natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The CommissionŐs assessment of the significance of tobacco production in relation to employment in the producing regions and the proposal to continue with the production aid scheme should have been based on up-to-date information from Member States. 
Ocena Komisije v zvezi s pomenom proizvodnje tobaka za zaposlovanje v regijah, kjer proizvajajo tobak, in njen predlog o nadaljevanju sheme proizvodne pomoči bi morala temeljiti na najnovejših informacijah držav članic.
The Court found that the CommissionŐs 1996 estimate (used in the context of its reform proposals) of 170 000 full-time workers being dependent on tobacco production was based on data relating to 1986 (for man hours per hectare) and to 1993 (for areas under cultivation). 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je ocena Komisije iz leta 1996 (uporabljena v kontekstu njenih reformnih predlogov), da je od proizvodnje tobaka odvisnih 170 000 polno zaposlenih delavcev, temeljila na podatkih, ki so se nanašali na leti 1986 (kar zadeva število delovnih ur na hektar) in 1993 (kar zadeva obdelovalne površine).
More up-to-date information was not requested from Member States. 
Od držav članic ni zahtevala bolj posodobljenih informacij.
Since this estimate was not reliable, the Court compared it with the most recent data available for the year 1999 in the CommissionŐs 2003 evaluation report. 
Ker ta ocena ni bila zanesljiva, jo je Sodišče primerjalo z najnovejšimi razpoložljivimi podatki za leto 1999 iz ocenjevalnega poročila Komisije za leto 2003.
This report suggested that around 64 000 full-time workers were involved in producing 90 % of the EUŐs production. 
Glede na to poročilo naj bi pri proizvajanju 90 % proizvodnje EU sodelovalo približno 64 000 polno zaposlenih delavcev.
The Court estimates this meant about 72 000 were involved overall. 
Sodišče ocenjuje, da to pomeni, da jih je bilo v celoti vključenih približno 72 000.
This is less than half of the CommissionŐs estimate made three years earlier. 
To pomeni več kakor pol manj od ocene Komisije izpred treh let.
In the opinion of the Court, this is likely to be closer to the situation actually prevailing in 1996 when the Commission made its proposals. 
Po mnenju Sodišča je to verjetno bliže dejanskemu stanju v letu 1996, ko je Komisija izdelala svoje predloge.
Applying the total budget of about 1 000 million euro per year to the estimated 72 000 full-time workers, aid represents 13 653 euro per person. 
Če celotni proračun, približno 1 000 milijonov EUR na leto, razdelimo na ocenjenih 72 000 polno zaposlenih delavcev, znaša pomoč 13 653 EUR na osebo.
The difference with the number of 7 600 euro mentioned by the Commission is due to the fact that it uses a number of working units from a different source whereas the Court uses a number based on figures verified by the external evaluator contracted by the Commission. 
Do razlike med to številko in 7 600 EUR, ki jih omenja Komisija, je prišlo zato, ker Komisija uporablja število delovnih enot iz drugega vira, Sodišče pa število, ki temelji na številkah, ki jih je preveril zunanji ocenjevalec, ki ga je najela Komisija.
Finally, the Commission considered that tobacco production was important for the entire populationŐs livelihood in some producing areas. 
In naposled, Komisija je bila mnenja, da je proizvodnja tobaka pomembna za preživetje celotnih populacij v nekaterih proizvodnih območjih.
This conclusion was based on statements from Member States. 
Ta sklep je temeljil na izjavah držav članic.
When questioned during the audit, Member States were unable to produce any evidence for their statements. 
Ko so bile države članice med revizijo povprašane o tem, svojih izjav niso mogle podpreti z dokazi.
18. missionŐs management derive from the Financial Regulation and focused on whether: The criteria against which the Court examined the Com-(a) mobilisation of resources was preceded by an evaluation of the costs and benefits likely to be involved; (b) market objectives were quantified and progress monitored; (c) the budget was used in such a way as to ensure sound financial management in particular economy and cost effectiveness; (d) operations were subject to regular review during the annual budgetary process so that their continued justification could be verified. 
18. misije, izhajajo iz Finančne uredbe, osredotočeni pa so bili na vprašanja, ali: Kriteriji, po katerih je Sodišče pregledalo upravljanje Ko-(a) je bila pred sprostitvijo sredstev izvedena ocena pričakovanih stroškov in koristi; (b) so bili tržni cilji količinsko opredeljeni, napredek pa nadziran; (c) je bil proračun porabljen v skladu z načeli dobrega finančnega poslovodenja, še posebej upoštevaje gospodarnost in stroškovno učinkovitost; (d) so bile dejavnosti v okviru letnega proračunskega procesa podvržene rednim pregledom, tako da je bilo mogoče preveriti njihovo nadaljnjo upravičenost.
The main sources of audit evidence were: (a) interviews with staff in tobacco-related Commission services, the competent national authorities, producers and processors and other relevant parties acting in the tobacco market; (b) documentation obtained from the Commission, Member States, and other informed sources; (c) on-the-spot examinations in Germany, Greece, Spain, France and Italy who, between them, receive 97,7 % of the premiums; the transactions examined covered 20 producer groups representing some 40 % of EU tobacco producers. 
Glavni viri revizijskih dokazov so bili: (a) pogovori z osebjem v službah Komisije, pristojnih za področje tobaka, pristojnimi nacionalnimi oblastmi, proizvajalci in predelovalci ter drugimi pomembnimi udeleženci na trgu tobaka; (b) dokumentacija, pridobljena pri Komisiji, državah članicah in drugih obveščenih virih; (c) preiskave na kraju samem v Nemčiji, Grčiji, Španiji, Franciji in Italiji, ki so skupaj prejemnice 97,7 % premij; pregledane transakcije so zajele 20 skupin proizvajalcev, kar pomeni kakih 40 % proizvajalcev tobaka v EU.
PREPARATION FOR THE 1998 REFORM 20. 
PRIPRAVA NA REFORMO IZ LETA 1998 20.
The Court examined the process through which the Commission prepared its reform proposal and noted that it had been prepared on certain key assumptions. 
Sodišče je preučilo postopek, v okviru katerega je Komisija pripravila svoj predlog za reformo, in ugotovilo, da je bil reformni predlog pripravljen na podlagi določenih ključnih predpostavk.
These were that tobacco was of material importance for employment and the entire populationŐs livelihood in some areas; alternative cultivation was not viable; the existing market imbalance and the need for significant support was attributable to the poor quality of tobacco produced which resulted in low prices being obtained. 
Te predpostavke so bile, da je tobak na nekaterih območjih bistvenega pomena za zaposlovanje in za življenjski standard celotnih populacij, da proizvodnja alternativnih pridelkov ni rentabilna ter da je obstoječa tržna neravnovesja in potrebo po precejšnji podpori mogoče pripisati slabi kakovosti proizvedenega tobaka, katere posledica so nizke cene.
17.2.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 41/7 The justification for continuing to support tobacco production was not soundly based 26. 
17.2.2005 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 41/7 Upravičenost nadaljnje podpore proizvodnji tobaka ni bila dobro utemeljena 26.
When preparing the new policy, the Commission concluded that, if quality did not improve, EU production was doomed in the medium term. 
Ko je Komisija pripravljala novo politiko, je sklenila, da je proizvodnja EU srednjeročno obsojena na propad, če se kakovost ne bo izboljšala.
It considered that the EU still had the potential to produce better quality tobacco, and therefore decided to provide an incentive by linking premium to the quality produced. 
Menila je, da EU še lahko proizvaja tobak boljše kakovosti, in se zato odločila, da bo to spodbudila tako, da bo premija povezana s kakovostjo proizvoda.
The Commission assumed that the market price would reflect the quality of tobacco. 
Komisija je domnevala, da se bo v tržni ceni zrcalila kakovost tobaka.
However this did not reflect the reality of the market and other errors were made in interpreting the data used. 
Vendar to ni ustrezalo dejanskemu stanju na trgu, pri razlagi uporabljenih podatkov pa so bile storjene še druge napake.
Firstly, the Commission based its policy on the assumption that EU production of certain variety groups could meet EU demand if a larger proportion of better quality tobacco was produced, thus reducing the mismatch between production and demand. 
Prvič, Komisija je svojo politiko oprla na predpostavko, da bi lahko proizvodnja EU določenih skupin sort tobaka zadostila povpraševanju v EU, če bi povišali delež kakovostnejšega tobaka in tako zmanjšali neskladje med proizvodnjo in povpraševanjem.
The Commission did not take sufficiently into account however, that EU consumer demand had switched from dark cigarettes, produced from dark air-cured tobaccos, to American and English blends which require tobacco which cannot be produced in the EU. 
Vendar Komisija ni dovolj upoštevala, da je povpraševanje porabnikov v EU prešlo od temnih cigaret, narejenih iz dark air-cured tobakov, k ameriškim in angleškim mešani-cam, za katere je potreben tobak, ki ga v EU ni mogoče proizva-jati.
Only imported tobacco varieties offered the qualities of aroma and taste which are required. 
Zahtevano aromo in okus so ponujale zgolj uvožene sorte tobaka.
These qualities derived from agronomic and climatic conditions prevailing in the countries of origin. 
Te značilnosti so izhajale iz agronomskih in klimatskih razmer, ki prevladujejo v izvornih državah.
Because the EU cannot produce certain varieties of tobacco required, the possibility to match production to EU demand was limited. 
Ker EU ne more proizvajati določenih zaželenih sort tobaka, je bila možnost, da bi se proizvodnja prilagodila povpraševanju v EU, omejena.
Secondly, the CommissionŐs conclusion that modulation of the premium in relation to price would improve quality was based on its assessment that the higher prices obtained for tobacco originating outside the EU were uniquely a reflection of its superior quality. 
Drugič, sklep Komisije, da bo prilagajanje premije glede na ceno izboljšalo kakovost, je temeljil na njeni oceni, da višje cene tobaka, ki ne prihaja iz EU, odsevajo izključno njegovo večjo kakovost.
Accordingly the Commission considered that, if tobacco produced in the EU was of better quality producers would receive better prices. 
V skladu s tem je Komisija menila, da bi proizvajalci dosegli boljše cene, če bi bil tobak, proizveden v EU, boljše kakovosti.
However the price comparison it made between the high non-EU prices and the lower internal prices was not reliable for the following reasons: (a) the comparison of EU and non-EU market prices in those tobacco producing countries selected for comparison, Malawi, Zimbabwe and the USA, did not take account of the fact that EU prices were subsidised through aid and that non-EU prices were maintained at relatively higher levels because of price support through production restrictions; (b) the Commission had no assurance that the export prices it used to value raw tobacco sold represented the value of the sales. 
Vendar njena cenovna primerjava med visokimi cenami zunaj EU in nižjimi notranjimi cenami ni bila zanesljiva iz naslednjih razlogov: (a) primerjava med tržnimi cenami v EU in zunaj EU v izbranih državah proizvajalkah – Malavi, Zimbabve in ZDA – ni upoštevala dejstva, da so cene v EU subvencionirane prek pomoči in da cene zunaj EU ostajajo na relativno višjih ravneh zaradi cenovne podpore, ki temelji na omejevanju proizvodnje; (b) Komisija ni imela nikakršnega zagotovila, da izvozne cene, ki jih je uporabila za vrednotenje prodanega surovega tobaka, predstavljajo dejansko prodajno vrednost.
Tobacco is often sold initially to multinational companies and traded within them (e.g. for tax reasons), before being sold to manufacturers at a higher price. 
Tobak velikokrat najprej prodajo multinacionalnim družbam, ki z njim med seboj trgujejo (denimo zaradi davčnih razlogov), šele nato pa ga po višji ceni prodajo proizvajalcem tobačnih izdelkov.
It is the lower price generated by the initial sale and export which is transmitted by the Member States and used by the Commission. 
Pri ceni, ki so jo posredovale države članice, Komisija pa uporabila, gre za to nižjo ceno, zaračunano pri prvi prodaji in iz-vozu.
This lower price does not reflect the market value of raw tobacco and therefore it can not be used to reflect the tobacco quality; (c) the prices used by the Commission in the comparison did not always reflect the total payments made by first processors to producers for their tobacco. 
Ta nižja cena ne izkazuje tržne vrednosti surovega tobaka in je potemtakem ni mogoče uporabiti kot pokazatelj kakovosti tobaka; (c) cene, ki jih je Komisija uporabila za primerjavo, niso vselej izkazovale celotnih plačil prvih predelovalcev proizvajalcem tobaka.
For example they did not include the additional amounts sometimes paid by first processors to growers or benefits in kind (which can account for up to 28 % of the price); (d) the Commission made errors in comparing import and export prices because the prices used for imports are on a CIF (cost insurance freight) basis whereas the export prices of EU tobacco are on a FOB (free on board) basis. 
Tako npr. niso vključevale dodatnih zneskov, ki so jih prvi predelovalci včasih plačali pridelovalcem, ali podobnih ugodnosti (ki lahko znašajo do 28 % cene); (d) Komisija je naredila napake pri primerjanju uvoznih in izvoznih cen, saj so cene za uvoz določene na podlagi cene CIF – stroški, zavarovanje in prevoznina (Cost Insurance Freight), cene za izvoz EU tobaka pa na podlagi cene FOB – franko la-dja (Free on Board).
The CommissionŐs advisory Committee (9) indicated that price was affected by factors other than quality such as movements in exchange rates, stock levels and major releases of stock onto the world market by non-EU producers. 
Svetovalni odbor (9) Komisije je nakazal, da na ceno poleg kakovosti vplivajo še drugi dejavniki, denimo spremembe valutnih razmerij, stanje zalog in velike sprostitve zalog proizvajalcev izven EU na svetovni trg.
Moreover, it had advised the Commission that the absence of an objective quality grading system was an obstacle to implementing a policy which relied on measuring quality. 
Poleg tega je Komisijo opozoril, da predstavlja dejstvo, da ni na voljo objektivnega sistema za ocenjevanje kakovosti, oviro pri uveljavljanju politike, ki se opira na merjenje kakovosti.
Because of these failings the CommissionŐs market analysis did not provide policy-makers with a sufficiently comprehensive and balanced understanding of the market to guide their selection of the market measures. 
Zaradi teh pomanjkljivosti tržna analiza Komisije oblikovalcem politike ni priskrbela dovolj obširnega in uravnoteženega poznavanja trga, da bi lahko vodila njihovo izbiro tržnih ukrepov.
The possibility of alternative cultivation 31. 
Možnost pridelave alternativnih kultur 31.
The Commission argued that, in some cases, alternative cultivation was not possible. 
Komisija je trdila, da v nekaterih primerih pridelava alternativnih kultur ni mogoča.
For example in Greece, sun-cured varieties were grown under conditions that made the growing of alternative crops impossible. 
V Grčiji, denimo, so sorte sun-cured gojili v razmerah, v katerih drugih kultur ne bi bilo mogoče go-jiti.
However, a pilot project (10) for the Commission concluded in 1995 that various alternative crops could be grown with good results (11). 
Vendar pa je pilotski projekt (10) Komisije leta 1995 pripeljal do ugotovitve, da bi bilo mogoče z dobrimi rezultati gojiti različne druge kulture (11).
The CommissionŐs analysis did not take into account changes in the character of the market 32. 
Analiza Komisije ni upoštevala sprememb značaja trga 32.
The post 1998 CMO continued to be based on the assumption that first processors were independent in setting the terms of the cultivation contract prices negotiated with producers. 
Skupna ureditev trga je po letu 1998 še naprej temeljila na predpostavki, da so prvi predelovalci neodvisni pri določanju pogojev oz. cen v okviru pridelovalnih pogodb, izpogajanih s proizvajalci.
This assumption was unrealistic since the situation had changed. 
Ta predpostavka ni bila realna, saj se je stanje spremenilo.
There had been a concentration of purchasing in the hands of a small number of multinational first processors, merchants and manufacturers and the latter had become increasingly dominant in price setting. 
Prišlo je namreč do koncentracije nakupov v rokah majhnega števila multinacionalnih prvih predelovalcev, trgovcev in proizvajalcev, pri čemer so slednji pridobivali čedalje večji vpliv pri določanju cen.
(9) The Standing Group on tobacco set up under the Advisory Committee on Specialist Products pursuant to Commission Decision 98/235/EC. 
(9) Stalna skupina za tobak, ki jo je ustanovil Svetovalni odbor za posebne proizvode v skladu z Odločbo Komisije 98/235/ES.
This Group comprises experts representing producers, traders, first processors, manufacturers and consumers. 
V tej skupini so strokovnjaki, ki zastopajo proizvajalce, trgovce, prve predelovalce, proizvajalce tobačnih izdelkov in porabnike.
(10) Commission Decision C(92) 3126 3.12.1992 for a pilot and demonstration project according to Article 8 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4256/88 (OJ L 374, 31.12.1988, p. 
(10) Odločba Komisije C(92) 3126 3.12.1992 o pilotskem in predstavitvenem projektu v skladu s členom 8 Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 4256/88 (UL L 374, 31.12.1988, str.
(Project No 92.EL.06002). 
(Projekt št. 92.EL.06002.)
(11) Helmico SA (1995) Final Report on Project No 92 EL.06002. 
(11) Helmico SA (1995) Končno poročilo o Projektu št. 92 EL.06002.
C 41/8 EN Official Journal of the European Union 17.2.2005 33. 
C 41/8 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 17.2.2005 33.
The Directorates-General for Agriculture and Fisheries received, in February 1997, a joint letter from producers and cooperative unions indicating that the problem of low prices was attributable to the oligopolistic structure of the processing market but this matter was not investigated at the time. 
Generalna direktorata za kmetijstvo in ribištvo sta februarja 1997 prejela pismo proizvajalcev in zadružnih sindikatov, glede na katero je bilo mogoče problem nizkih cen pripisati oligopolni strukturi predelo-valnega trga, vendar tega tedaj niso preučili.
The CourtŐs audit subsequently found out that anti-competitive practices existed (see paragraphs 61 to 71). 
Revizija Sodišča je pozneje odkrila, da so obstajale protikonkurenčne prakse (glej odstavke 61–71 spodaj).
In its Special Report No 8/1993, the Court had already noted that the increasing involvement of producer groups in first processing had permitted them to limit manufacturersŐ influence over prices. 
8/1993 je Sodišče že opozorilo, da je naraščajoča vpletenost skupin proizvajalcev v prvo predelavo slednjim omogočila, da omejijo vpliv proizvajalcev tobačnih izdelkov na cene.
The CommissionŐs 1996 analysis did not recognise the negative implications for competition arising from the prohibition, in 1993, of such groups from carrying out first processing (12). 
Analiza Komisije iz leta 1996 ni zaznala negativnih vplivov na konkurenco, izhajajočih iz dejstva, da je bilo leta 1993 takim skupinam prepovedano izvajati prvo predelavo (12).
Insufficient alignment of agriculture and other policies 34. 
Nezadostna uskladitev kmetijske politike z drugimi politikami 34.
The tobacco CMO contains policy objectives and measures which affect other policy areas. 
Skupna ureditev trga tobaka vsebuje politične cilje in ukrepe, ki vplivajo na področja delovanja drugih politik.
It is important to ensure coherence between them and this is usually achieved through inter-service consultation. 
Pomembno je zagotoviti usklajenost med njimi, kar je ponavadi doseženo s posvetovanji med službami.
Not all relevant services however, were consulted during the preparation of the CommissionŐs proposals (Directorate-General for Development, Directorate-General for Competition). 
Vendar se Komisija pri pripravi predlogov ni posvetovala z vsemi relevantnimi službami (z Generalnim direktoratom za razvoj, z Generalnim direktoratom za konkurenco).
The export of a substantial part of EU subsidised tobacco at very low prices was not discussed with the Directorate-General for Development and Humanitarian Aid in terms of its potentially adverse effect on the exports of developing countries. 
Tako v zvezi z izvozom precejšnjega dela tobaka, subvencioniranega s strani EU, po zelo nizkih cenah ni bila opravljena razprava z Generalnim direktoratom za razvoj in humanitarno pomoč glede morebitnega negativnega učinka na izvoz držav v razvoju.
Such exports are crucial to EU efforts to improve the economic situation of these countries. 
Tak izvoz pa je ključnega pomena za prizadevanja EU za izboljšanje gospodarskega stanja v teh državah.
For example, the Commission grants development aid to small-scale tobacco producers in Malawi where raw tobacco accounts for 70 % of all export income. 
Tako denimo Komisija dodeljuje razvojno pomoč malim proizvajalcem tobaka v Malaviju, kjer surovi tobak predstavlja 70 % vseh dohodkov od izvoza.
On the other hand, the CMO supports EU production, most of which is not in demand in the EU and therefore exported. 
Na drugi strani skupna ureditev trga podpira proizvodnjo EU, po kateri v EU večinoma ni povpraševanja in jo posledično izvažajo.
This reduces the export possibilities of developing countries. 
To zmanjšuje možnosti izvoza za države v razvoju.
A report produced in 1994 for the Directorate-General for Environment on eco-responsibility and the common agricultural policy pointed out that tobacco types had varying irrigation and nitrogen application needs and thus impacted differently on the environment. 
Poročilo o „Okoljski odgovornosti in skupni kmetijski politiki“ (Eco-responsibility and the Common Agricultural Policy), izdelano leta 1994 za Generalni direktorat za okolje, je poudarilo, da različne vrste tobaka potrebujejo različno intenzivno namakanje in gnojenje z dušikom ter posledično različno vplivajo na okolje.
The CMOŐs premium system encourages shifts in production from sun-cured and dark air-cured towards flue-cured and light air-cured. 
Sistem premij v okviru skupne ureditve trga spodbuja prehod od sun-cured in dark air-cured tobakov k flue-cured in light air-cured tobakom.
This leads to undesirable environmental impacts as they require higher levels of irrigation and/or fertiliser. 
To privede do neželenih učinkov za okolje, saj slednje vrste tobakov potrebujejo več namakanja in/ali gnojil.
Flue-curing also involved higher energy consumption. Such changes are incompatible with both the CommissionŐs overall environmental objectives and those specific to the tobacco (12) Regulation (EEC) No 84/93 (OJ L 12, 20.1.1993, p. 
Vročezračno sušenje pomeni tudi večjo porabo energije. Te spremembe niso združljive ne s splošnimi okoljskimi cilji Komisije ne (12) Uredba (EGS) št. 84/93 (UL L 12, 20.1.1993, str.
The Court noted that, for the 1998 reform, the Commission did not fully take account of the Directorate-General for the EnvironmentŐs reservations. 
Sodišče je opozorilo, da Komisija pri reformi iz leta 1998 ni v celoti upoštevala zadržkov Generalnega direktorata za okolje.
However, it was the main argument for its proposal for phasing out raw tobacco production subsidies presented to the Gteborg European Council in 2001. 
Toda prav ti so bili njen glavni argument za predlagano opuščanje subvencij za proizvodnjo surovega tobaka, predstavljeno na Evropskem svetu v Göteborgu leta 2001.
The Commission failed to draw CouncilŐs attention to the advice given by the Directorate-General for Customs and Indirect Taxation (Taxation and Customs Union DG) that, subsidies impact on retail prices (reduce them). 
Komisija Sveta tudi ni opozorila na nasvet Generalnega direktorata za carino in posredno obdavčenje (GD za obdavčenje in carinsko unijo), da subvencije vplivajo na maloprodajne cene (jih znižujejo).