and Parliament, adopted at the conciliation meeting of 25 November 2004, the Commission is invited to submit not later than March 2005 an amending budget to take into account these reduced financial requirements.
In line with the Joint Declaration of the Council and Parliament, adopted at the conciliation meeting of 25 November 2004, the Commission is invited to submit not later than March 2005 an amending budget to take into account these reduced financial requirements.