natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The fundamental role played by national contact points to monitor the BTSF training programme at national level is raised/recalled at each meeting with Member States when BTSF is discussed. 
The fundamental role played by national contact points to monitor the BTSF training programme at national level is raised/recalled at each meeting with Member States when BTSF is discussed.
The Commission took immediate action and fully addressed the findings of the BTSF intermediate evaluation of 2009. 
The Commission took immediate action and fully addressed the findings of the BTSF intermediate evaluation of 2009.
Following the first assessment of participants’ satisfaction with the BTSF training, the Commission undertook substantial efforts to propose more practical activities during BTSF training sessions. 
Following the first assessment of participants’ satisfaction with the BTSF training, the Commission undertook substantial efforts to propose more practical activities during BTSF training sessions.
Moreover, the fact that the dissemination of information in Member States after BTSF activities lacked sufficient practical demonstrations at Member State level depends solely on the competent authorities rather than on the BTSF programme. 
Moreover, the fact that the dissemination of information in Member States after BTSF activities lacked sufficient practical demonstrations at Member State level depends solely on the competent authorities rather than on the BTSF programme.
The evaluation report of the BTSF programme is expected to be finalised in autumn 2012. 
The evaluation report of the BTSF programme is expected to be finalised in autumn 2012.
The Commission will endeavour to improve further the running of BTSF on the basis of the evaluators’ recommendations. 
The Commission will endeavour to improve further the running of BTSF on the basis of the evaluators’ recommendations.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Box 6 BTSF training priorities are set down following a very broad yearly consultation process both within the Commission and with the Member States. 
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Box 6 BTSF training priorities are set down following a very broad yearly consultation process both within the Commission and with the Member States.
Whether or not a programme should be continued is an integral part of this process. 
Whether or not a programme should be continued is an integral part of this process.
Training topics are regularly renewed and replaced by new technical areas. 
Training topics are regularly renewed and replaced by new technical areas.
New training techniques such as distance learning are currently tested within BTSF and may offer a way out for linguistic issues. 
New training techniques such as distance learning are currently tested within BTSF and may offer a way out for linguistic issues.
However, when organising training workshops, one basic principle of BTSF is to ensure a mix of Member State participants for networking and experience sharing. 
However, when organising training work-shops, one basic principle of BTSF is to ensure a mix of Member State participants for networking and experience sharing.
For budgetary reasons, it is not possible to offer interpretation in all EU languages. 
For budgetary reasons, it is not possible to offer interpretation in all EU languages.
The Commission closely follows the assessments made by participants and Commission officials who participate in training activities. 
The Commission closely follows the assessments made by participants and Commission officials who participate in training activities.
However, it would be far too expensive to offer interpretation in all EU languages. 
However, it would be far too expensive to offer interpretation in all EU languages.
Therefore, it is up to the competent authorities in the Member States to identify the best placed person to attend the BTSF courses. 
Therefore, it is up to the competent authorities in the Member States to identify the best placed person to attend the BTSF courses.
The choice of the establishments to be visited is done in agreement with the local competent authorities, the contractors and the FBOs. 
The choice of the establishments to be visited is done in agreement with the local competent authorities, the contractors and the FBOs.
The objective for participants being also to learn to identify non-conformities and to suggest corrective measures, selecting only fully compliant establishments would not meet this learning objective appropriately. 
The objective for participants being also to learn to identify non-conformities and to suggest corrective measures, selecting only fully compliant establishments would not meet this learning objective appropriately.
See reply to paragraph 42. 
See reply to paragraph 42.
Sustainability and the selection of projects which meet best the identified objectives was a basic principle under Sapard programming and implementation. 
Sustainability and the selection of projects which meet best the identified objectives was a basic principle under Sapard programming and implementation.
The sustainability of funded projects was based on two pillars: the need to demonstrate viability of the project and to monitor each project for five years after its final payment. Special Report No 14/2012 – Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004 
The sustainability of funded projects was based on two pil-lars: the need to demonstrate viability of the project and to monitor each project for five years after its final payment. Special Report No 14/2012 – Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004
39 For the selection of projects, Council Regulation No 1268/1999 set forth that each Sapard programme ‘shall ensure that priority is given to measures to improve market efficiency, quality and health standards and measures to create new employment’. 
39 For the selection of projects, Council Regulation No 1268/1999 set forth that each Sapard programme ‘shall ensure that priority is given to measures to improve market efficiency, quality and health standards and measures to create new employment’.
The verifications of the respect of these provisions and thus of the hygiene requirements in slaughterhouses was the responsibility of the national competent authorities. 
The verifications of the respect of these provisions and thus of the hygiene requirements in slaughterhouses was the responsibility of the national competent authorities.
The Commission is performing the audits for Sapard (Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia) in order to ascertain the correct implementation of the national procedures related to the ex post checks, in particular if the countries respect the five-year monitoring period. 
The Commission is performing the audits for Sapard (Bul-garia, Romania and Croatia) in order to ascertain the correct implementation of the national procedures related to the ex post checks, in particular if the countries respect the five-year monitoring period.
In case of decentralised management under Sapard, the national programmes contained the general provisions for implementation, monitoring and controls. 
In case of decentralised management under Sapard, the national programmes contained the general provisions for implementation, monitoring and controls.
This plan had then to be approved by the Commission as a ‘Sapard programme’. 
This plan had then to be approved by the Commission as a ‘Sapard programme’.
For national accreditation and the resulting conferral of management, detailed working procedures (national procedures) had to be elaborated by the implementing structures based on the general provisions. 
For national accreditation and the resulting conferral of management, detailed working procedures (national procedures) had to be elaborated by the implementing structures based on the general provisions.
Following the information received from OLAF, the Agriculture and Rural Development DG carried out an immediate follow-up of those cases: the paying agency in Romania was visited on 24 and 25 November 2010 and again in February 2011. 
Following the information received from OLAF, the Agriculture and Rural Development DG carried out an immediate follow-up of those cases: the paying agency in Romania was visited on 24 and 25 November 2010 and again in February 2011.
Another conformity audit mission was carried out in November 2011. 
Another conformity audit mission was carried out in November 2011.
The Agriculture and Rural Development DG’s auditors assessed during those missions that the paying agency had dealt with the different cases opened by OLAF investigation in a correct way, and assessed that the Romanian Development and Fisheries had recorded the debts on the debtors’ ledger according to the rules set out in MAFA. 
The Agriculture and Rural Development DG’s auditors assessed during those missions that the paying agency had dealt with the different cases opened by OLAF investigation in a correct way, and assessed that the Romanian Development and Fisheries had recorded the debts on the debtors’ ledger according to the rules set out in MAFA.
Another conformity audit mission is scheduled for the end of 2012. 
Another conformity audit mission is scheduled for the end of 2012.
The main purpose of the audit will be to assess the follow-up of the OLAF cases in Romania. 
The main purpose of the audit will be to assess the follow-up of the OLAF cases in Romania.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 49. 
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 49.
As required by the Sapard regulation, the impact of the funded investments on meeting the new hygiene standards was subject of a review by the ex post evaluation reports of the Sapard programmes of eight beneficiary countries which joined the EU in 2004. 
As required by the Sapard regulation, the impact of the funded investments on meeting the new hygiene standards was subject of a review by the ex post evaluation reports of the Sapard programmes of eight beneficiary countries which joined the EU in 2004.
The synthesis report of these evaluations by independent evaluators concluded under chapter ‘4.2.1 Meeting EU standards and acquis communautaire: The most important impacts were reached in the field of hygiene, sanitary and veterinary conditions and environment’1. 
The synthesis report of these evaluations by independent evaluators concluded under chapter ‘4.2.1 Meeting EU standards and acquis com-munautaire: The most important impacts were reached in the field of hygiene, sanitary and veterinary conditions and environment’1.
The report was published and can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/evaluation/ rural-development-reports/index_en.htm 50. 
The report was published and can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/evaluation/ rural-development-reports/index_en.htm 50.
The implementation of the Czech Sapard programme has been finalised. 
The implementation of the Czech Sapard programme has been finalised.
Until the end of 2013, the Commission is following up on the Member State’s compliance with the five-year monitoring period. 
Until the end of 2013, the Commission is following up on the Member State’s compliance with the five-year monitoring period.
The existence of a HACCP team could be considered as an indication of both the commitment and the ability to meet EU standards. 
The existence of a HACCP team could be considered as an indication of both the commitment and the ability to meet EU standards.
There was also the competitiveness objective to be fulfilled. 
There was also the competitiveness objective to be fulfilled.
An establishment which had already made steps towards HACCP implementation had a better prospect than one which had not. 
An establishment which had already made steps towards HACCP implementation had a better pros-pect than one which had not.
Standards and competitiveness are complementary objectives. 
Standards and competitiveness are complementary objectives.
1 The Commission is currently preparing a synthesis report for the three remaining ex post evaluations of Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia, as soon as they are received from the three countries. 
1 The Commission is currently preparing a synthesis report for the three remaining ex post evaluations of Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia, as soon as they are received from the three countries.
Synthesis reports go beyond the requirements of the Sapard regulation and are being done on the initiative of the Commission. 
Synthesis reports go beyond the requirements of the Sapard regulation and are being done on the initiative of the Commission.
40 Box 7 See also reply to paragraph 45. 
40 Box 7 See also reply to paragraph 45.
The Member State is responsible for the implementation of the measure. 
The Member State is responsible for the implementation of the measure.
The Commission controls the existence of the selection criteria which need to be in line with the priorities and objectives defined in the programme. 
The Commission controls the existence of the selection criteria which need to be in line with the priorities and objectives defined in the programme.
The effectiveness of the selection criteria is checked during audits (e.g. ongoing audit on M123 in Hungary) and analysed via the different evaluations (e.g. mid-term evaluation). 
The effectiveness of the selection criteria is checked during audits (e.g. ongoing audit on M123 in Hungary) and analysed via the different evaluations (e.g. mid-term evaluation).
This can result in penalties or/and recommendations addressed by the Commission to the Member State. 
This can result in penalties or/and recommendations addressed by the Commission to the Member State.
The need for proof of economic viability and the respect of the monitoring period of five years ensured — to a certain extent — the sustainability of the investment and prevented the loss of Community funds. 
The need for proof of economic viability and the respect of the monitoring period of five years ensured — to a certain extent — the sustainability of the investment and prevented the loss of Community funds.
However, any private project supported by the EU is exposed to market developments and changes that might render the investment non-viable after a certain period. 
However, any private project supported by the EU is exposed to market developments and changes that might render the investment non-viable after a certain period.
Having received additional information from the Court, the Commission will follow up on this project to check if the five-year monitoring period was respected in accordance with the respective rules of the MAFA. 
Having received additional information from the Court, the Commission will follow up on this project to check if the five-year monitoring period was respected in accordance with the respective rules of the MAFA.
In Hungary the project was supported by Sapard. 
In Hungary the project was supported by Sapard.
The beneficiary is a major enterprise in Hungary. 
The beneficiary is a major enterprise in Hungary.
The beneficiary explained the suspension of the activity by the decrease in the pig population in Hungary, which is mainly due to the increased feed prices in the market. 
The beneficiary explained the suspension of the activity by the decrease in the pig population in Hungary, which is mainly due to the increased feed prices in the market.
The Hungarian authorities did not accept this justification as a ‘case of force majeure’, and it was considered as an irregularity as the project was not operational for the obligatory five years after approval. 
The Hungar-ian authorities did not accept this justification as a ‘case of force majeure’, and it was considered as an irregularity as the project was not operational for the obligatory five years after approval.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 51. 
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 51.
The Commission welcomes the Court’s conclusion that overall the design of systems for supervision of hygiene requirements by the Commission and the competent authorities in the newly acceding Member States were adequate despite a number of observed weaknesses. 
The Commission welcomes the Court’s conclusion that overall the design of systems for supervision of hygiene requirements by the Commission and the competent authorities in the newly acceding Member States were adequate despite a number of observed weaknesses.
In addition the Commission notes that in the Court’s view these weaknesses do not individually or collectively call into question the overall design of the systems to ensure that hygiene requirements are applied. 
In addition the Commission notes that in the Court’s view these weaknesses do not individually or collectively call into question the overall design of the systems to ensure that hygiene requirements are applied.
The Commission will continue to work with the Member States using the mechanisms and processes already established and described above (guidelines, MANCP network, annual reports) to ensure that MANCPs are useful tools in ensuring the effectiveness of official controls. 
The Commission will continue to work with the Member States using the mechanisms and processes already established and described above (guidelines, MANCP network, annual reports) to ensure that MANCPs are useful tools in ensuring the effectiveness of official controls.
Recommendation 1 (a) The Commission, through FVO audits, regularly reviews the implementation of food safety legislation by the Member States and this is a constant and ongoing task. 
Recommendation 1 (a) The Commission, through FVO audits, regularly reviews the implementation of food safety legislation by the Member States and this is a constant and ongoing task.
Recommendation 1 (b) The Commission will continue to work with the Member States using the mechanisms and processes already established (guidelines, MANCP network, annual reports) to ensure that MANCPs are useful tools in ensuring the effectiveness of official controls. 
Recommendation 1 (b) The Commission will continue to work with the Member States using the mechanisms and processes already established (guidelines, MANCP network, annual reports) to ensure that MANCPs are useful tools in ensuring the effectiveness of official controls.
41 Recommendation 1 (c) The Commission is committed to encouraging Member States to effectively perform their veterinary controls and will use every opportunity, including FVO audits and BTSF training, to do so for the future. 
41 Recommendation 1 (c) The Commission is committed to encouraging Member States to effectively perform their veterinary controls and will use every opportunity, including FVO audits and BTSF training, to do so for the future.
Recommendation 1 (d) The Commission has an effective system for detecting weaknesses in Member States’ food and feed controls and for ensuring that the actions promised by the Member States are delivered. 
Recommendation 1 (d) The Commission has an effective system for detecting weaknesses in Member States’ food and feed controls and for ensuring that the actions promised by the Member States are delivered.
However, the Commission recognises the need to ensure that its supervision of official controls responds effectively to the realities of the food and feed sector. 
However, the Commission recognises the need to ensure that its supervision of official controls responds effectively to the realities of the food and feed sector.
See reply to Recommendation 2. 
See reply to Recommendation 2.
Recommendation 2(a) to (d) The Commission is of the opinion that the current set of guidelines, tools and procedures are appropriate and efficient to ensure high quality guidance and training in the framework of the BTSF initiative. 
Recommendation 2(a) to (d) The Commission is of the opinion that the current set of guidelines, tools and procedures are appropriate and efficient to ensure high quality guidance and training in the framework of the BTSF initiative.
Striving for continuous improvement, the Commission will address the results of the most recent evaluation, to be finalised in autumn 2012, by adequate future actions. 
Striving for continuous improvement, the Commission will address the results of the most recent evaluation, to be finalised in autumn 2012, by adequate future actions.
The Commission is of the opinion that it has adequately addressed in its legislation and in the Sapard programmes the issues of sustainability and the selection of projects. 
The Commission is of the opinion that it has adequately addressed in its legislation and in the Sapard programmes the issues of sustainability and the selection of projects.
However, the final implementation of the projects under decentralised management is the responsibility of the beneficiary countries. 
However, the final implementation of the projects under decentralised management is the responsibility of the beneficiary countries.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Recommendation 3(a) to (c) Under the rural development policy, the common monitoring and evaluation framework (CMEF) provides a single framework for monitoring and evaluation of all rural development interventions. 
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Recommendation 3(a) to (c) Under the rural development policy, the common monitoring and evaluation framework (CMEF) provides a single framework for monitoring and evaluation of all rural development interventions.
The CMEF includes a series of evaluation guidelines and guidance notes on common indicators for monitoring and evaluation. 
The CMEF includes a series of evaluation guidelines and guidance notes on common indicators for monitoring and evaluation.
The Commission set up, as part of the European Rural Development Network, an Evaluation Network, to facilitate an exchange of expertise and supporting implementation and evaluation of the rural development policy. 
The Commission set up, as part of the European Rural Development Network, an Evaluation Network, to facilitate an exchange of expertise and supporting implementation and evaluation of the rural development policy.
European Court of Auditors Special Report No 14/2012 Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2012 — 41 pp. — 21 × 29.7 cm ISBN 978-92-9237-854-7 doi:10.2865/16654 
European Court of Auditors Special Report No 14/2012 Implementation of EU hygiene legislation in slaughterhouses of countries that joined the EU since 2004 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2012 — 41 pp. — 21 × 29.7 cm ISBN 978-92-9237-854-7 doi:10.2865/16654
Free publications: HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); • at the European Union’s representations or delegations. 
Free publications: HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); • at the European Union’s representations or delegations.
You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758. 
You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.
Priced publications: • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu). 
Priced publications: • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).
Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union): • via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union (http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm). 
Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union): • via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union (http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).
MEMBER STATES THAT JOINED THE EU SINCE 2004 HAD TO BRING THEIR SLAUGHTERHOUSES UP TO THE EU’S HYGIENE STANDARDS AND COULD RECEIVE EU FUNDS TO DO SO. 
MEMBER STATES THAT JOINED THE EU SINCE 2004 HAD TO BRING THEIR SLAUGHTERHOUSES UP TO THE EU’S HYGIENE STANDARDS AND COULD RECEIVE EU FUNDS TO DO SO.