natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Defines the scope, objectives, approach, methodology and timetable of the task. 
Opredelitev obsega, ciljev, pristopa, metodologije in časovnega načrta naloge.
Multidisciplinary teams collect evidence on the spot at Commission headquarters and in Member and beneficiary States. 
Multidisciplinarne ekipe zbirajo dokaze na kraju samem na sedežu Komisije ter v državah članicah in upravičenkah.
Clear, structured presentation of main findings and conclusions. 
Jasna in strukturirana predstavitev glavnih ugotovitev in sklepov.
Preparation of recommendations. 
Priprava priporočil.
Confirmation of facts and findings with the auditees. 
Razčiščevanje dejstev in ugotovitev z revidiranci.
Approval of the report by the audit chamber or full Court. 
Revizijski senat ali celotno Sodišče potrdi poročilo.
Publication of the special report in 23 official languages, with the reply of the auditee. 
Objava posebnega poročila v 23 uradnih jezikih z odgovorom revidiranca.
Brief summaries of the 24 special reports produced by the ECA in 2014 are presented over the next few pages under the related headings of the multiannual financial framework for 2014–20, the multiannual budget of the EU. 
Na naslednjih straneh so kratki povzetki 24 posebnih poročil, ki jih je Sodišče pripravilo v letu 2014, pod ustreznimi razdelki večletnega finančnega okvira za obdobje 2014–2020, tj. večletnega proračuna EU.
Our activities 17 Smart and inclusive growth Smart and inclusive growth covers the following two areas. Competitiveness for growth and jobs includes funding for research and innovation; education and training; trans‐European networks in energy, transport and telecommunications; social policy; development of enterpris‐ es; etc. 
Naše dejavnosti 17 Pametna in vključujoča rast Pametna in vključujoča rast zajema dve področji: Konkurenčnost za rast in delovna mesta zajema financiranje za raziskave in inovacije; izobraževanje in usposabljanje; vseevropska omrežja na področjih energetike, prometa in telekomunikacij; socialno politiko; razvoj podjetij itd. Odhodki EU, namenjeni konkurenčnosti za rast in delovna mesta v obdobju 2014–2020 (v tekočih cenah), znašajo 142 milijard EUR ali 13 % skupnega proračuna EU.
Economic, social and territorial cohesion covers regional policy which aims at helping the least developed EU countries and regions to catch up with the rest, strengthening competitiveness of all regions and develop‐ ing cooperation between them. 
Ekonomska, socialna in teritorialna kohezija zajema regionalno politiko, katere cilj je pomagati najmanj razvitim državam in regijam EU, da bi dohitele druge, krepiti konkurenčnost vseh regij in razvijati sodelovanje med njimi.
The EU’s cohesion expenditure planned for 2014–20 — at current prices — is €367 billion, or 34 % of the total EU budget. 
Načrtovani kohezijski odhodki EU za obdobje 2014–2020 (v tekočih cenah) znašajo 367 milijard EUR ali 34 % skupnega proračuna EU.
During 2014, the ECA produced the following special reports in this area. • Effectiveness of EU‐supported public urban transport projects (1/2014) — assessed the implementation and the effectiveness of public urban transport projects co‐financed by EU struc‐ tural funds to find whether they meet user needs and achieve their objectives. 
Leta 2014 je Sodišče za to področje pripravilo naslednja posebna poročila: • Uspešnost projektov javnega mestnega prometa, ki prejemajo podporo EU (1/2014) – V poročilu sta bila ocenjena izvajanje in uspešnost projektov javnega mestnega prometa, sofinanciranih iz strukturnih skladov EU, da bi se ugotovilo, ali zadoščajo potrebam uporabnikov in dosegajo svoje cilje.
The audit found that two thirds of urban trans‐ port projects co‐financed by EU structural funds were underutilised. 
Pri reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da se dve tretjini projektov mestnega prometa, sofinanciranih iz strukturnih skladov EU, premalo uporabljata.
Weaknesses in project design and inadequate mobility policy were two of the main factors. 
Med glavnimi dejavniki so bile slabosti v projektnih zasnovah in neustrezna politika mobilnosti.
This underperformance was gen‐ erally not followed up by the promoters or the national authorities. 
Nosilci projektov ali nacionalni organi v zvezi s premajhno uporabo običajno niso ukrepali.
In general, infrastructure and vehicles for most projects were implemented in accordance with project specifications. 
Izvedba v zvezi z infrastrukturo in prevoznimi sredstvi je pri večini projektov v splošnem potekala v skladu s projektnimi specifikacijami.
Signifi‐ cant delays and cost overruns were found but, once completed, almost all the projects audited met users’ needs. 
Ugotovljene so bile bistvene zamude in prekoračitve stroškov, toda skoraj vsi revidirani projekti so po zaključku zadoščali potrebam uporabnikov.
European cities need to enhance mobility and to reduce congestion, accidents and pollution through local mobility policies. 
Evropska mesta morajo s pomočjo lokalnih politik mobilnosti izboljšati mobilnost ter zmanjšati zastoje, število nesreč in onesnaženost.
The EU allocated €10.7 billion to urban transport for the 2000–06 and 2007–13 periods. 
EU je v obdobjih 2000–2006 in 2007–2013 za mestni promet dodelila 10,7 milijarde EUR.
The projects co‐financed help cities to implement urban transport such as metros, trams and buses. 
Sofinancirani projekti pomagajo mestom pri izvajanju mestnega prevoza, kot so podzemne železnice, tramvaji in avtobusi.
Trams and buses are key methods of urban transport. 
Tramvaji in avtobusi so glavna sredstva mestnega prevoza.
Our activities 18 • Cohesion policy funds support to renewable energy generation — has it achieved good results? 
Naše dejavnosti 18 • Podpora iz skladov kohezijske politike za proizvodnjo energije iz obnovljivih virov – ali je dosegla dobre rezultate?
(6/2014) — assessed the achievements of the two most important funding sources for promoting renewable energy — the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF) — by examining whether funds had been allocated to well‐prioritised, cost‐ effective and mature renewable energy genera‐ tion projects with rational objectives and to what extent these funds had achieved good results in contributing to the EU 2020 target for energy from renewable sources. 
(6/2014) – V poročilu so bili ocenjeni dosežki dveh najpomembnejših virov financiranja za spodbujanje proizvodnje energije iz obnovljivih virov – Evropskega sklada za regionalni razvoj (ESRR) in Kohezijskega sklada (KS) – s preučitvijo, ali so bila sredstva dodeljena projektom proizvodnje energije iz obnovljivih virov, ki so bili dobro prednostno razvrščeni, stroškovno učinkoviti, zreli za izvedbo in so imeli racionalne cilje, ter v kolikšni meri so ta sredstva dosegla dobre rezultate tako, da so prispevala k cilju za energijo iz obnovljivih virov, ki si ga je EU zastavila do leta 2020.
The audited projects delivered outputs as planned and most of them were sufficiently mature and ready for implementation when selected. 
Revidirani projekti so dosegli načrtovane izložke in večina jih je bila ob izboru dovolj zrela in pripravljena za izvedbo.
There were no significant cost overruns or delays, and the renewable energy generation capacities were installed as planned and operational. 
Ni bilo večjih prekoračitev stroškov ali zamud, zmogljivosti za proizvodnjo energije iz obnovljivih virov pa so bile nameščene v skladu z načrti in so delovale.
But the energy production results were not always achieved or not properly measured. 
Cilji v zvezi s proizvodnjo energije pa niso bili vedno doseženi ali izmerjeni.
Overall value for money was limited because cost‐effectiveness was not the guiding principle in planning and implementing the projects and the spending had only limited EU added value. 
Splošna stroškovna učinkovitost je bila omejena, saj ni bila vodilno načelo pri načrtovanju in izvajanju projektov, in poraba je imela le omejeno dodano vrednost EU.
The Council of the European Union has set a bind‐ ing EU target of 20 % in renewable energy in gross final energy consumption by 2020. 
Svet EU je določil zavezujoč cilj EU 20-odstotnega deleža obnovljive energije pri končni bruto porabi energije do leta 2020.
Approximately €4.7 billion was allocated for renewable energy through the ERDF and CF in the 2007–13 period. • Has the ERDF successfully supported the development of business incubators? 
Za obnovljivo energijo je bilo v obdobju 2007–2013 preko ESRR in KS dodeljene približno 4,7 milijarde EUR. • Ali je ESRR uspešno podpiral razvoj podjetniških inkubatorjev?
(7/2014) — assessed whether business incubation facilities co‐financed by the ERDF had successfully sup‐ ported high‐potential start‐up companies. 
(7/2014) – V poročilu je bilo ocenjeno, ali so podjetniški inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešno podpirali zagonska podjetja z visokim potencialom rasti.
The audit found that the EU made a significant financial contribution to the creation of business incubator infrastructure, particularly in Member States in which this type of business support is relatively rare. 
Pri reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da je EU znatno finančno prispevala k ustvarjanju infrastrukture podjetniških inkubatorjev, zlasti v državah članicah, v katerih je bila ta vrsta podpore podjetjem razmeroma redka.
But the performance of audited in‐ cubators was modest. 
Kljub temu pa je bila smotrnost poslovanja revidiranih inkubatorjev skromna.
The provision of incubation services was rather limited due to financial con‐ straints and the low level of incubation activities. 
Zagotavljanje storitev inkubatorjev je bilo zaradi finančnih omejitev in nizke stopnje dejavnosti inkubatorjev dokaj omejeno.
This was mainly because of a lack of management expertise in incubation practices and shortcom‐ ings in management systems. 
Vzrok so bili zlasti pomanjkanje strokovnega znanja o praksah inkubiranja in pomanjkljivosti sistemov upravljanja.
Business incubators aim to support the successful establishment and further development of start‐up enterprises. 
Namen podjetniških inkubatorjev je podpirati uspešno ustanavljanje in nadaljnji razvoj zagonskih podjetij.
As a result, the provision of support to small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) has become an increasingly important political priority over the years. 
Zato je zagotavljanje podpore malim in srednje velikim podjetjem z leti postalo vse pomembnejša politična prednostna naloga.
EU spending on this area amounted to €38 billion in the 2007–13 period. 
Poraba EU na tem področju je v obdobju 2007–2013 znašala 38 milijard EUR.
ERDF co‐financed ‘Delta’ building in the Wrocław Technology Park. Architect: Anna Kościuk. 
ESRR je sofinanciral stavbo „Delta” v tehnološkem parku Wrocław Arhitektka: Anna Kościuk.
Our activities 19 • Is the ERDF effective in funding projects that directly promote biodiversity under the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020? 
Naše dejavnosti 19 • Ali je ESRR uspešen pri financiranju projektov, ki neposredno spodbujajo biotsko raznovrstnost v okviru strategije EU za biotsko raznovrstnost do leta 2020?
(12/2014) — examined whether Member States took advan‐ tage of the available ERDF funding for directly promoting biodiversity, and assessed whether the co‐financed projects were effective in halting biodiversity loss. 
(12/2014) – V poročilu je bilo preučeno, ali so države članice izkoristile razpoložljiva sredstva ESRR za neposredno spodbujanje biotske raznovrstnosti, in ocenjeno, ali so sofinancirani projekti uspešno zaustavljali izgubo biotske raznovrstnosti.
The audit found that the Member States’ take‐up of the ERDF financing for projects was less than for other areas of ERDF spending. 
Pri reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da so države članice možnosti financiranja teh projektov iz ESRR izkoristile manj kot na drugih področjih porabe ESRR.
If the ERDF is to continue to be helpful for delivering the EU strategy for halting biodiversity loss by 2020, the Commission should provide the Member States with more support for implementing specific pro‐ tection and management plans for habitats and species. 
Če naj ESRR še naprej pomaga pri izvedbi strategije EU za zaustavitev izgube biotske raznovrstnosti do leta 2020, bi morala Komisija bolj podpirati države članice pri izvajanju posebnih načrtov za zaščito in upravljanje s habitati in vrstami.
The co‐financed projects were generally in line with national and EU biodiversity priorities. But the assessment of their effectiveness was undermined, as most Member States had neither results indicators nor monitoring systems to as‐ sess the development of habitats and species. 
Sofinancirani projekti so bili na splošno v skladu s prednostnimi nalogami EU v zvezi z biotsko raznovrstnostjo, vendar je oceni njihove uspešnosti škodovalo, da večina držav članic ni imela kazalnikov rezultatov niti sistemov spremljanja, s katerimi bi ocenili razvoj habitatov in vrst.
Protecting biodiversity is a key priority for the EU. 
Zaščita biotske raznovrstnosti je ključna prednostna naloga za EU.
Following the failure to achieve the previous target of halting biodiversity loss in Europe by 2010, the Council endorsed a new strategy up to 2020. €2.8 billion was allocated in the 2007–13 program‐ ming period to the direct promotion of biodiversity and nature protection under the ERDF. • Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e‐commerce been effective? 
Po neuspešnem poskusu zaustavitve izgube biotske raznovrstnosti v Evropi do leta 2010 je Svet potrdil novo strategijo do leta 2020. Za neposredno spodbujanje biotske raznovrstnosti in varstvo narave v okviru sklada ESRR je bilo v obdobju 2007–2013 dodeljene 2,8 milijarde EUR. • Ali je bila podpora Evropskega sklada za regionalni razvoj malim in srednje velikim podjetjem na področju e-trgovanja uspešna?
(20/2014) — assessed whether the operational programmes were a good basis for efficiently supporting e‐commerce measures for SMEs, whether the managing authorities selected and monitored e‐commerce projects properly and whether the e‐commerce projects co‐financed by the ERDF were successfully implemented and provided measurable benefits. 
(20/2014) – V poročilu je bilo ocenjeno, ali so bili operativni programi dobra podlaga za učinkovito podporo ukrepom za e-trgovanje za mala in srednje velika podjetja (MSP), ali so organi upravljanja ustrezno izbrali in spremljali projekte e-trgovanja in ali so se projekti e-trgovanja, ki jih je sofinanciral Evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj, uspešno izvajali in ali so zagotovili merljive koristi.
The audit found that support from the ERDF to SMEs in the field of e‐commerce — buying and selling goods on the Internet — contributed to an increased availability of business services online. 
Pri reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da je podpora ESRR za mala in srednje velika podjetja na področju e-trgovanja (nakupa in prodaje blaga na spletu) prispevala k povečanju razpoložljivosti spletnih poslovnih storitev.
But shortcomings in monitoring made it impossible to assess the extent to which the ERDF support contributed to the achievement of national and EU information technology goals. 
Toda zaradi pomanjkljivosti pri spremljanju je bilo nemogoče oceniti, v kakšnem obsegu je prispevala k doseganju ciljev držav članic in EU za informacijske in komunikacijske tehnologije.
Weak selection procedures by Member States mean that many projects are unlikely to provide value for money. 
Zaradi šibkih izbirnih postopkov držav članic za veliko projektov ni verjetno, da bodo zagotovili stroškovno učinkovitost.
Managers of the programmes focused more on using the money (outputs) than on achieving results. The Commission encourages e‐commerce through its digital agenda for Europe. €3 billion of EU money was budgeted between 2007 and 2013 from the ERDF to help small businesses make better use of ICT. 
Upravitelji programov so se bolj kot na rezultate osredotočali na porabo denarja (izložki). Komisija spodbuja e-trgovanje s svojo Evropsko digitalno agendo. Za spodbujanje uporabe informacijskih in komunikacijskih tehnologij v malih podjetjih so bile iz proračuna EU v obdobju 2007–2013 namenjene 3 milijarde EUR.
ECA video of special report 20/2014, ‘Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e‐commerce been effective?’ — EUauditorsECA on Youtube. 
Videoposnetek, ki ga je pripravilo Sodišče ob posebnem poročilu (20/2014) Ali je bila podpora Evropskega sklada za regionalni razvoj malim in srednje velikim podjetjem na področju e-trgovanja uspešna? – EUauditorsECA na Youtube.
Our activities 20 A performance audit in focus: EU‐funded airport infrastructures: poor value for money (21/2014) Closed part of over‐dimensioned terminal at Fuerteventura airport Air traffic in Europe has been on the rise for years and it is estimated that it will almost double by 2030. 
Naše dejavnosti 20 Predstavitev revizije smotrnosti poslovanja: Letališka infrastruktura, financirana s sredstvi EU: slaba stroškovna učinkovitost (21/2014) Zaprti del prevelikega terminala na letališču Fuerteventura Zračni promet v Evropi se že leta povečuje in po ocenah se bo do leta 2030 skoraj podvojil.
Although EU air transport policy has aimed at overcoming capacity problems by building additional infrastructure, making better use of existing facilities, optimising airport ser‐ vices and integrating other modes of transport, Europe will not be able to meet a large part of this demand due to a shortage of runway and ground infrastructure. 
Čeprav je politika EU na področju zračnega prometa usmerjena v reševanje težav z zmogljivostjo, in sicer z gradnjo dodatne in smotrnejšo rabo obstoječe infrastrukture, optimizacijo letaliških storitev ter boljšo povezanostjo z drugimi vrstami prevoza, Evropa velikega dela tega povpraševanja ne bo mogla zadovoljiti zaradi pomanjkanja vzletno-pri-stajalnih stez in talne infrastrukture.
There are more than 500 commercial airports in Europe, directly and indirectly employing a million people and — together with airlines — contributing more than €140 bil‐ lion to the European economy. 
V Evropi je več kot 500 komercialnih letališč, ki neposredno in posredno zaposlujejo več kot milijon ljudi, skupaj z letalskimi prevozniki pa h gospodarstvu EU prispevajo več kot 140 milijard EUR.
Airport‐related infrastruc‐ ture projects are an important area of spending from the EU budget: the EU allocated some €4.5 billion to such projects over the 2000–13 programme periods, with more than €2.8 billion coming from cohesion policy funds. 
Projekti prometne infrastrukture, povezani z letališči, so pomembno področje porabe proračuna EU: EU jim je v programskih obdobjih 2000– 2013 dodelila približno 4,5 milijarde EUR, od tega več kot 2,8 milijarde EUR iz skladov kohezijske politike.
The ECA undertook a performance audit of this support to examine whether there was a proven need for the in‐ vestments, whether the constructions were completed on time and on budget and whether the new or upgrad‐ ed infrastructure was fully used. 
Sodišče je opravilo revizijo smotrnosti poslovanja pri tej podpori, da bi preučilo, ali je obstajala dokazana potreba po naložbah, ali so bila dela zaključena pravočasno in s predvidenimi sredstvi ter ali se novozgrajena ali nadgrajena infrastruktura uporablja v celoti.
We assessed whether the investments resulted in higher passenger numbers and improved customer service, and whether the funded airports were financially viable. 
Ocenili smo, ali se je zaradi teh naložb povečalo število potnikov in ali so se izboljšale storitve za stranke ter ali so financirana letališča finančno samozadostna.
Our auditors carried out their work between May 2013 and October 2014, focusing on 20 EU‐funded airports in Estonia, Greece, Italy, Poland and Spain. 
Revizorji so delo opravljali med majem 2013 in oktobrom 2014, osredotočili pa so se na 20 letališč v Estoniji, Grčiji, Italiji, na Poljskem in v Španiji, ki jih je financirala EU.
Between them they received more than €600 million of EU money from 2000 to 2013. 
Ta letališča so v obdobju 2000–2013 prejela več kot 600 milijonov EUR sredstev EU.
The team reviewed the relevant legislation, air transport planning documents of the five Member States and publications of the main industry associations. Most importantly, they travelled to the 20 airports to assess and obtain direct evidence on the outputs, use, results and impacts of the EU funding and the financial situation of the airports. 
Člani revizijske ekipe so pregledali relevantno zakonodajo, dokumentacijo o načrtovanju zračnega prometa v teh petih državah članicah in publikacije glavnih panožnih združenj, predvsem pa so obiskali teh 20 letališč, da bi ocenili izložke, rezultate in učinke financiranja EU ter finančni položaj letališč ter pridobili neposredne dokaze o njih.
We concluded that the EU‐funded investments in airports had produced poor value for money. 
Prišli smo do zaključka, da je bila stroškovna učinkovitost naložb v letališča, financirana s sredstvi EU, slaba.
Too many air‐ ports, which were often in close proximity to each other, received funding for similar infrastructure and in many cases such infrastructure proved to be oversized. 
Preveliko število letališč, ki so bila pogosto v neposredni medsebojni bližini, je prejelo sredstva za podobno infrastrukturo, ki je bila v številnih primerih preobsežna.
Only half of the audited airports succeeded in increasing their passenger numbers. Improvements in customer service or regional socioeconomic benefits, such as the cre‐ ation of additional jobs, were either not measured or not supported by evidence. 
Le polovici revidiranih letališč je uspelo povečati število potnikov, izboljšave storitev za stranke in družbeno-gospodarske koristi, kot je ustvarjanje dodatnih delovnih mest, pa se bodisi niso merile bodisi niso bile dokazane.
We also found that seven of the airports were not financially self‐sustainable and will struggle to remain in operation without more public money. 
Ugotovili smo tudi, da sedem letališč ni bilo finančno samozadostnih in bodo le stežka obratovala brez dodatnih javnih sredstev.
For most of the airports audited, our team found lengthy delays in construction and in the delivery of infrastructure. 
Člani naše ekipe so pri večini revidiranih letališč ugotovili dolgotrajne zamude pri gradnji in končni predaji infrastrukture.
Almost half of the airports experienced cost overruns, which meant that the Member States had to spend almost €100 million more from their national budgets than initially envisaged. 
Pri skoraj polovici letališč so nastale prekoračitve stroškov, zato so morale države članice iz svojih nacionalnih proračunov porabiti skoraj 100 milijonov EUR več, kot je bilo prvotno predvideno.
Our activities 21 Funding was not well coordinated by the Member States, as most countries had no strategic long‐term airport development plan. 
Naše dejavnosti 21 Države članice niso dobro usklajevale financiranja, saj jih večina ni imela dolgoročnih strateških načrtov za razvoj letališč.
Moreover, the funding was insufficiently supervised by the Commission, which generally does not know which airports are receiving funding or what sums are involved. 
Poleg tega ga Komisija ni dovolj nadzorovala, saj na splošno nima podatkov o tem, katera letališča prejemajo sredstva in kakšna je višina teh sredstev.
This situation prevents it from having a complete picture of all EU investments in airports and limits its possibilities for monitoring and ensur‐ ing that policies are properly designed and implemented. 
To ji onemogoča celovit pregled vseh naložb EU v letališča in omejuje njene možnosti za spremljanje in zagotavljanje, da so politike ustrezno zasnovane in da se ustrezno izvajajo.
Based on these findings, we recommended that starting with the 2014–20 programme period, the Commission should ensure that Member States only allocate EU funding to airport infrastructure in those airports which are financially viable and for which investment needs have been properly assessed and demonstrated. 
Na podlagi teh ugotovitev smo priporočili, naj Komisija od programskega obdobja 2014–2020 zagotovi, da bodo države članice sredstva EU namenjale le za letališko infrastrukturo na tistih letališčih, ki so finančno samoza-dostna in za katera je bila potreba po naložbah ustrezno ocenjena in dokazana.