natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
EN 88 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2011 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 3.47. WhilsttheCourt’sownre-performanceofEAGFarea inspections carried out in Bulgaria, Romania, Greece and the Netherlands (37) showed weaknesses in the quality of national inspections, the respective certification bodies reported that the quality of inspections was good (38) or at least adequate (39). 
88 UradnilistEvropskeunije 10.11.2011 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 3.47 Čeprav so ponovni inšpekcijski pregledi za področje EKJS, ki jih je Sodišče izvedlo v Bolgariji, Romuniji, Grčiji in na Nizozemskem (37), pokazali slabosti v kakovosti nacionalnih inšpekcijskih pregledov, so certifikacijski organi teh držav poročali, da je njihova kakovost dobra (38) ali vsaj ustrezna (39).
3.48. Furthermore,EUlegislationrequiresthecertification bodies to be operationally independent from the paying agencies in order to avoid any potential conflict of interest. 
3.48 PolegtegazakonodajaEUzahteva,dasocertifikacijski organi pri svojem delu neodvisni od plačilnih agencij, da bi se izognili morebitnemu navzkrižju interesov.
Whilst in most Member States the certification body function has been assigned to either the national audit office, a private audit company or the internal audit department of the ministry of finance, the Netherlands have assigned this function to the internal audit department of the Ministry of Agriculture which the Court considers not to be independent from the authorities implementing the CAP. 
V večini držav članic je funkcija certifikacijskega organa dodeljena nacional­ nemu revizijskemu uradu, zasebni revizijski družbi ali oddelku za notranjo revizijo na ministrstvu za finance, na Nizozem­ skem pa so to funkcijo dodelili notranjemu revizijskemu oddelku na ministrstvu za kmetijstvo, za katerega Sodišče meni, da ni neodvisen od organov, ki izvajajo SKP.
The audit examined the internal control system of DG ENV. 
Pri reviziji je bil pregledan sistem notranjih kontrol GD ENV.
Internal Control System of DG ENV 3.50. Thirtyrandomlyselectedpaymentsfundedbythe LIFE+ programme were tested. 
Sistem notranjih kontrol GD ENV 3.50 Preizkušenih je bilo 30 naključno izbranih plačil, financiranih iz programa LIFE+.
The audit revealed that key controls were not adequately documented with the risk that such controls are not performed. 
Revizija je pokazala, da ključne kontrole niso bile ustrezno dokumentirane, kar pomeni tveganje, da se takšne kontrole ne izvajajo.
Threeoutofthe30paymentstestedrelatetogrants awarded to the OECD. 
3.51 Triod30preizkušenihplačilsenanašajonadonacije, dodeljene OECD.
DG Environment did not check the supporting documents for costs incurred, and considered these costs as eligible on the sole basis of their description in the final report. 
GD za okolje ni preveril dokazil za nastale stroške in jih je štel za upravičene izključno na podlagi njiho­ vega opisa v končnem poročilu.
However, the final report did not provide sufficient information to determine whether the costs had actually been incurred and were eligible. _____________ (37) See example 3.4. 
Vendar Komisija ugotavlja, da Sodišče ni odkrilo ničesar, na podlagi česar bi se lahko sklepalo, da se je tveganje neodvisnosti uresničilo. _____________ (37) Glej primer 3.4.
(38) Greece and Netherlands. 
(38) Grčija in Nizozemska.
(39) Bulgaria and Romania. 
(39) Bolgarija in Romunija.
3.50. Each financial and technical agent aknowledges he/she has performed the necessary controls under his responsibillity by signing the transactions. 
SL 3.50 Vsak finančni in tehnični uradnik potrdi izvedbo potrebnih kontrol v njegovi pristojnosti s podpisom transakcij.
A number of notes for the files, exchange of e-mails and handwritten notes demonstrate that files are checked. 
Številne opombe za dokumentacijo, izmenjava elektronske pošte in ročno napisane opombe dokazujejo, da se dokumentacija pregleduje.
The Commission considers its internal control system as reliable. 
Komisija šteje svoj sistem notranjih kontrol za zanesljiv.
However, it will continue to improve the documentation of some key controls. 
Kljub temu bo še naprej izboljševala dokumentacijo nekaterih ključnih kontrol.
3.51. The accounting, internal control, audit and procurement procedures of OECD have been checked by the Commission in the framework of Article 53d of the Financial Regulation and it offers guarantees equivalent to internationally accepted standards. 
3.51 Komisija je v skladu s členom 53(d) finančne uredbe pregle­ dala računovodske postopke, postopke notranje kontrole, revizijske postopke in postopke za oddajo javnega naročila OECD, pri čemer zagotavlja jamstva, enakovredna mednarodno sprejetim standardom.
The final report was considered acceptable taking into account the specific control arrangements defined in the Framework agreement of 2006 between the Commission and OECD. 
Končno poročilo se je ob upoštevanju posebnih kontrolnih ureditev, opredeljenih v okvirnem sporazumu za leto 2006 med Komisijo in OECD, štelo za sprejemljivo.
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 89 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S RELIABILITY OF COMMISSION MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIONS 3.52. Annex 3.3 contains a summary of the results of the review of Commission management representations, notably the annual activity reports (AAR) and declarations by Directors-General, for Commission DG AGRI, CLIMA, ENV, MARE and SANCO. 
SL 10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 89 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A ZANESLJIVOST POSLOVODSKIH PREDSTAVITEV KOMISIJE 3.52 V Prilogi 3.3 so povzeti rezultati pregleda poslovod­ skih predstavitev Komisije, zlasti letnih poročil o dejavnostih in izjav generalnih direktorjev, za generalne direktorate Komisije AGRI, CLIMA, ENV, MARE in SANCO.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 3.52. In this annex the Court states that DG ENV has lifted a reservation based on assumptions that are not proven. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 3.52 V tej prilogi Sodišče navaja, da je GD ENV umaknil pridržek na podlagi neutemeljenih predpostavk.
DG ENV considers that its assessment is based on the analysis of 4 years of risk based audits and DG ENV is confident that it constitutes a sound basis for the calculation of the error rate and lifting of the reservation. 
GD ENV meni, da njegova ocena temelji na analizi štirih let revizij na podlagi tveganja, in je prepričan, da pomeni trdno osnovo za izračun stopnje napake in umik pridržka.
Likewise, the Commission did not consider it necessary to issue a reservation for DG SANCO as the residual error rate after correction of the errors detected was below 2 %. 
Komisija je prav tako menila, da ni potrebno izraziti pridržka za GD SANCO, saj je bila stopnja preostalih napak po popravku ugotovljenih napak nižja od 2 %.
DG MARE dropped a reservation although the Member State did not accept the correction entirely because the closure of the programme concerned is ongoing and the necessary (full) financial correction will be made by the Commission in the closure exercise. 
GD MARE je opustil pridržek, čeprav država članica ni v celoti sprejela popravka, ker je zaključevanje zadevnega programa v teku in bo Komisija potreben (popoln) finančni popravek opravila pri izvedbi zaključitve.
In these circumstances DG MARE considered that it was appropriate not to maintain the reservation. 
GD MARE je menil, da ohranjanje pridržka v teh okoliščinah ni primerno.
These are management decisions resulting from a careful consideration of the circumstances and an assessment of risks which provides the most reliable basis for the declaration of assurance. 
To so poslovodske odločitve, ki temeljijo na skrbni proučitvi okoliščin in oceni tveganj, ki zagotavlja najzanesljivejšo podlago za izjavo o zanesljivosti.
The reservation in DG AGRI’s AARs 2008 and 2009 regarding expenditure for rural development measures under Axis 2 was justified by the fact that for these measures Member States’ control statistics showed an error rate which was significantly above the 2 % materiality threshold currently used by the Court, which in turn was the reason why the error rate for rural development expen­ diture as a whole, which according to the Commission’s standing instructions on making reservations is the basis for assessing the materiality of errors, also remained above 2 %. 
3.53 Pridržek iz letnih poročil o dejavnostih za leti 2008 in 2009 GD AGRI v zvezi z odhodki za ukrepe za razvoj podeželja iz osi 2 je bil utemeljen z dejstvom, da so kontrolni statistični podatki držav članic za te ukrepe pokazali stopnjo napake, ki je bistveno presegala 2-odstotni prag pomembnosti, ki ga Sodišče trenutno uporablja, kar je bil po drugi strani razlog, da je stopnja napake za skupne odhodke za razvoj podeželja, ki je glede na veljavna navodila Komisije v zvezi z oblikovanjem pridržkov podlaga za ocenjevanje pomembnosti napak, prav tako ostala nad 2 %.
In 2010, as a result of the joint efforts of the Commission and the Member States, the quality and reliability of these control statistics and the degree of quantification of the errors found and reported improved significantly. 
Na podlagi skupnih prizadevanj Komisije in držav članic so se kako­ vost in zanesljivost teh kontrolnih statističnih podatkov ter stopnja količinske opredelitve ugotovljenih in sporočenih napak v letu 2010 bistveno izboljšale.
These improvements allowed DG AGRI to calculate the residual error rate for rural development as a whole, more precisely than in previous years, when it did not have the necessary assurance that Member States compiled their statistics with the necessary rigor, by now using the same methodology as that used for EAGF expenditure. 
Te izboljšave so GD AGRI omogočile, da stopnjo preostalih napak za razvoj podeželja kot celoto izračuna natančneje kot v prejšnjih letih, ko ni imel potrebnih zagotovil, da so države članice zbirale statistične podatke s potrebno natančnostjo, pri čemer zdaj uporablja enako metodologijo kot za odhodke EKJS.
However, even if these two Member States should have higher than average error rates, their impact would in all likelihood not increase the residual error rate for rural development as a whole above the 2 % materiality threshold. 
Na podlagi tega pristopa je bila ugotovljena stopnja preostalih napak za razvoj podeželja kot celote nižja od 2-odstotnega praga pomembnosti (1).
3.53. DG AGRI’s 2009 AAR contained a reservation regarding expenditure for rural development measures under axis 2 (improving the environment and the countryside). 
3.53 Letno poročilo GD AGRI za leto 2009 je vsebovalo pridržek za odhodke za ukrepe za razvoj podeželja iz osi 2 (izboljšanje okolja in pokrajine).
The Director-General did not consider it necessary to carry over this reservation to the 2010 AAR. 
Generalnemu direktorju se tega pridržka ni zdelo potrebno prenesti v letno poročilo o dejavnostih za leto 2010.
EN 90 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2011 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S Moreover, the action plan set out in the reservation of previous years had been completed, and the error rates reported were, with a couple of exceptions, considered tolerable. 
SL 90 UradnilistEvropskeunije 10.11.2011 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E Poleg tega se je akcijski načrt iz pridržka prejšnjih let zaključil in sporočene stopnje napak, razen nekaterih izjem, so se štele za spre­ jemljive.
Any further reduction of errors could have only been achieved by increasing the level of on-the-spot checks, which would not be cost effective. 
Nadaljnje zmanjšanje napak bi bilo mogoče doseči samo s povečanjem stopnje pregledov na kraju samem, kar pa ne bi bilo stroškovno učinkovito.
Finally, as regards the high error rates for Bulgaria and Romania for measures under Axis 2, the relevant expenditure for these two Member States was covered by the reservation for IACS. 
V zvezi z visokimi stopnjami napak za ukrepe iz osi 2 v Bolgariji in Romuniji so bili zadevni odhodki za ti državi članici vključeni v pridržek za IAKS.
Likewise, the new reservation for Portugal due to the serious deficiencies in its IACS also covered the Axis 2 expenditure. 
Prav tako je nov pridržek za Portugalsko zaradi resnih pomanjkljivosti njenega sistema IAKS vključeval tudi odhodke iz osi 2.
The Member States’ control statistics are verified and validated to a large extent by the certification bodies, as recommended as an option by the Court in its annual report for 2005, and the results of this work are disclosed in DG AGRI’s Annual Activity Report. 
3.54 Kontrolne statistične podatke držav članic v veliki meri preverijo in potrdijo certifikacijski organi, kar kot možnost priporoča Sodišče v svojem poročilu za leto 2005, rezultati tega dela pa so objavljeni v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih GD AGRI.
In order to address the risk that the error rates derived from these control statistics could have been understated due to inaccuracies in the databases or inadequate follow up of anomalies, as referred to by the Court, DG AGRI applied a safety margin of a 25 % increase which it considers largely sufficient to cover the risks reffered to by the Court. 
Zaradi obravnavanja tveganja, da bi bile stopnje napak, ki izhajajo iz teh kontrolnih statističnih podatkov, podcenjene zaradi netočnosti podatkovnih zbirk ali nezadostnega spremljanja nepravilnosti, kot navaja Sodišče, je GD AGRI uvedel varnostno rezervo v višini 25-odstotnega povečanja, za katero meni, da je dovolj velika za kritje tveganj, na katera opozarja Sodišče.
Even with such an increase, the residual error rates for expen­ diture on direct aids, market intervention and rural development measures would still be far below 2 %. 
Kljub takemu povečanju bi bile stopnje preostalih napak za odhodke za neposredno pomoč, interven­ cijo na trgu in ukrepe za razvoj podeželja še vedno bistveno nižje od 2 %.
Moreover, for the first pillar, and in particular the direct payments covered by the IACS, the results of the Court’s own audits confirm an error rate well below the 2 % materiality threshold which essentially corroborates the results of the control statistics and shows that the supervisory and control systems function efficiently. 3.54. 
Poleg tega rezultati revizij Sodišča za prvi steber in zlasti za nepo­ sredna plačila, ki jih zajema IAKS, potrjujejo stopnjo napake, ki je precej pod 2-odstotnim pragom pomembnosti, kar v glavnem potrjuje rezultate kontrolnih statističnih podatkov ter dokazuje uspešno delo­ vanje kontrolnih in nadzornih sistemov.
Asin2009DGAGRIcontinuestoconsiderthatthe anomalies found by national inspectors during randomly selected on-the-spot inspections reflect the residual error rates for the aid scheme in question. 
3.54 GDAGRIenakokotvletu2009šenaprejmeni,da odstopanja, ki so jih nacionalni inšpektorji odkrili pri naključno izbranih inšpekcijskih pregledih na kraju samem, odražajo stopnjo preostalih napak pri zadevni shemi pomoči.
The Court maintains the observation already made in its 2009 Annual Report that it cannot endorse this approach which is affected by the following deficiencies: — it is based on inspections the quality of which the Commission’s own and the Court’s audits show for several paying agencies is insufficient, — it relies on statistics which the Commission is already aware were incorrectly compiled, and — it is incomplete because it disregards the residual errors in the administrative management of claims which have been shown to be deficient. 
Sodišče ostaja pri opažanju, ki ga je navedlo že v letnem poročilu za leto 2009, da ne more potrditi tega pristopa, na katerega vplivajo naslednje pomanjkljivosti: — temelji na inšpekcijskih pregledih, kakovost katerih je za več plačilnih agencij nezadostna, kot so pokazale tudi revi­ zije Komisije same in Sodišča, — zanaša se na statistične podatke, za katere Komisija že ve, da so bili nepravilno sestavljeni, ter — je nepopoln, ker se pri njem ne upoštevajo preostale napake pri administrativnem upravljanju zahtevkov, za katere se je pokazalo, da so pomanjkljivi.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions 3.55. Based on its audit work, the Court concludes that the payments for the year ended 31 December 2010 for Agri­ culture and Natural Resources were affected by material error. 
ZAKLJUČKI IN PRIPOROČILA Zaključki 3.55 Sodišče je na podlagi svojega revizijskega dela prišlo do zaključka, da so na plačila za kmetijstvo in naravne vire za leto, ki se je končalo 31. decembra 2010, vplivale pomembne napake, vendar v neposrednih plačilih, ki jih pokriva IAKS, ni bilo pomembnih napak.
3.55. The Court’s conclusion for Agriculture and Natural Resources confirms the positive trend that in the past years the most likely error is close to the materiality threshold of 2 %. 
3.55 Sklep Sodišča glede kmetijstva in naravnih virov potrjuje pozitivni trend, da se je v preteklih letih najverjetnejša napaka pribli­ žala 2-odstotnemu pragu pomembnosti.
The Commission further notes that for EAGF expenditure, which in 2010 accounted for 77 % of total expenditure under this Chapter, the most likely error is well below the materiality threshold and that for direct payments covered by the IACS it is even lower. 
Komisija nadalje ugotavlja, da je pri odhodkih EKJS, ki so leta 2010 znašali 77 % skupnih odhodkov iz tega poglavja, najverjetnejša napaka precej pod pragom pomembnosti, pri neposrednih plačilih, ki jih zajema IAKS, pa je še manjša.
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 91 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 3.56. Based on its audit work, the Court concludes that the supervisory and control systems audited for Agriculture and Natural Resources were partially effective in ensuring the regu­ larity of payments. 
SL 10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 91 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 3.56 Sodišče je na podlagi svojega revizijskega dela prišlo do zaključka, da so nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi, revidirani na področju kmetijstva in naravnih virov, delno uspešni pri zago­ tavljanju pravilnosti plačil.
Recommendations 3.57. Annex 3.4 sets out the result of the Court’s review of progress made in addressing the recommendations contained in previous Annual Reports (2008 to 2009). 
Priporočila 3.57 V Prilogi 3.4 je predstavljen rezultat, ki ga je Sodišče dobilo pri pregledu napredka pri izvajanju priporočil iz prejš­ njih letnih poročil (2008 do 2009).
The following points should be noted: — the Commission has taken important remedial action as regards simplification of rural development measures and the reliability and completeness of information recorded in the LPIS, T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 3.56. 
Omeniti je treba naslednje: — Komisija je sprejela pomembne popravne ukrepe za poenostavitev ukrepov za razvoj podeželja ter zanesljivost in popolnost informacij, evidentiranih v LPIS.
The Commission considers that the IACS is generally an effective control system for limiting the risk of error or irregular expenditure. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 3.56 Komisija meni, da je IAKS na splošno uspešen kontrolni sistem za omejevanje tveganja napak ali nepravilnih odhodkov.
As regards rural development, the Commission considers that the supervisory and control systems are constantly improving and that, as a result, the error rate is decreasing in this area. 
V zvezi z razvojem podeželja Komisija meni, da se nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi stalno izboljšujejo, s čimer se stopnja napake na tem področju zmanjšuje.
3.57. — In the last 4 years, the Commission and the Member States have implemented an action plan aiming at ensuring a better control­ lability of the agri-environmental measures, which has resulted in a reduced error rate. 
3.57 — Pretekla štiri leta so Komisija in države članice izvajale akcijski načrt, katerega namen je zagotoviti boljšo možnost nadzora ukrepov za kmetijstvo in okolje, s čimer se je zmanjšala stopnja napake.
Simplification initiatives have been imple­ mented for the current programming period and will continue to be pursued in the future for the CAP reform post-2013. 
Za sedanje programsko obdobje se izvajajo pobude za poenostavitev, kar se bo v okviru reforme skupne kmetijske poli­ tike po letu 2013 nadaljevalo tudi v prihodnje.
However, it is clear that a right balance needs to be found between the policy goals, the administrative costs and the risk of errors. 
Kljub temu je jasno, da je treba vzpostaviti pravo ravnovesje med cilji politike, upravnimi stroški in tveganjem napak.
As of claim year 2010, Member States are obliged to assess the quality of their LPIS. 
Od leta vložitve zahtevkov 2010 morajo države članice ocenjevati kakovost svojih LPIS.
Whilst 2010 is the first year, this exercise has already been helpful for Member States as regards identifi­ cation of areas requiring attention. — The current system provides for a common legal framework within which the Member States are responsible for defining the maintenance criteria under the GAEC. This allows for the diversity of agricultural areas and traditions in the EU to be taken into account. 
Čeprav je leto 2010 prvo leto, je ta ukrep državam članicam že pomagal pri opredeljevanju področij, ki jim je treba nameniti pozornost. — Sedanji sistem zagotavlja skupni pravni okvir, v okviru katerega so države članice pristojne za določitev meril za ohranjanje dobrih kmetijskih in okoljskih pogojev, kar omogoča upoštevanje razno­ likosti kmetijskih površin in tradicij v EU.
The issue of the farmer definition referred to by the Court has been addressed in the framework of the Health Check by giving Member States the possibility to exclude natural or legal persons from the direct payment schemes whose principal business objects do not consist of exercising an agricultural activity or whose agricultural activities are insignificant (Article 28(2) of Regu­ lation (EC) No 73/2009). 
Vprašanje opredelitve kmetov, ki ga je poudarilo Sodišče, je bilo obravnavano v okviru pregleda zdravstvenega stanja reforme skupne kmetijske politike, s čimer je bilo državam članicam omogočeno, da iz shem neposrednih plačil izključijo tiste fizične ali pravne osebe, katerih glavna dejavnost ni opravljanje kmetijske dejavnosti ali katerih kmetijske dejavnosti predstavljajo le majhen delež (člen 28(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 73/2009).
Further reflections on targeting support to active farmers are, as indicated in the Commission Communication on the CAP towards 2020, envisaged in the context of the post-2013 CAP, bearing in mind the need to avoid complicated rules which would result in a complex control system whose imple­ mentation would be costly and contrary to the simplification efforts of the Commission. — as regards the recommendations that minimum annual maintenance requirements for grassland should be set at EU level and that EU legislation should exclude that direct aid is paid to claimants who neither used the land for farming nor maintained it in GAEC the new Council regu­ lation left these issues to the discretion of the Member States. 
Nadaljnji premisleki o usmerjanju podpore k dejavnim kmetom so predvideni v okviru skupne kmetijske politike po letu 2013, kot je navedeno v sporočilu Komisije o skupni kmetijski politiki proti letu 2020, ob upoštevanju potrebe po preprečevanju zaple­ tenih pravil, ki bi povzročila kompleksen kontrolni sistem, kate­ rega izvajanje bi bilo drago in v nasprotju s prizadevanji Komi­ sije za poenostavitev. — Kar zadeva priporočila, naj se minimalne zahteve v zvezi z letnim vzdrževanjem za travišča določijo na ravni EU in naj zakonodaja EU izključi možnost, da se neposredna pomoč izplača vložnikom zahtevkov, ki niso uporabljali zemljišč za kmetovanje niti jih niso ohranjali v dobrih kmetijskih in okoljskih pogojih, je nova uredba Sveta te zadeve pustila v pristojnosti držav članic.