natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In addition, for the purpose of checking the delimitation of general government, Eurostat has at its disposal the register of government entities, the EDP Inventory, the questionnaire on government controlled entities classified outside government (available since 2011) and documents on reclassifications requested before EDP visits. 
Poleg tega ima Eurostat za preverjanje razmejitve sektorja država na voljo register državnih subjektov, evidenco virov in metod za postopek v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem, vprašalnik o državno nadziranih subjektih, razvrščenih zunaj sektorja država (na voljo od leta 2011), in dokumente o prerazvrstitvah, ki se zahtevajo pred obiski v okviru postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem.
Moreover, the issue of the delimitation of government is one of the central topics in each EDP visit and thus covered in the mission findings. 
Poleg tega je vprašanje razmejitve sektorja država ena od osrednjih tem na vsakem obisku v okviru postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem in zato zajeto v ugotovitvah misije.
Finally, these records are up to date as all Member States are obliged to report on an annual basis the list of govern‐ ment controlled entities, including information on their NACE classification, liabilities and for the entities with larg‐ est debt the results of the latest market/non‐market tests. 
Nazadnje, te evidence so posodobljene, saj morajo vse države članice letno posredovati seznam državno nadziranih subjektov, vključno z informacijami o njihovi razvrstitvi po klasifikaciji NACE, obveznostmi in, za subjekte z največjim dolgom, rezultati zadnjih preizkusov tržnosti/netržnosti.
Comments on Annex III are provided below. 
Pripombe glede Priloge III so navedene spodaj.
51 The Commission does ensure that Member States apply ESA. 
51 Komisija zagotavlja, da države članice uporabljajo ESR.
To this end, and to ensure consistent treatment across cases and Member States as well as to close possible interpretation gaps, Eurostat has been providing guidance through the MGDD. 
Eurostat v ta namen ter za zagotovitev dosledne obravnave vseh primerov in držav članic ter za odpravo morebitnih vrzeli v razlagi zagotavlja smernice s Priročnikom o javnofinančnem primanjkljaju in dolgu.
The Commission would like to clarify that Eurostat and its Director‐General have sole responsi‐ bility for statistical decisions according to Regulation 223/2009. 
Komisija želi pojasniti, da imata Eurostat in njegov generalni direktor izključno odgovornost za odločitve o statistiki v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št.
Regarding the time spans used for analysing and classifying public units, the Commission considers differences not only as legitimate but necessary as they reflect different legal, administrative or business arrangements. 
Komisija v zvezi s časovnimi obdobji, ki so se uporabila za analizo in razvrščanje javnih enot, meni, da razlike niso samo legitimne, temveč tudi potrebne, ker izražajo različne pravne, upravne ali poslovne ureditve.
Reply of the Commission 110 Box 3 – First indent When it comes to completeness of registers and the analysis of each single entity, Eurostat has exceptionally agreed that in Member States having thousands (or tens of thousands) of smaller entities at local government level, the market‐non‐market test can be done at group level. 
Odgovori Komisije 110 Okvir 3, prva alinea Kar zadeva popolnost registrov in analizo vsakega posameznega subjekta, se je Eurostat izjemoma strinjal, da se lahko preizkus tržnosti/netržnosti v državah članicah, ki imajo na tisoče (ali desettisoče) manjših subjektov na ravni lokalne oblasti, opravi na ravni skupine.
For large and complex units, a detailed analysis is conducted at unit level (and not on a group basis). 
Pri velikih in kompleksnih enotah se opravi podrobna analiza na ravni enote (in ne na ravni skupine).
Eurostat has also agreed on a prudent approach in another Member State. 
Eurostat se je s previdnostnim pristopom strinjal tudi pri drugi državi članici.
Eurostat cannot check individually every single unit in Member States. 
Eurostat ne more preveriti vsake posamezne enote v državah članicah.
Eurostat checks annually the information provided in the questionnaire of government controlled entities classified outside general government, and any other material at hand. 
Eurostat letno preveri informacije iz vprašalnika o državno nadziranih subjektih, razvrščenih zunaj sektorja država, in kakršno koli drugo razpoložljivo gradivo.
Furthermore Eurostat agrees on reclassifications in benchmark revisions provided that there is no or negligible impact on deficit and debt data. 
Poleg tega se Eurostat strinja o prerazvrščanju po spremembi referenčnega merila, če to ne vpliva na podatke o primanjkljaju in dolgu ali če ta vpliv zanemarljiv.
Box 3 – Second indent The Commission considers the ESA95 rules have been respected in the examples included. 
Okvir 3, druga alinea Komisija meni, da so bila v vključenih primerih pravila ESR 95 upoštevana.
Just to take the first example in this section (it applies to all examples, just for the sake of efficiency), it is said in Annex III: ‘one Member State classified the supervisory unit for financial markets, which is an institutional unit, within the general government sector. 
Če vzamemo samo prvi primer v tem oddelku (to velja za vse primere, samo zaradi učinkovitosti), je v Prilogi III navedeno: „ena država članica je nadzorno enoto za finančne trge, ki je institucionalna enota, razvrstila v sektor država.
According to ESA 95, units of this kind should be classified outside the general govern‐ ment sector (namely, as financial auxiliaries within the financial corporations sector). 
V skladu z ESR 95 je treba takšne enote razvrstiti zunaj sektorja država (in sicer kot izvajalce pomožnih finančnih dejavnosti v sektorju finančnih družb).
Other Member States correctly classified these institutional units outside general government’. 
Druge države članice so te institucionalne enote pravilno razvrstile zunaj sektorja država“.
However, supervisory units for financial markets can be classified in general government. 
Vendar je mogoče nadzorno enoto za finančne trge razvrstiti v sektor država.
In addition, it puts into question the methodological treatment agreed by experts in Member States and Eurostat. 
Poleg tega je zaradi tega negotova metodološka obravnava, o kateri so se dogovorili strokovnjaki držav članic in Eurostata.
Box 3 – Third indent Eurostat recommends Member States to analyse and reclassify units every year. 
Okvir 3, tretja alinea Eurostat državam članicam priporoča, naj enote analizirajo in prerazvrstijo vsako leto.
This is currently the case for all units having a debt larger than 0.01% of GDP and all Member States are moving towards a more frequent annual reclas‐ sification schedule also for smaller units. 
To se zdaj izvaja za vse enote, katerih dolg presega 0,01 % BDP, in vse države članice si prizadevajo za pogostejše letno prerazvrščanje tudi pri manjših enotah.
The Commission collects annually the Questionnaire on Government Controlled entities and analyses it to check if all units continue to satisfy the 50% test. 
Komisija letno zbira vprašalnik o državno nadziranih subjektih in ga analizira, da bi preverila, ali lahko vse enote še vedno opravijo 50-odstotni preizkus.
Reply of the Commission 111 53 The Commission uses its risk analysis to select Member States and topics for its dialogue visits. 
Odgovori Komisije 111 53 Komisija uporablja svojo analizo tveganja za izbor držav članic in tem za obiske za dialog.
High‐risk topics have always been included in the agenda for both Upstream Dialogue Visits (UDV) and Standard Dialogue Visits (SDVs) (either coming from the risk assessment or from other sources). 
Teme z velikim tveganjem so vedno vključene na dnevni red predhodnih obiskov za dialog in standardnih obiskov za dialog (izhajajo iz ocene tveganja ali drugih virov).
Apart from the general high‐risk issues which are always part of the mission agendas, specific issues based on risks are also included. 
Poleg splošnih vprašanj z velikim tveganjem, ki so vedno na dnevnem redu misije, so vključena tudi posebna vprašanja na podlagi tveganj.
After UDVs were incorporated in SDVs, the results have been used to identify risky areas which were then addressed during a dialogue visit. 
Ko so bili predhodni obiski za dialog vključeni v standardne obiske za dialog, so se rezultati uporabili za ugotavljanje tveganih področij, ki so bila nato obravnavana na obisku za dialog.
Eurostat considers that it has addressed high risk issues in a visit (e.g. for Italy, the discussions on the recording of GFCF on a cash basis was the result of the risk assessment of 2012). 
Eurostat meni, da na obisku obravnava vprašanja z velikim tveganjem (npr. pri Italiji so bile razprave o evidentiranju bruto investicij v osnovna sredstva na podlagi denarnih sredstev rezultat ocene tveganja iz leta 2012).
While in the past there was no justification for marking a change, in the form of a comment, this practice has already been changed and comments are now mandatory. 
Medtem ko v preteklosti ni bilo utemeljitve za označitev spremembe, in sicer v obliki opombe, se je ta praksa že spremenila in zato so opombe zdaj obvezne.
While the EDP risk assessment exercise is well documented, throughout the annual process, it has been voluntary to provide specific comments on each dimension of the risk assessment exercise. 
Medtem ko je ocena tveganja v okviru postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem dobro dokumentirana v celotnem letnem postopku, je dajanje konkretnih opomb glede posameznega vidika ocene tveganja prostovoljno.
Eurostat agrees that changes in the risk level require more detailed reasoning and comments to be put in writing. 
Eurostat se strinja, da spremembe stopnje tveganja zahtevajo podrobnejšo utemeljitev in pisne opombe.
54 Eurostat considers that the duration of the visits is sufficient to adequately examine data quality issues. 
54 Eurostat meni, da je trajanje obiskov zadostno za ustrezno preučitev vprašanj glede kakovosti podatkov.
If needed, Eurostat has the possibility to prolong the visits or make follow‐up visits. 
Po potrebi lahko obiske podaljša ali opravi nadaljnje obiske.
The Commission considers the ‘number of topics’ is one criterion, but the complexity of an issue and/or the potential impact on EDP data are also important. 
Komisija meni, da je „število tem“ eno od meril, vendar sta pomembna tudi kompleksnost vprašanja in/ali morebiten vpliv na podatke glede postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem.
The Commission underlines that the dialogue visit is not a stand‐alone tool to examine data quality issues. 
Komisija poudarja, da obisk za dialog ni samostojno orodje za preučitev vprašanj glede kakovosti podatkov.
The dialogue visit is rather intended to identify risks or potential problems about the quality of the reported data (Council Regulation 479/2009), whilst the data is assessed biannually in April and October. 
Obisk za dialog je bolj namenjen ugotavljanju nevarnosti in morebitnih problemov glede kakovosti podatkov iz poročila (Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 479/2009), medtem ko se podatki ocenjujejo dvakrat letno, aprila in oktobra.
All dialogue visits are followed up and complemented by the regular assessment work and vice versa. 
Vsem obiskom za dialog sledi nadaljnje ukrepanje in se dopolnjujejo z rednim ocenjevanjem ter obratno.
55 Institutional arrangements and supervisory and control systems have been part of both UDV and SDV agendas, and there is a section in all agendas for visits in order to deal with these issues. 
55 Institucionalni dogovori ter nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi so na dnevnih redih predhodnih obiskov za dialog in standardnih obiskov za dialog, sicer pa vsi dnevni redi obiskov vključujejo oddelek, namenjen reševanju teh vprašanj.
In addition, a dedicated questionnaire on these issues was launched in 2012. 
Poleg tega je bil leta 2012 uveden vprašalnik, namenjen tem vprašanjem.
Finally, additional information on institutional arrangements is provided via the ‘peer review’ exercise conducted on NSIs, the EDP inventories, and the memoranda of understanding signed by the national institutions on EDP. 
Nazadnje se dodatne informacije o institucionalnih dogovorih zagotavljajo z medsebojnimi strokovnimi pregledi nacionalnih statističnih uradov, evidenc virov in metod za postopek v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem ter memorandumov o soglasju, ki jih nacionalne institucije podpišejo glede postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem.
The Commission agrees to analyse how this issue could be further documented in the future. 
Komisija se strinja, da bo analizirala, kako bi bilo mogoče v prihodnje to vprašanje podrobneje dokumentirati.
Reply of the Commission 112 56 It should be pointed out that this observation is calculated using the most extreme cases instead of averages, which would be more appropriate (Figure 6). 
Odgovori Komisije 112 56 Opozoriti je treba, da je to opažanje izračunano na podlagi najskrajnejših primerov, namesto povprečnih, kar bi bilo ustrezneje (slika 6).
Those ‘extremes’ have justification in most cases: for example in the case of Germany the 2013 EDP upstream dialogue visit to Germany comprised two meetings of Eurostat with the national authorities. 
Te „skrajnosti“ so večinoma utemeljene: v primeru Nemčije je na primer predhodni obisk za dialog glede postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem leta 2013 vključeval dva sestanka Eurostata z nacionalnimi organi.
After each meeting provisional findings and action points were drafted, however, the final joint report with the main conclusions and recommendations was prepared once the entire two‐part visit had been completed, i.e. following the second meeting. 
Po vsakem sestanku so bile oblikovane začasne ugotovitve in ukrepi, končno skupno poročilo z glavnimi zaključki in priporočili pa je bilo pripravljeno, ko se je končal celotni dvodelni obisk oziroma po drugem sestanku.
The same reasoning is valid for the Czech Republic: in 2012 the UDV was sent after 14 weeks but was only published after 25 weeks, together with the SDV findings. 
Enaka utemeljitev velja za Češko: leta 2012 je bil predhodni obisk za dialog poslan po 14 tednih, vendar je bil objavljen šele po 25 tednih, skupaj z ugotovitvami standardnega obiska za dialog.
Action points are agreed between Eurostat and the MSs in and after the dialogue visit, and they are transmitted to the Member State the week after the visit (so they are extremely punctual). 
O ukrepih se Eurostat in države članice dogovarjajo med obiskom za dialog in po njem, državi članici pa se posredujejo teden dni po obisku (kar pomeni, da so izredno točni).
Member States commit themselves by agreeing with Eurostat both on content and the deadline. 
Države članice se zavežejo z dogovorom z Eurostatom glede vsebine in roka.
Depending on the nature of the action and whether it has an impact on the deficit and debt data, deadlines are set and closely monitored before each EDP notification. 
Pred vsakim obvestilom o postopku v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem se roki določijo glede na vrsto ukrepa in glede na to, ali ukrep vpliva na podatke o primanjkljaju in dolgu, ter se tesno spremljajo.
The list of pending action points is revised at each visit. 
Seznam ukrepov, ki se izvajajo, se pregleda ob vsakem obisku.
There are some action points which, because of institutional arrangements needed in the country or the need to implement new data collection systems, take more time to be implemented. 
Zaradi institucionalnih dogovorov, potrebnih v državi, ali potrebe po izvajanju novih sistemov zbiranja podatkov je za izvajanje nekaterih ukrepov potrebnega več časa.
In addition, action points are included in the reports of the visits, which are publicly available on the website of Eurostat. 
Poleg tega so ukrepi vključeni v poročila o obiskih, ki so javno dostopna na spletni strani Eurostata.
Action points with impact on the reported deficit and debt data are taken into account in the quality assessment. 
Ukrepi, ki vplivajo na poročane podatke o primanjkljaju in dolgu, se upoštevajo pri oceni kakovosti.
Unresolved actions points on issues with a material impact on deficit and debt may also lead to a reservation. 
Nerešeni ukrepi glede vprašanj, ki pomembno vplivajo na primanjkljaj in dolg, lahko vodijo tudi do pridržka.
57 (b) Methodological issues are regularly discussed with Member States experts in the EDP statistics working group twice per year. 
57 (b) O metodoloških vprašanjih se dvakrat letno redno razpravlja s strokovnjaki držav članic v delovni skupini za statistične podatke glede postopka v zvezi s čezmernim primanjkljajem.
In addition, Eurostat has chaired in recent years a task‐force on the MGDD which meets two‐three times per year in order to agree on an updated version of the Manual. 
Poleg tega Eurostat v zadnjih letih predseduje delovni skupini o Priročniku o javnofinančnem primanjkljaju in dolgu, ki zaseda dvakrat do trikrat letno, da bi se dogovorila o posodobljeni različici Priročnika.
58 Eurostat’s policy is to publish all advice given to Member States. 
58 Politika Eurostata je, da objavi vse nasvete, zagotovljene državam članicam.
However, in case a Member State objects to pub‐ lication due to confidentiality (for example, because it contains business‐sensitive information as guidance is very often on specific cases, or because the operation will not take place after the guidance), Eurostat accepts this. 
Vendar če država članica nasprotuje objavi zaradi zaupnosti (ker na primer vsebuje poslovno občutljive informacije, saj se smernice pogosto nanašajo na konkretne zadeve, ali ker operacija ne bo izvedena po smernicah), se Eurostat s tem strinja.
Eurostat agrees with this observation and, in this context, it is prepared to discuss with Member States how to com‐ municate on advice given, without violating confidentiality. 
Eurostat se strinja s tem opažanjem in je v tem okviru pripravljen z državami članicami razpravljati o tem, kako komunicirati o zagotovljenih nasvetih brez kršenja zaupnosti.
It has already started this process by including informa‐ tion on advice given in the latest report to the EFC. 
Ta postopek je že začel z vključitvijo informacij o zagotovljenih nasvetih v zadnje poročilo Ekonomsko-finančnemu odboru.
Reply of the Commission 113 59 The ability to correctly identify ‘one‐off’’ measures, as defined in the Stability and Growth Pact, is crucial for car‐ rying out fiscal surveillance. 
Odgovori Komisije 113 59 Sposobnost prepoznavanja „enkratnih“ ukrepov, kot so opredeljeni v Paktu za stabilnost in rast, je bistvena za izvajanje fiskalnega nadzora.
Specific guidance, including an indicative and open list of ‘one‐off’ measures was developed in the wake of the 2005 reform of the Stability and Growth Pact, and published in the 2006 Report on Public Finance in the EMU (see Report on Public Finances in EMU 2006: ‘Definition and identification of one‐off and temporary measures’, Section II.4.2, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication423_ en.pdf). 
Posebne smernice, vključno z okvirnim in odprtim seznamom „enkratnih“ ukrepov, so bile oblikovane kot rezultat reforme Pakta za stabilnost in rast leta 2005 ter objavljene v poročilu Javne finance v EMU v letu 2006 (glej poročilo Javne finance v EMU v letu 2006: „Opredelitev in prepoznavanje enkratnih in začasnih ukrepov“, oddelek II.4.2, na voljo na: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication423_en.pdf).
The Commission has since been using this guidance as a point of reference for its surveillance activities. 
Odtlej Komisija te smernice uporablja kot referenčno točko za svoje nadzorne dejavnosti.
The 2006 guidance has been recently extended with the establishing of ‘guiding principles’ and the update of the list of ‘typical’ examples. 
Smernice iz leta 2006 so bile nedavno razširjene z uvedbo „vodilnih načel“ in posodobitvijo seznama „značilnih“ primerov.
This re‐vamped guidance has been published in the 2015 Report on Public Finances in the EMU: ‘One‐off measures – classification principles used in fiscal surveillance’, Section II.3 (published in December 2015), avail‐ able at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/eeip/pdf/ip014_en.pdf). 
Te prenovljene smernice so bile objavljene v Poročilu o javnih financah v EMU v letu 2015: „Enkratni ukrepi – načela razvrščanja, ki se uporabljajo pri fiskalnem nadzoru“, oddelek II.3 (objavljeno decembra 2015), na voljo na: http://ec.europa.eu/ economy_finance/publications/eeip/pdf/ip014_en.pdf.
60 The definition of one‐off measures, as well as an indicative and open list of ‘typical’ cases has been published on the Report on Public Finances in EMU 2006: ‘Definition and identification of one‐off and temporary measures’, Part II, Section 4.2., available at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication423_en.pdf. 
60 Opredelitev enkratnih ukrepov ter okvirni in odprti seznam „značilnih“ primerov sta bila objavljena v poročilu Javne finance v EMU v letu 2006: „Opredelitev in prepoznavanje enkratnih in začasnih ukrepov“, del II, oddelek 4.2, na voljo na: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication423_en.pdf.
The Commission points out that it has recently extended the guidance and published the classification principles used in the identification of ‘one‐off’ measures, as well as an indicative list of ‘standard’ cases in the Report on Pub‐ lic Finances in EMU 2015: ‘One‐off measures – classification principles used in fiscal surveillance’, Section II.3 (published in December 2015), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/eeip/pdf/ip014_en.pdf). 
Komisija opozarja, da je nedavno razširila smernice in objavila načela za razvrščanje, ki se uporabljajo pri prepoznavanju „enkratnih“ ukrepov, ter okvirni seznam „standardnih“ primerov v Poročilu o javnih financah v EMU v letu 2015: „Enkratni ukrepi – načela razvrščanja, ki se uporabljajo pri fiskalnem nadzoru“, oddelek II.3 (objavljeno decembra 2015), na voljo na: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/eeip/pdf/ip014_en.pdf.
It should be emphasised, however, that expert judgement is always required, as the characteristics of each individ‐ ual measure need to be examined carefully on the basis of the classification principles applied by the Commission. 
Vendar je treba poudariti, da je vedno potrebna strokovna presoja, saj je treba temeljito preučiti značilnosti vsakega posameznega ukrepa na podlagi načel za razvrščanje, ki jih uporablja Komisija.
Box 4 Following the list updated in December 2015 (subsequent to the Court’s audit) of ‘standard’ cases of ‘one‐off’ meas‐ ures, as published in the Report on Public Finances in EMU 2015: ‘One‐off measures – classification principles used in fiscal surveillance’, Section II.3, Box 4 does not reflect the current situation. 
Okvir 4 Po seznamu, objavljenem decembra 2015 (po reviziji Sodišča), in sicer seznamu „standardnih“ primerov „enkratnih“ ukrepov, kot je bil objavljen v Poročilu o javnih financah v EMU v letu 2015: „Enkratni ukrepi – načela razvrščanja, ki se uporabljajo pri fiskalnem nadzoru“, oddelek II.3, okvir 4 ne kaže sedanjega stanja.
Deficit‐increasing measures The Commission underlines that the budgetary costs of such exceptional events tend to be larger relative to the size of the economy in smaller countries. 
Ukrepi, ki povečujejo primanjkljaj Komisija poudarja, da so proračunski stroški takih izrednih dogodkov običajno razmeroma višji glede na velikost gospodarstva v manjših državah.
Reply of the Commission 114 61 The Commission points out that in order to be able to better capture the economic reality, the commonly agreed rules of the SGP include provisions designed to respond to and accommodate unanticipated developments and unexpected events. 
Odgovori Komisije 114 61 Komisija opozarja, da skupno dogovorjena pravila Pakta za stabilnost in rast zaradi boljšega upoštevanja gospodarskega stanja vključujejo določbe, oblikovane za odzivanje na nepredviden razvoj dogodkov in nepričakovane dogodke ter za prilagajanje nanje.