natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the revised set up of the governance of the blend‐ ing facilities it has been proposed that projects will be only submitted for final approval (no provisional approval anymore). 
V revidirani ureditvi za upravljanje kombiniranih instrumentov je bilo predlagano, da se projekti predložijo le v končno odobritev (in ne več v začasno odobritev).
The application form includes detailed descriptions of the need and added value of the grant, as well as how the amount has been determined/calculated. 
Obrazec vloge vključuje podrobne opise v zvezi s potrebo in dodano vrednostjo nepovratnih sredstev ter tudi način določitve/izračuna višine.
The process must involve preliminary analysis and discussions of the projects included in the pipeline to be clarified before submission for final approval so as to ensure maturity of the projects, impact and value for money. 
Postopek mora vključevati predhodno analizo in razprave o projektih, vključenih v načrt za pripravo, ki ga je treba pojasniti pred predložitvijo v končno odobritev, da se zagotovi zrelost projektov, njihov vpliv in stroškovna učinkovitost.
57 (d) The Commission accepts the recommendation. 
57 (d) Komisija sprejema priporočilo.
58 The Commission accepts the recommendation. 
58 Komisija sprejema priporočilo.
In the future, cash needs will be factored in before disbursing. 
V prihodnosti se bodo denarne potrebe upoštevale pred izplačilom.
A new contract template for financial instruments is currently under preparation. 
Trenutno je v pripravi nova pogodbena predloga za finančne instrumente.
The measure will be likely in place by the end of 2014. 
Ukrep bo verjetno začel veljati do konca leta 2014.
59 The Commission accepts the recommendation. 
59 Komisija sprejema priporočilo.
59 (a) A results measurement framework has already been included in the application form, with the accompanying guidelines clarifying the informa‐ tion requested. 
59 (a) Okvir za merjenje rezultatov je že vključen v obra‐ zec za vlogo skupaj s priloženimi smernicami, ki pojasnjujejo zahtevane informacije.
The impact of the specific EU grant can often not be separated from the overall project. 
Učinka poseb‐ nih nepovratnih sredstev EU pogosto ni mogoče ločiti od celotnega projekta.
However, regarding the EU grant the added value has to be clearly pointed out (see above). 
Vendar je treba glede nepovratnih sredstev EU dodano vrednost jasno poudariti (glej zgoraj).
59 (b) Instructions have been sent to all EU delegations, and guidelines are under elaboration. 
59 (b) Navodila so bila poslana vsem delegacijam EU, smernice pa so v pripravi.
59 (c) The Commission partially accepts the recommenda‐ tion. 
59 (c) Komisija delno sprejema priporočilo.
The Commission will consider the opportunity to adapt the ROM methodology to the specific characteristic of blending. 
Proučila bo možnost prilagoditve metodologije ROM posebnim lastnostim kombiniranja virov sredstev.
60 The Commission accepts the recommendation. 
60 Komisija sprejema priporočilo.
A new Indirect Management Delegation Agreement for all the projects contracted under the Regional Blending Facilities is under preparation. 
V pripravi je nov sporazum o prenosu posrednega upravljanja za vse projekte, dogovorjene v okviru regionalnih kombiniranih instrumentov.
This contract template will include an annex particu‐ larly foreseen for a Communication and Visibility Plan which will be established for each individual project. 
Ta pogod‐ bena predloga bo vsebovala prilogo, posebej pred‐ videno za načrt komuniciranja in prepoznavnosti, ki se pripravi za vsak posamezen projekt.
The Commission and the Member States have set up eight regional investment facilities to support EU external policies. 
Komisija in države članice so vzpostavile osem regionalnih naložbenih instrumentov za podporo zunanjim politikam EU.
These investment facilities aim at pooling together (blending) grants provided by the European Commission with loans from financial institutions. 
Njihov namen je združevanje (kombiniranje) nepovratnih sredstev Evropske komisije s posojili finančnih institucij.
They contribute to finance key infrastructure projects that require considerable financial resources. 
Naložbeni instrumenti prispevajo k financiranju ključnih infrastrukturnih projektov, ki zahtevajo precejšnja finančna sredstva.
The Court examined the effectiveness of blending EU grants with loans from financial institutions. 
Sodišče je preučilo uspešnost kombiniranja nepovratnih sredstev EU s posojili finančnih institucij.
The Court concludes that this blending has been generally effective. 
Prišlo je do zaključka, da je bilo tovrstno kombiniranje na splošno uspešno.
The regional investment facilities were well set up but the potential benefits of blending were not fully realised. 
Regionalni naložbeni instrumenti so bili dobro vzpostavljeni, vendar potencialne koristi kombiniranja niso bile v celoti dosežene.
The Court makes a number of recommendations for the Commission that concern project selection and grant approval, disbursement of funds, monitoring of the implementation of EU grants, and enhancing the visibility of EU aid. 
Sodišče daje Komisiji več priporočil, ki se nanašajo na izbiro projektov in odobritev nepovratnih sredstev, izplačila sredstev, spremljanje izvrševanja nepovratnih sredstev EU ter izboljšanje prepoznavnosti pomoči EU.
EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS QJ‐AB‐14‐016‐EN‐C ISSN 1831‐0834 
EVROPSKO RAČUNSKO SODIŠČE QJ‐AB‐14‐016‐SL‐C ISSN 1831‐094X
EN 2014 Special Report NO 23 Errors in rural development spending: what are the causes, and how are they being addressed? 
št. 23 Posebno poročilo SL 2014 Napake pri porabi za razvoj podeželja: Kakšni so vzroki in kako se obravnavajo?
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015 ISBN 978-92-872-1654-0 doi:10.2865/92113 © European Union, 2015 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 
Luxembourg: Urad za publikacije Evropske unije, 2015 ISBN 978-92-872-1658-8 doi:10.2865/82915 © Evropska unija, 2015 Reprodukcija je dovoljena z navedbo vira.
EN 2014 Special Report NO 23 Errors in rural development spending: what are the causes, and how are they being addressed? (pursuant to Article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU) 
št. 23 Posebno poročilo SL 2014 Napake pri porabi za razvoj podeželja: Kakšni so vzroki in kako se obravnavajo? (v skladu z drugim pododstavkom člena 287(4) PDEU)
Contents 02 Paragraph I–XI 1–5 6–11 12–21 12–14 15–16 17 18–21 22–92 22–54 23–29 30–38 39–45 46–54 55–69 56–65 66–69 Glossary Executive summary Introduction Audit scope and approach Types and prevalence of errors found Overall Investment measures Area‐related aid Differences in the financial implementation rate and the error rate between groups of Member States Observations PART I — What are the main causes of the error rate in investment measures? 
Kazalo 02 Odstavek I–XI 1–5 6–11 12–21 12–14 15–16 17 18–21 22–92 22–54 23–29 30–38 39–45 46–54 55–69 56–65 66–69 Glosar Povzetek Uvod Obseg revizije in revizijski pristop Vrste in pogostost ugotovljenih napak Splošno Naložbeni ukrepi Pomoč na površino Razlike med stopnjami finančnega izvajanja in stopnjami napake med skupinami držav članic Opažanja DEL I – Kateri so glavni vzroki za stopnjo napake pri naložbenih ukrepih?
Public bodies are a significant source of error because of non‐compliance with public procurement rules Beneficiaries’ non‐compliance with eligibility criteria had a significant impact on the error rate Indications that private beneficiaries may have committed intentional irregularities Member State authorities could have detected and corrected errors affecting investment measures PART II — What are the main causes of the error rate in area‐related aid? 
Javni organi so pomemben vir napak zaradi neskladnosti s pravili o javnem naročanju Neskladnost upravičencev z merili za upravičenost je imela znaten učinek na stopnjo napake Znaki, da so zasebni upravičenci morda storili namerne nepravilnosti Organi držav članic bi lahko odkrili in popravili napake, ki so vplivale na naložbene ukrepe DEL II – Kateri so glavni vzroki za stopnjo napake pri pomoči na površino?
Agri‐environment aid is the most error prone area‐related measure Payments for less‐favoured areas are less affected by error 
Med ukrepi na površino je verjetnost napake največja pri kmetijsko‐okoljski pomoči Na plačila za območja z omejenimi možnostmi je manj vplivala napaka
Contents 03 70–92 PART III — Do the Member States’ action plans and the new EU legal framework have the potential to address these causes effectively? 
Kazalo 03 70–92 DEL III – Ali bi akcijski načrti držav članic in nov pravni okvir EU lahko uspešno obravnavali te vzroke?
71–81 The action plan exercise initiated by the Commission is a step in the right direction in addressing the causes of error 82–92 The new EU legal framework may have a positive effect in addressing the causes of errors 93–100 Conclusions and recommendations Annex — List of rural development measures Reply of the Commission 
71–81 Izvajanje akcijskih načrtov na pobudo Komisije je korak v pravo smer pri obravnavi vzrokov za napake 82–92 Nov pravni okvir EU bi lahko imel pozitiven učinek na obravnavo vzrokov za napake 93–100 Zaključki in priporočila Priloga – Seznam ukrepov za razvoj podeželja Odgovori Komisije
Glossary 04 1 Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ L 312, 23.12.1995, p.1). 
Glosar 04 1 Člen 59 Uredbe (EU, Euratom) št.
Glossary 05 2 Article 59 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 
966/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 25. oktobra 2012 o finančnih pravilih, ki se uporabljajo za splošni proračun Unije, in razveljavitvi Uredbe Sveta (ES, Euratom) št. 1605/2002 (UL L 298, 26.10.2012, str.
3 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/ EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium‐sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 
2003/361/ES z dne 6. maja 2003 o definiciji mikropodjetij ter malih in srednjih podjetij (UL L 124, 20.5.2003, str.
Each measure sets out specific rules to be complied with by the projects or actions that can be financed. 
Preveriti bi bilo treba vse sestavne dele, ki jih je mogoče in primerno preverjati z administrativnimi sredstvi.
Public procurement: Tender process to be followed by public bodies when purchasing goods, works and services above a certain threshold. 
Javna naročila: Razpisni postopek, ki ga morajo upoštevati javni organi pri nabavi blaga, dela in storitev, katerih cena presega določen prag.
The aim is to obtain the best value offer by creating sufficient competition between suppliers and to ensure that contracts are awarded fairly, transparently and without discrimination. 
Cilj je dobiti najugodnejšo ponudbo, in sicer z ustvarjanjem zadostne konkurence med dobavitelji, in zagotoviti, da se naročila oddajo pošteno, pregledno in brez diskriminacije.
Directive 2004/18/EC and Directive 2004/17/EC set out the legal framework for public procurement which needs to be implemented by the national authorities. 
Direktiva 2004/18/ES in Direktiva 2004/17/ES določata pravni okvir za javno naročanje, ki ga morajo izvajati nacionalni organi.
Rural development programme: A document prepared by a Member State or region, and approved by the Commission, to plan and monitor the implementation of the rural development policy. 
Program razvoja podeželja: Dokument, ki ga za načrtovanje in spremljanje izvajanja politike za razvoj podeželja pripravi država članica ali regija, odobri pa Komisija.
It may contain up to 46 different measures and additional sub measures. 
Vsebuje lahko do 46 različnih ukrepov in dodatne podukrepe.
Executive 06 summary I IV The European Union (EU) and Member States allo‐ cated more than 150 billion euro to rural develop‐ ment policy during the 2007–13 programming period. 
Povzetek 06 I IV Evropska unija (EU) in države članice so v programskem obdobju 2007–2013 za politiko za razvoj podeželja namenile več kot 150 milijard EUR.
Implemented under shared management, the total budget was almost equally divided between invest‐ ment measures (mainly supporting investments in tangible and intangible assets) and area‐related aid (compensating farmers for their efforts in carrying out certain farming activities). 
Skupni proračun, ki se je izvajal v okviru deljenega upravljanja, je bil skoraj enakovredno razdeljen med naložbene ukrepe (v glavnem podpora za naložbe v opredmetena in neopredmetena sredstva) in pomoč na površino (nadomestilo kmetom za njihova prizadevanja pri izvajanju nekaterih kmetijskih dejavnosti).
II The Court estimates that the average error rate for rural development expenditure incurred dur‐ ing the past 3 years was 8,2 %4. Investment meas‐ ures accounted for two thirds of this error rate, and area‐related aid accounted for one third. 
II Sodišče ocenjuje, da je povprečna stopnja napake za odhodke na področju razvoja podeželja, ki so nastali v zadnjih treh letih, znašala 8,2 %.4 Naložbeni ukrepi so pomenili dve tretjini te stopnje napake, tretjino pa pomoč na površino.
In this context, this special report aims to describe the main causes of this high error rate and to assess whether the steps taken by the Member States and the Commission will address the identified causes effectively in future. 
S tem posebnim poročilom zato Sodišče želi opisati glavne vzroke za to visoko stopnjo napake in oceniti, ali bodo ukrepi, ki so jih uvedle države članice in Komisija, v prihodnje uspešno obravnavali ugotovljene vzroke.
III The Court concludes that the Commission and the Member States are partially effective in addressing the main causes of the high error rate for rural develop‐ ment. 
III Sodišče je prišlo do zaključka, da so Komisija in države članice delno uspešne pri obravnavi glavnih vzrokov za visoko stopnjo napake na področju razvoja podeželja.
This overall conclusion is mainly based on the assessment that, despite the Commission’s initiatives, Member States’ action plans did not systematically address the weaknesses identified. 
Ta splošni zaključek temelji zlasti na oceni, da kljub pobudam Komisije akcijski načrti držav članic niso sistematično obravnavali ugotovljenih slabosti.
The causes of errors were identified by analysing the sample of 461 payments selected randomly dur‐ ing the audits of legality and regularity for 2011, 2012 and 2013. 
Vzroki za napake so bili ugotovljeni z analizo vzorca 461 plačil, ki so bila naključno izbrana med revizijami zakonitosti in pravilnosti za leta 2011, 2012 in 2013.
Knowledge stemming from the Court’s assessment of the control systems operating in the Member States complemented this first step of the work. 
Ta prva delovna faza je bila dopolnjena z znanjem, pridobljenim z oceno Sodišča glede kontrolnih sistemov, ki delujejo v državah članicah.
In a second step, the Court reviewed the action plans for 10 out of the 27 Member States, and exam‐ ined whether they effectively identified the causes of errors and included remedial action. 
V drugi fazi je Sodišče pregledalo akcijske načrte 10 od 27 držav članic, in preučilo, ali so bili v njih uspešno ugotovljeni vzroki za napake in vanje vključeni popravljalni ukrepi.
This work was completed by assessing the potential impact of the EU legal framework for the 2014–20 programming period on the causes of errors. 
To delo je bilo zaključeno z oceno potencialnega učinka pravnega okvira EU za programsko obdobje 2014–2020 na vzroke za napake.
V Non‐compliance with public procurement rules contributed to one eighth of the error rate. 
V Neskladnost s pravili o javnem naročanju je prispevala k osmini stopnje napake.
The main infringements were unjustified direct award without a competitive procedure, misapplication of selection and award criteria or lack of equal treatment of tender‐ ers. 
Glavne kršitve so bile neupravičena neposredna oddaja naročila brez konkurenčnega postopka, napačna uporaba izbirnih meril in meril za dodelitev ali neenakopravna obravnava ponudnikov.
Lack of knowledge in applying procurement rules and the preference for working with certain suppliers are the main explanations for these situations. 
Glavni razlagi za te primere sta pomanjkanje znanja o uporabi pravil o javnem naročanju in dajanje prednosti delu z nekaterimi dobavitelji.
VI Unintentional breaches of eligibility criteria by public and private beneficiaries accounted for a quarter of the error rate. 
VI To, da so javni in zasebni upravičenci nenamerno kršili merila za upravičenost, je pomenilo četrtino stopnje napake.
Suspected intentional infringements by private beneficiaries contributed to another eighth of the error rate. 
Domnevno namerne kršitve, ki so jih storili zasebni upravičenci, so prispevale še osmino stopnje napake.
The Court found that the measure supporting the processing of agricultural products was the most prone to error, while the measure sup‐ porting the initial setting up of young farmers was not affected by eligibility errors. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je največja verjetnost napake pri ukrepu za podporo predelave kmetijskih proizvodov, na ukrep za pomoč mladim prevzemnikom kmetij pa ni vplivala napaka v zvezi z upravičenostjo.
4 The most likely error rate reported for the entire policy group (rural development, environment, fisheries and health) was 7,7 % for the 2011 financial year, 7,9 % for 2012 and 6,7 % for 2013. 
4 Najverjetnejša stopnja napake, sporočena za celotno skupino politik (razvoj podeželja, okolje, ribištvo in zdravje), je bila 7,7 % za proračunsko leto 2011, 7,9 % za proračunsko leto 2012 in 6,7 % za proračunsko leto 2013.
The error rate for rural development alone is higher than for the other components of the group (for the corresponding figures relating to Rural Development only see also footnote 5 of paragraph 4). 
Stopnja napake na področju razvoja podeželja je višja kot pri drugih delih skupine politik (ločeni podatki za razvoj podeželja so navedeni tudi v opombi 5 v odstavku 4).
Executive summary 07 VII Member States’ control authorities could and should have detected and corrected most of the errors affect‐ ing investment measures (those made both by private and public beneficiaries). 
Povzetek 07 VII Nadzorni organi držav članic bi lahko odkrili in popravili večino napak, ki so vplivale na naložbene ukrepe (tistih, ki so jih storili zasebni in javni upravičenci) in bi to tudi morali storiti.
Control systems are deficient because checks are not exhaustive and are based on insufficient information. 
Kontrolni sistemi so pomanjkljivi, ker pregledi niso izčrpni in ker temeljijo na nezadostnih informacijah.
VIII Area‐related aid generated almost a third of the error rate, the main cause being non‐compliance with farm‐ ing commitments. 
VIII Pomoč na površino je povzročila skoraj tretjino stopnje napake, glavni vzrok je bila neskladnost s kmetijskimi zavezami.
There are three explanations for this situation: low incentives for farmers to comply, a low control rate for commitments and a low sanc‐ tion rate for non‐compliance. 
Za to stanje obstajajo tri razlage: nizke spodbude kmetom za upoštevanje, nizka stopnja kontrole za zaveze in nizka stopnja sankcij za neskladnost.
On the other hand, compensatory payments for less‐favoured areas, with similar characteristics as the measure supporting the setting‐up of young farmers, are less affected by error. 
Po drugi strani pa na kompenzacijska plačila za območja z omejenimi možnostmi, ki imajo podobne značilnosti kot ukrep za pomoč mladim prevzemnikom kmetij, manj vplivajo napake.
IX The action plan exercise initiated by the Commission is a step in the right direction in addressing the causes of error. 
IX Izvajanje akcijskih načrtov na pobudo Komisije je korak v pravo smer pri obravnavi vzrokov za napake.
However, action plans implemented by Member States mainly have a reactive role, and do not system‐ atically address the problems that caused the errors in all the Member States. 
Toda akcijski načrti, ki so jih izvajale države članice, imajo večinoma odzivno vlogo, in ne obravnavajo sistematično problemov, ki so povzročili napake v vseh državah članicah.
Moreover, there is a lack of preventive action against widespread weaknesses at EU level. 
Poleg tega ni dovolj preventivnih ukrepov za zelo razširjene slabosti na ravni EU.
The EU legal framework for the 2014–20 programming period is a potential means of address‐ ing the causes of error. 
Pravni okvir EU za programsko obdobje 2014–2020 je mogoče sredstvo za obravnavanje vzrokov za napake.
However, two stages in the regulatory set‐up which are currently ongoing provide the main potential for reducing errors: the Commis‐ sion’s review and approval of rural development programmes, and the Member States’ implementation of national regulatory frameworks. 
Toda dve fazi regulativne ureditve, ki se izvajata sedaj, sta glavni možnosti za zmanjšanje napak: pregled in odobritev programov razvoja podeželja, ki ju izvaja Komisija, ter nacionalni regulativni okviri, ki jih izvajajo države članice.
X In the context of addressing the causes of error, a recurring finding in this report has been the need to maintain an appropriate balance between the number and complexity of rules, as a transposition of the need to achieve pre‐defined objectives, and the need to guarantee the legality and regularity of spending. 
X Ponavljajoča se ugotovitev v tem poročilu glede obravnave vzrokov za napake je potreba po vzdrževanju ustreznega ravnovesja med številom in zapletenostjo pravil, kar odraža potrebo po doseganju vnaprej določenih ciljev ter potrebo po zagotavljanju zakonitosti in pravilnosti porabe.
In the Court’s opinion, finding the right balance between these two counterweights is the key to the successful implementation of the rural development policy. 
Po mnenju Sodišča je to, da se poišče pravo ravnovesje med tema nasprotjema, ključno za uspešno izvajanje politike za razvoj podeželja.
XI The Court makes the following recommendations: (a) The Commission should complete its corrective actions to date by continuing to focus on the root causes of error for rural development spending. 
XI Sodišče priporoča naslednje: (a) Komisija naj pravočasno zaključi svoje dosedanje popravljalne ukrepe tako, da se še naprej osredotoča na temeljne vzroke za napake pri porabi za razvoj podeželja.
In this regard, preventive and corrective actions should be taken by the Member States where rel‐ evant concerning: public procurement, intentional circumvention of rules and agri‐environment payments. (b) The Commission should closely monitor the im‐ plementation of RDPs and in its conformity audits take account of the applicable rules including those adopted at national level where relevant, in order to reduce the risk of repeating weaknesses and errors encountered during the 2007–13 pro‐ gramming period. (c) The Commission and the Member States should analyse: (i) to what extent the characteristics of a more focused scope, limited eligibility criteria and the use of simplified cost options can be replicated into the design and implementation of an increased number of support measures, without jeopardising the overall objectives of those measures; 
Zato naj države članice po potrebi sprejmejo preventivne in popravljalne ukrepe v zvezi z javnim naročanjem, namernim zaobhaja-njem pravil in kmetijsko-okoljskimi plačili. (b) Komisija naj skrbno spremlja izvajanje programov razvoja podeželja in pri svojih revizijah skladnosti upošteva veljavna pravila, vključno s tistimi, ki so bila sprejeta na nacionalni ravni, kadar je to primerno, da bi zmanjšala tveganje ponavljanja slabosti in napak, ki so se pojavile v programskem obdobju 2007–2013. (c) Komisija in države članice naj analizirajo: (i) koliko je mogoče značilnosti bolj osredotočenega področja uporabe, omejenih meril za upravičenost in uporabe poenostavljenega obračunavanja stroškov uporabiti tudi pri oblikovanju in izvajanju povečanega števila podpornih ukrepov, ne da bi bili pri tem ogroženi splošni cilji teh ukrepov;