natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
„Komisija apņemas iesniegt, ja iespējams, līdz 2007. gada februārim, grozījumu priekšlikumu Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2003. gada 4. novembra Regulai (EK) Nr. 2004/2003 par noteikumiem, kas attiecas uz Eiropas līmeņa politiskajām partijām un to finansēšanu, lai ieviestu atbilstīgus noteikumus nolūkā neattiecināt Finanšu regulas 109. pantā definēto bezpeļņas noteikumu uz pašu resursiem, it īpaši uz Eiropas līmeņa politiskās partijas gada darbības rādītājos apkopotajām iemaksām un biedru naudām, kuras pārsniedz 25 % no saņēmēja attaisnotajām izmaksām saskaņā ar Regulas (EK) Nr. 2004/2003 10. panta 2. punktu.”
"The Commission undertakes to submit, if possible, before February 2007 a proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 on the regulations governing political parties at European level and the rules regarding their funding by introducing appropriate provisions for exempting from the no-profit rule set up in Article 109 of the Financial Regulation the own resources, in particular contributions and membership fees, aggregated in the annual operations of a political party at European level which exceed the 25% of eligible cost to be borne by the beneficiary according to Article 10(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003."
Eiropas Parlamenta un Komisijas paziņojuma projekts par atkāpēm no Finanšu regulas
Draft declaration of the European Parliament and the Commission on derogations from the Financial Regulation
„Komisija un Eiropas Parlaments apņemas paziņot pārējām iestādēm par ikvienu atkāpi no Finanšu Regulas noteikumiem, kas sastopama normatīvos priekšlikumos vai to grozījumos, kurus iesniedz likumdošanas iestādei, kā arī norādīt šādu atkāpju iemeslus.”
"The Commission and the European Parliament undertake to notify to the other Institutions any derogation from the provisions of the Financial Regulation contained in legislative proposals or in amendments to legislative proposals submitted to the legislative authority and to state the specific reasons justifying such derogations."
ATZINUMS Sniegusi Budžeta kontroles komiteja
OPINION of the Committee on Budgetary Control
On 15 March 2006
On 15 March 2006
Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0085 . , the European Parliament adopted (enhanced cooperation - Committee on Budgets and Committee on Budgetary Control) the amendments contained in the Gräßle report on the revision of the Financial Regulation.
Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0085 . , the European Parliament adopted (enhanced cooperation - Committee on Budgets and Committee on Budgetary Control) the amendments contained in the Gräßle report on the revision of the Financial Regulation.
However, it postponed its vote on the legislative resolution, which was not adopted until 6 July 2006
However, it postponed its vote on the legislative resolution, which was not adopted until 6 July 2006
Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0312 . , in order to induce the Council to open the 1975 conciliation procedure (on matters having appreciable financial implications) and with a view to a revised Commission proposal taking on board Parliament's amendments.
Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0312 . , in order to induce the Council to open the 1975 conciliation procedure (on matters having appreciable financial implications) and with a view to a revised Commission proposal taking on board Parliament's amendments.
The Commission submitted its amended proposal on 18 May 2006.
The Commission submitted its amended proposal on 18 May 2006.
On 19 October COREPER adopted its joint guidelines and mandated the Presidency to inform the European Parliament of the agreed draft text with a view to the preparation of the conciliation procedure as laid down in the Joint Declaration of 4 March 1975.
On 19 October COREPER adopted its joint guidelines and mandated the Presidency to inform the European Parliament of the agreed draft text with a view to the preparation of the conciliation procedure as laid down in the Joint Declaration of 4 March 1975.
The Council joint guidelines were formally adopted as an A-point (without discussion) in Council on 7 November 2006 with document 14259/06 FIN 490 ADD 1.
The Council joint guidelines were formally adopted as an A-point (without discussion) in Council on 7 November 2006 with document 14259/06 FIN 490 ADD 1.
Trialogue meetings took place on 18 October, 9 November and 16 November and a formal conciliation meeting was held on 21 November 2006.
Trialogue meetings took place on 18 October, 9 November and 16 November and a formal conciliation meeting was held on 21 November 2006.
Following further negotiations between the European Parliament and the Council agreement was reached on a final text intended to receive the approval of the ECOFIN Council meeting on 28 November 2006.
Following further negotiations between the European Parliament and the Council agreement was reached on a final text intended to receive the approval of the ECOFIN Council meeting on 28 November 2006.
This final text, in the judgement of your rapporteurs, adequately reflects the concerns of the Committee on Budgetary Control in relation to the areas of the Financial Regulation falling within its sphere of competence as agreed between the chairmen of COBU and COCOBU.
This final text, in the judgement of your rapporteurs, adequately reflects the concerns of the Committee on Budgetary Control in relation to the areas of the Financial Regulation falling within its sphere of competence as agreed between the chairmen of COBU and COCOBU.
In conclusion, your draftsmen proposes that the Committee on Budgetary Control accept the final text of the proposed amendments to the Financial Regulation and invites the Committee on Budgets (subject to the formal adoption thereof without further amendment by the Council) to propose that the European Parliament declare this procedure closed.
In conclusion, your draftsmen proposes that the Committee on Budgetary Control accept the final text of the proposed amendments to the Financial Regulation and invites the Committee on Budgets (subject to the formal adoption thereof without further amendment by the Council) to propose that the European Parliament declare this procedure closed.
Kopējā pamatnostādne, ko Padome pieņēmusi nolūkā pieņemt Padomes regulu, ar kuru groza Regulu (EK, Euratom ) Nr. 1605/2002 par Finanšu regulu, ko piemēro Eiropas Kopienu vispārējam budžetam
The joint guideline adopted by the Council with a view to adopting a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC, Euratom) No. 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.
– ņemot vērā Padomes kopējo nostāju (11944/2/2006 - C6-0357/2006 ),
– having regard to the Council common position (11944/2/2006 - C6-0357/2006 ),
Pieņemtie teksti 18.5.2006 , P6_TA(2006)0217 . par Komisijas ierosinājumu Parlamentam un Padomei ( COM(2004)0629 )
Texts Adopted , 18.5.2006 , P6_TA(2006)0217 . on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0629 )
- ņemot vērā grozīto Komisijas ierosinājumu ( COM(2004)0629 /2)
– having regard to the amended Commission proposal ( COM(2004)0629 /2)
– ņemot vērā Attīstības komitejas ieteikumu otrajam lasījumam (A6–04482006),
– having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Development ( A6‑0448/2006 ),
4. uzdod tā ģenerālsekretāram parakstīt aktu pēc tam, kad ir notikusi pārbaude, vai ir ievērotas visas procedūras, un saskaņā ar Padomes ģenerālsekretāru nodrošināt, lai to publicētu „Eiropas Savienības Oficiālajā Vēstnesī”;
Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to have it published in the Official Journal of the European Union;
Komisijas ierosinājumu regulai par attīstības sadarbības un ekonomiskās sadarbības finansēšanas instrumenta izveidi, kas bija sākums procedūrai jauna juridiska pamata EK attīstības izdevumiem izveidošanai, parakstīja 2004. gada 29. septembrī.
The Commission's proposal for a regulation establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation and economic cooperation, which formed the start of the procedure leading to a new legal base for EC development spending, was dated 29 September 2004.
Divus gadus pēc ierosinājuma publicēšanas, sekoja sarežģīts, grūti izprotams un dažkārt arī problemātisks likumdošanas process.
For two years after publication of the proposal, the legislative process followed a path that was tortuous, convoluted and at times fraught with difficulties.
Taču šajā laikā tekstā tika veiktas būtiskas izmaiņas.
But the text has come a very long way in that time.
Jūsu referenta viedoklis par sākotnējo ierosinājumu bija, ka tas ir ļoti galējs un Parlamentam pilnībā nepieņemams.
The view of your rapporteur on the original proposal was that it was very extreme and totally unacceptable to Parliament.
Tas apdraudēja gan Parlamenta prerogatīvu koplēmumu procedūrā, gan arī attīstības politikas principus pašus par sevi.
It attacked both Parliament's prerogatives under co-decision and the principles of development policy itself.
Pirmais signāls, kas norādīja uz Parlamenta nodomu ierosinājumu noraidīt, bija Attīstības komitejā vienbalsīgi pieņemtā un trijās citās komitejās, kas sniedza atzinumus, vienprātīgi atbalstītā atbilde.
The first response, signalling Parliament's intention to reject the proposal, was adopted unanimously in the Development Committee and supported, equally unanimously, by the three other committees which gave opinions.
Šīs pieejas dēļ Komisija un Padome sēdās pie sarunu galda, un galu galā pārliecināja tās rēķināties ar Parlamenta koplēmuma pilnvarām ne vien attiecībā uz attīstības instrumentu, bet arī attiecībā uz citiem „Prodi paketes” ārējo darbību instrumentiem.
This approach brought the Commission and the Council to the negotiating table and ultimately convinced them to respect Parliament’s co-decision powers, not only for the development instrument but also for other External Actions instruments of the ‘Prodi package’.
Bija gadījumi, kad citu iestāžu pieeja līdzinājās vairāk spiediena izdarīšanai, nekā sarunām un Eiropas Parlamenta kā koplēmuma pieņēmēja respektēšanai.
There were times when the approach taken by other institutions amounted to pressure, rather than negotiation and respect for the European Parliament as co-decision maker.
Pārsteidza arī tas, ka reizēm Attīstības komitejai nācās turēties pretim citiem spēkiem Parlamentā, kas vāji izprata to, ka tiek apdraudētas pašas iestādes pilnvaras un prerogatīvas.
It was also surprising that, at times, the Development Committee had to stand against other forces in Parliament in which it was less well understood that the powers and prerogatives of the institution itself were at stake.
Visā šajā procesā Attīstības komiteja nezaudēja vienotību un palika pie sava.
Throughout all this, the Development Committee stayed united, and stood its ground.
Kopējā nostāja, ko Padome iesniedza Parlamentam 2006. gada 23. oktobrī, ietver daudzus elementus, ko iekļāva pēc Parlamenta pieprasījuma.
The Common Position transmitted to Parliament by Council on 23 October 2006 includes many elements that were incorporated at the request of Parliament.
Svarīgākie no tiem ir:
Among the most important are:
a) Tiesību akti uz noteiktu laiku
a) Time-limited legislation
Sākotnējā Eiropas Komisijas priekšlikumā nebija iekļauts termiņa beigu datums vai arī vidusposma pārskata klauzula.
The initial proposal from the European Commission contained no expiry-date or mid-term review clause.
Iepriekšējo sarunu laikā bija panākta vienošanās par to, ka visi ārējo darbību instrumenti zaudē spēku, beidzoties Finanšu plānam 2013. gadā un, ka pārskatīšanas process tiks uzsākts 2009. gadā.
These were agreed, during the earliest negotiations, for all External Actions instruments, so they will all now expire at the end of the new Financial Perspective in 2013 and the revision process will start in 2009.
b) Īpašs instruments attīstības politikai
b) Specific instrument for development policy
Jautājums, kas izraisīja lielas bažas Attīstības komitejai, bija, ka sākotnējais priekšlikums neparedzēja īpašu finanšu instrumentu attīstības politikai.
It was a matter of great concern to the Development Committee that the original proposal did not foresee a financing instrument specifically for development policy.
Tas bija drīzāk politikas jaunattīstības valstīm apvienojums ar politiku rūpnieciski attīstītajām valstīm, padarot neiespējamu noteikt skaidrus mērķus un politikas prioritātes kādai no tām.
Rather, it mixed policy for developing countries with policy for industrialised countries, making it impossible to set clear objectives or specific policy priorities for either of them.
Pēc lielām domstarpībām par ārējo darbību tiesību aktu uzbūvi, Attīstības komitejas sarunu dalībnieki panāca vienošanos par to, lai attiecībā uz rūpnieciski attīstītām valstīm tiktu piemēroti citi tiesību akti, un attiecībā uz tām Starptautiskās tirdzniecības komiteja iesniedza jaunu priekšlikumu.
Following much disagreement about the legislative architecture for External Actions, the Development Committee negotiators obtained agreement for industrialised countries to be subject to different legislation, and a new proposal for them has been received by the International Trade Committee.
Kopējā nostājā bija noteikts tas, ko vēlējās Attīstības komiteja – īpašs jaunattīstības valstīm paredzēts instruments, ko nosauca par Instrumentu sadarbībai attīstības jomā jeb DCI.
The Common Position enshrines what the Development Committee wanted - an instrument specifically geared to developing countries, called the Development Cooperation Instrument, or DCI.
Parlaments arī iestājās par atsevišķa Cilvēktiesību instrumenta izveidošanu, kas būs Eiropas Cilvēktiesību un demokrātijas iniciatīvas turpinājums, un to panāca.
Parliament also battled for, and won, a separate Instrument for Human Rights, which will be the continuation of the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights.
Pašlaik notiek šī instrumenta likumdošanas procedūra.
The legislative procedure for this instrument is ongoing.
c) Vienīgais juridiskais pamats attīstībai – 179. pants
c) Single legal base for development - Article 179
Līdztekus diskusijām par tiesību aktu uzbūvi, notika arī ar šo jautājumu saistītas diskusijas par juridisko pamatu, ko piemērot DCI.
Along with the discussions on the legislative architecture, there was a related debate on the legal base to apply to the DCI.
Sākotnējais priekšlikums pamatojās uz diviem EK Līguma pantiem – 179. pantu, kas attiecas uz attīstību, un 181.a pantu, kas attiecas uz sadarbību ar trešām valstīm.
The original proposal was based on two articles of the EC Treaty - Article 179, which covers development, and Article 181a, which relates to cooperation with third countries.
Jūsu referents saskaņā ar Parlamenta un Padomes Juridiskā dienesta juridisko konsultāciju apgalvoja, ka 181.a pantu nepiemēro attiecībā uz jaunattīstības valstīm un ka tādēļ DCI ir pamatojams vienīgi ar 179. pantu.
Your rapporteur's argument, in line with legal advice from the Legal Services of Parliament and Council, was that Article 181a does not apply to developing countries and the DCI should be based on Article 179 only.
Šajā ziņā Parlaments bija ieguvējs.
In this Parliament has been fully successful.
d) Politikas veidošana ar koplēmuma procedūru
d) Policymaking by co-decision
Otrā lielākā Komisijas sākotnējā priekšlikuma problēma bija tas, ka tā paredzēja gandrīz vai pilnībā atcelt Parlamenta tiesības noteikt politiku jaunattīstības valstīm ar koplēmuma procedūru.
Another of the major problems with the Commission's initial proposal was that it sought to remove, almost completely, Parliament's right to set policy for developing countries by co-decision.
Komisija paredzēja no tiesību aktu darbības jomas svītrot politikas veidošanu un tā vietā izmantot nesaistošus paziņojumus.
The Commission intended to take policymaking out of the scope of legislation and use non-binding communications instead.
Vienīgie saistošie politikas noteikumi šajā gadījumā būtu iekļauti katras valsts, reģiona vai tematiskās programmas stratēģijas dokumentos, un tos pieņemtu ar komitoloģijas procedūru bez Parlamenta līdzdalības.
The only binding policy provisions would then have been included in the strategy papers for each country, region or thematic programme - and these were to be adopted by comitology, without input from Parliament.
Līdztekus Padomei, Attīstības komitejas sarunu dalībnieki noraidīja pieeju veidot politiku Komisijas paziņojumu veidā un pievērsās tam, lai nodrošinātu, ka politikas veidošana joprojām notiktu likumdošanas koplēmuma procedūras veidā.
Along with Council, the Development Committee negotiators rejected the approach of making policy by means of Commission communications, and concentrated on ensuring that policymaking remained subject to the legislative co-decision procedure.
Ar Padomi apspriestajā kopējā nostājā ir iekļauts liels daudzums politiskā satura, un gandrīz viss no tā bija iekļauts, atbildot uz Parlamenta bažām.
The Common Position negotiated with Council contains very large amounts of policy content, almost all of it included in response to Parliament's concerns.
Tas galvenokārt ir pamatots ar 13 politikas noteikumiem, ko aizstās ar jauno DCI un no kuriem gandrīz visi jau ir saskaņoti ar Parlamentu un Padomi koplēmuma procedūrā.
This is mainly based on the policy content of the 13 policy regulations which will be replaced by the new DCI, almost all of which had already been agreed by Parliament and Council in co-decision.
e) Detalizētāki finanšu noteikumi
e) More detailed financial provisions
Ierosinājumā iekļautie finanšu noteikumi bija otra joma, kas radīja ļoti nopietnas bažas: tie bija ļoti vispārīgi un atradās ļoti tālu no izstrādes pakāpes, kādu Parlaments kā daļa no budžeta lēmējiestādes, bija pieradis saņemt.
The financial provisions of the proposal were another area of very serious concern: they were extremely general, and very far from the level of detail Parliament, as part of the budgetary authority, was accustomed to handling.
Vienīgā dotā informācija bija par kopējiem finanšu asignējumiem visam instrumentam, līdztekus ar skaitļiem ĀKK sadarbībai, ko atcēla pēc tam, kad Eiropadome nolēma EAF neiekļaut budžetā.
The only information given was the total financial allocation for the whole instrument, along with a figure for ACP cooperation which was subsequently removed when the European Council decided to keep the EDF outside the budget.
Pirms tam ar koplēmuma procedūru finanšu asignējumus piešķīra katrai programmai, ko noteica atsevišķos noteikumos, tādēļ Attīstības komitejas sarunu dalībnieki uzstāja, ka šī prakse būtu jāturpina.
In the past there had been a separate co-decided financial allocation for each programme, enshrined in separate regulations, so the Development Committee negotiators insisted this practice should continue.
Tagad kopējā nostājā ir iekļauts programmas finansējuma sadalījums un atsevišķos gadījumos arī programmas ietvaros (piemēram, nevalstiskajiem dalībniekiem, kuriem tagad ir izveidota kopīga programma ar pašvaldību iestādēm, radot nepieciešamību prasīt papildu finansējuma sadalījumu, lai nodrošinātu, ka viņi arī turpmāk saņems finansējumu tādā apjomā, kas ļoti tuvs viņu finansējuma apjomam pēdējos gados).
The Common Position now includes a breakdown of funding by programme, and in some cases within a programme (such as non-state actors, which now have a joint programme with local authorities, making it necessary to request a further breakdown of funding in order to guarantee that they will continue to receive funding very close to their annual allocations in past years).
Jauninājumu ieviešana
Breaking new ground
Ir arī jomas, kurās jaunais DCI manāmi atšķirsies no visiem pārējiem tiesību aktiem attīstības jomā, kas ir izmantoti iepriekš, un tādēļ Parlamentam bija nepieciešams spert patiesi nozīmīgus soļus.
There are also areas where the new DCI will depart markedly from all other development legislation that has gone before it, and this is where Parliament has made really major advances.
a) Tiek likumīgi atzīta Ekonomiskās sadarbības un attīstības organizācijas (ESAO) Attīstības palīdzības komiteja
a) OECD Development Assistance Committee legally recognised
Jaunais DCI pirmo reizi juridiskajā dokumentā iekļaus starptautiski atzītu attīstības politikas definīciju, ko noteikusi Ekonomiskās sadarbības un attīstības organizācija (ESAO).
The new DCI will for the first time enshrine in legal text the internationally-accepted definition of development policy set by the OECD Development Assistance Committee.
Tas ir būtisks solis, lai attīstības budžetu pasargātu no tēriņiem citu politiku mērķu sasniegšanai.
This is an essential step to preserve the development budget from being poached for other policy objectives.
Pilnīgi visas ģeogrāfiskās programmas tiks izveidotas tā, lai tās atbilstu APK atbilstības kritērijiem Oficiālajai palīdzībai attīstībai, un tas pats attieksies arī uz 90 % tematisko programmu asignējumiem.
One hundred percent of geographic programmes will be framed so as to conform to the DAC eligibility criteria for Official Development Aid, and the same will be true for at least 90% of allocations under the thematic programmes.
Atlikušos 10 % no tematisko programmu asignējumiem izlietos ar attīstības jomu nesaistītām darbībām Migrācijas programmas un Vides programmas ietvaros, tostarp starptautisko līgumu īstenošanai vides jomā, kā arī vairāku starptautisku konvenciju sekretariātu, kas darbojas vides jomā, atbalstam.
The remaining 10% of thematic allocations will be used for non-development actions under the Migration programme and the Environment programme, including the implementation of international environment agreements and support to the secretariats of a number of major international conventions in the field of environment.
b) DCI pievienotā vienošanās par izdevumu mērķiem
b) Agreement on spending targets attached to DCI
Jaunajam DCI pievienotajā Komisijas deklarācijā ir arī pirmo reizi noteikts etalons, ko Attīstības komiteja izmanto kopš 2003. gada, lai pievērstu lielāku uzmanību galvenajām Tūkstošgades attīstības mērķu pamatizglītības un veselības aprūpes pamatpakalpojumu nozarēm.
A Commission declaration attached to the new DCI will contain, also for the first time, the benchmark that the Development Committee has been using since 2003 to promote increased focus on the key MDG sectors of basic education and basic health.
Komisija nekad iepriekš nebija apstiprinājusi komitejas 20 % etalonu šīm nozarēm, un kaut arī Parlaments to ir paredzējis budžetā pēdējos trijos gados, tā ir atteikusies to īstenot.
The Commission has never before accepted the committee's 20% benchmark for these sectors, and even though Parliament has written it into the budget for the last three years, they have refused to implement it.
Asignējumi šiem sektoriem vienmēr ir bijuši nepietiekami.
Allocations to these sectors have always been woefully low.
Taču tagad DCI pievienotajā deklarācijā Komisija pauž nolūku sasniegt šo etalonu līdz 2009. gadam (iekļaujot vidējo izglītību kā papildu kategoriju, jo tā ir ļoti svarīga vidēja ienākuma valstīs Latīņamerikā).
But now, in the declaration attached to DCI, the Commission signs up to aiming to achieve this benchmark by 2009 (with the additional category of secondary education included, since this is particularly important for the middle-income countries of Latin America).
Jūsu referents līdzīgi kā citi pārrunu grupas dalībnieki uzskata, ka šis Parlamentam ir patiesi liels ieguvums.
Along with the other Members of the Negotiating Team, your rapporteur views this as a very significant gain for Parliament indeed.
c) Plānošanas dokumentu demokrātiskas kontroles attīstība
c) Democratic scrutiny of programming documents - moving forward
Nedaudz lielāks progress ir panākts Parlamenta un Komisijas dialoga jautājumā par stratēģisko dokumentu projektu, lai DCI īstenošanā ļautu veikt efektīvu parlamentāro kontroli.
Some more headway has also been made on the matter of the dialogue between Parliament and the Commission on the draft strategy papers, to allow effective parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation of DCI.