natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Court found that, despite the large amounts involved, insufficient checks were made. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da so se kljub velikim zadevnim zneskom izvedla nezadostna preverjanja.
There were no checks on whether the offers were comparable, and whether the best offer was selected. 
Preverjeno ni bilo, ali so bile ponudbe primerljive in ali je bila izbrana najboljša ponudba.
Except in Bulgaria, where initial steps were being undertaken, there were no comparisons with reference prices, which would allow Sapard assistance to be limited if unjustified costs were claimed. 
Razen v Bolgariji, kjer so bili prvi ukrepi že uvedeni, ni bilo nikakršnih primerjav z referenčnimi cenami, ki bi pri zahtevkih za neupravičene stroške omogočale omejitev pomoči programa Sapard.
The CommissionŐs audits did not address this issue. 
Revizije Komisije tega vprašanja niso obravnavale.
That such checks are required is shown by the audit findings set out below. 
Da pa so takšna preverjanja potrebna, kažejo spodaj navedene ugotovitve revizije.
The CourtŐs analysis of the offers presented for 34 projects showed that in the majority of the cases the three offers were not comparable and therefore of little or no value (1). 
Analiza, ki jo je Sodišče izvedlo v zvezi s ponudbami, predstavljenimi za 34 projektov, je pokazala, da tri ponudbe večinoma niso bile primerljive, zaradi česar so bile brez večje ali vsakršne vrednosti (1).
Beneficiaries are not required to specify in writing the details of the planned investment. 
Upravičencem ni treba pisno predložiti podrobnih podatkov o načrtovani naložbi.
Consequently, offers were generally received which were for different equipment specifications, or without such specifications at all, and there were large price differences. 
Zato so se na splošno prejemale ponudbe s specifikacijami za različno opremo ali celo brez vsakršnih tovrstnih specifikacij, cenovne razlike pa so bile občutne.
In addition, the offers did not always contain the information on the main determining factors which caused the beneficiary to select an offer. 
Poleg tega ponudbe niso vedno vsebovale informacij o glavnih odločilnih dejavnikih, na podlagi katerih je upravičenec izbral določeno ponudbo.
In cases where the offers were comparable, the cheapest offer was not always selected and no explanation or justification was provided. 
Ko so bile ponudbe primerljive, ni bila vedno izbrana najcenejša niti ni bila za izbor predložena nikakršna obrazložitev.
It was impossible in most cases to analyse whether the best offer was accepted and thereby to ensure sound financial management, in particular of economy and cost-effectiveness. 
Večinoma je bilo nemogoče analizirati, ali je bila sprejeta najboljša ponudba, in s tem zagotoviti dobro finančno poslovanje, predvsem pa gospodarnost in stroškovno učinkovitost.
Around half of the beneficiaries encountered by the Court confirmed that the three-offer procedure was meaningless because they knew in advance which equipment they intended to buy. 
Približno polovica upravičencev, ki jih je Sodišče zaslišalo, je potrdila, da je bil postopek treh ponudb nesmiseln, saj so že vnaprej vedeli, katero opremo nameravajo kupiti.
The other two offers were obtained purely to fulfil the requirement. 
Drugi dve ponudbi sta bili pridobljeni zgolj za izpolnitev zahteve.
For example, for a Sapard project to buy a tractor in Poland, the beneficiary had already decided which tractor she wanted to buy and from whom. 
Pri Sapa-rdovem projektu nabave traktorja na Poljskem se je upravičenka na primer že vnaprej odločila, kateri traktor bo kupila in od koga.
In order to fulfil the three-offer requirement, she obtained two further identical offers (2) which purported to be from different sales points of another company. 
Da bi izpolnila zahtevo po treh ponudbah, je pridobila še dve identični ponudbi (2), ki sta bili dozdevno z drugih prodajnih mest drugega podjetja.
However, she had not considered buying from them, even though they were slightly cheaper, as they would not be able to provide after-sales service in the future. 
Vendar se ni odločila za nabavo pri njih, četudi so imeli nekoliko nižje cene, ker niso bili sposobni zagotoviti prihodnjih poprodajnih storitev.
(1) In the sample of projects reviewed by the Court, private procurement rules were applied to 34 projects. In 23 cases the offers were found to be not comparable. 
(1) V vzorcu projektov, ki ga je preučilo Sodišče, so se pravila zasebne nabave uporabljala pri 34 projektih, v 23 primerih pa je bilo ugotovljeno, da ponudbe niso bile primerljive.
(2) In the same handwriting and written with a purple pen. 
(2) Z enako pisavo in napisano z vijoličastim pisalom.
Sometimes three offers were not obtained. 
Včasih tri ponudbe niso bile pridobljene.
In Bulgaria the procedure was not applied in respect of general costs, whereas in other countries it was. 
V Bolgariji se postopek ni uporabljal v zvezi s splošnimi stroški, medtem ko se v drugih državah je.
In Poland, several cases were found where one investment was broken down into several items each below 10 000 euro, thus avoiding the procedure. 
Na Poljskem je bilo odkritih več primerov, ko se je ena naložba razčlenila na več postavk, od katerih je vsaka znašala manj kot 10 000 eurov, da bi se tako izognili postopku.
In other cases several different items each larger than 10 000 euro were combined in single offers. 
V drugih primerih je bilo več različnih postavk, od katerih je vsaka znašala več kot 10 000 eurov, združenih v enotne ponudbe.
The weaknesses identified by the Court were not detected by the CommissionŐs audits nor by its management information system. 
Pomanjkljivosti, ki jih je opredelilo Sodišče, niso bile razkrite niti v revizijah, ki jih je izvedla Komisija, niti v njenem upravljavskem informacijskem sistemu.
Thus, the different practices noted between countries have not been addressed by the Commission. 
Zato Komisija ni obravnavala različnih praks, ki so bile opažene med državami.
Better rules and checks are required, in particular for larger projects, both by the Sapard country and by the Commission. 
Tako država Saparda kot tudi Komisija bi morali poskrbeti za boljša pravila in preverjanja, zlasti pri večjih projektih.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 110. 
SKLEPI IN PRIPOROČILA 110.
The Commission did not use the time available, before the adoption of the Sapard Regulation by the Council, to prepare for detailed implementation principles and rules. 
Komisija ni izkoristila časa, ki ga je imela na voljo, preden je Svet sprejel Uredbo Sapard, za pripravo podrobnih izvedbenih načel in pravil.
Thus, more time than necessary was used, after the adoption by the Council, to provide them. 
Zato je bilo, potem ko je Svet sprejel uredbo, za njihovo zagotovitev porabljenega več časa, kot je bilo potrebno.
After their adoption, in November 2000, the start of Sapard depended on the time needed by the countries to set up the systems. 
Po njihovem sprejetju novembra 2000 je bil začetek izvajanja programa Sapard odvisen od časa, ki so ga države potrebovale za vzpostavitev sistemov.
The Commission and the Sapard countries did not analyse why some countries were quick and why for others it took longer. 
Komisija in države Saparda niso analizirale, zakaj so bile nekatere države pri tem hitre in druge počasnejše.
The CommissionŐs application of a system of decentralised management has meant that it has not actively identified implementation problems, provided advice on addressing them nor monitored results. 
Komisijina uporaba sistema decentraliziranega upravljanja kaže, da ni aktivno prepoznavala problemov pri izvajanju, svetovala pri njihovem reševanju niti ni spremljala rezultatov.
Moreover, staff resources were limited. 
Poleg tega je bilo število osebja omejeno.
Due to this, best practices were not applied in all countries, and practices which were counter-productive were not prevented, all of which hampered a quicker yet secure implementation of Sapard. 
Zato se najboljše prakse niso izvajale v vseh državah niti se niso preprečile kontraproduk-tivne prakse, vse to pa je oviralo hitrejše, vendar varno izvajanje programa Sapard.
30.11.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 295/17 Ń Even in the case of decentralised management, the Commission should ensure that best practices are implemented in all beneficiary countries, and that sufficient resources are allocated to this task. 
30.11.2004 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 295/17 — Celo pri decentraliziranem upravljanju mora Komisija zagotavljati, da se najboljše prakse izvajajo v vseh državah upravičenkah in da se za to nalogo dodelijo zadostna sredstva.
The CommissionŐs proposals to the budgetary authority were not based on reliable and realisable budget forecasts of implementation. Ń Whilst the Commission may wish to demonstrate to the countries that it has confidence in their respective abilities to implement the Sapard instrument, the political will should not be translated into unrealistic budget forecasts. 
Predlogi Komisije proračunskemu organu niso temeljili na zanesljivih in uresničljivih napovedih izvrševanja proračuna. — Medtem ko si Komisija morda želi državam pokazati, da je prepričana o njihovih sposobnostih izvajanja Sapardovega instrumenta, se politična volja ne sme prevajati v neizvedl-jive proračunske napovedi.
Sapard had as a positive effect that structures and systems which did not exist a few years ago were set up and function in the Sapard countries. 
Pozitiven učinek programa Sapard sta bila vzpostavitev in delovanje struktur in sistemov v državah Saparda, ki še pred nekaj leti niso obstajali.
Key elements of these systems will be used for the management of EU funds after accession. 
Ključni elementi teh sistemov se bodo uporabljali za upravljanje sredstev EU po pristopu.
Prior approval of the systems based on both the Sapard countriesŐ and Commission audits has ensured that well-defined systems with key controls existed, at least on paper, before any funds could be spent. 
Predhodna odobritev sistemov, ki temelji na revizijah držav Saparda in Komisije, zagotavlja, da jasno opredeljeni sistemi s ključnimi kontrolami obstajajo vsaj na papirju, preden se porabijo kakršna koli sredstva.
This is good practice. 
To je dobra praksa.
However, Member States may implement new legislation without such prior audits of the system. Ń The Commission should consider whether ex ante audits and prior approval of new financial and management systems before money is spent would also be good practice for Member States. 
Vendar pa lahko države članice izvajajo novo zakonodajo brez takšnih predhodnih revizij sistema. — Komisija mora preučiti, ali bi bile predhodne revizije in predhodna potrditev novih finančnih sistemov in sistemov upravljanja, preden se denar porabi, dobra praksa tudi za države članice.
Due to the low level of expenditure during the pre-accession period, there has been only a minor contribution to the objectives defined in the Sapard Regulation for 8 of the 10 beneficiary countries. 
Zaradi nizkih izdatkov v predpristopnem obdobju je bil prispevek k ciljem iz Uredbe Sapard za 8 od 10 držav upravičenk zelo majhen.
The first results of completed projects show that the money has generally been spent on projects which increase the quantity of agricultural production, and not on projects which improve the quality of agricultural production (meeting quality and health standards and protection of the environment). Ń The Commission should address this imbalance and ensure that Sapard funds are used for projects which have as the main objective the improvement of standards for processing plants or farms as a whole. 
Prvi rezultati končanih projektov kažejo, da se je na splošno več denarja porabilo za projekte, ki povečujejo količino kmetijske proizvodnje, kot pa za projekte, ki izboljšujejo kakovost kmetijske proizvodnje (z izpolnjevanjem kakovostnih ter zdravstvenih standardov in varstvom okolja). — Komisija mora obravnavati to neravnovesje in zagotoviti, da se sredstva iz programa Sapard uporabljajo za projekte, katerih glavni cilj je izboljševanje standardov za predelovalne obrate ali kmetije v celoti.
The Court found that the rules and the checks for private procurement and for general costs were insufficient. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da so bila pravila in preverjanja zasebne nabave ter splošni stroški nezadostni.
Effective checks to prevent the acceptance and payment of overstated invoices were not made. 
Učinkovita preverjanja za preprečevanje potrjevanja in izplačevanja računov, ki prikazujejo višje zneske od dejanskih, niso bila izvedena.
Insufficient checks were also noted for compliance with standards for hygiene and the environment. Ń The Commission should address this lack in rules and effective checks. 
Opažena so bili tudi nezadostna preverjanja skladnosti s higienskimi in okoljskimi standardi. — Komisija mora obravnavati to pomanjkanje pravil in učinkovitih preverjanj.
A key implementation problem was that potential beneficiaries lacked own resources and had difficulties in obtaining credit. 
Ključni problem pri izvajanju je bil, da potencialni upravičenci niso imeli dovolj lastnih virov in so imeli težave pri pridobivanju posojila.
Whilst the Sapard programme offers a large number of measures, it does not include the possibility to address this problem. Ń For similar, future actions, the Commission should simplify the Sapard programme by reducing it to three or four key measures. 
Ker program Sapard zagotavlja veliko ukrepov, ne vključuje možnosti reševanja tega problema. — Za podobne prihodnje ukrepe mora Komisija poenostaviti program Sapard tako, da ga skrči na tri ali štiri ukrepe.
The Commission should examine whether in that case a system of loans and guarantees could replace or supplement existing measures in order to address the problem of project financing. 
Komisija mora preučiti, ali bi lahko pri tem sistem posojil in jamstev zamenjal ali dopolnil obstoječe ukrepe, da bi se rešil problem financiranja projektov.
So, ÔHas Sapard been well managed?Ő The answer is that management has been of mixed quality. 
Torej: „Ali se program Sapard dobro upravlja?“ Odgovor se glasi, da kakovost upravljanja niha.
On the one hand, Sapard has allowed countries to gain Ôhands-onŐ experience of operating an EU aid system, for which the Commission has been a driving force. 
Po eni strani program Sapard državam omogoča, da si pridobivajo praktične izkušnje ob delovanju sistema pomoči EU, katerega gonilna sila je Komisija.
On the other hand, this was not a primary aim of Sapard and the key objectives that had been set were not achieved, such as assisting in the Community acquis particularly those relating to environmental and health standards. 
Po drugi strani pa to ni bil prvotni cilj programa Sapard in ključni cilji, kot je pomoč pri izvajanju pravnega reda Skupnosti, zlasti tisti, ki se nanašajo na okoljske in zdravstvene standarde, niso bili doseženi.
This was due to avoidable delays in implementation, and as a consequence those countries joining in 2004 have not had the benefit of delivering aid for the measures approved, for the period of about four-and-a-half years from the beginning of 2000 to May 2004, which had been planned by the legislative authority. 
To je posledica zamud pri izvajanju, ki bi se jim bilo mogoče izogniti, in tako države, ki so se pridružile leta 2004, niso mogle zagotoviti pomoči za odobrene ukrepe za obdobje približno štirih let in pol, od začetka leta 2000 do maja 2004, kar je načrtoval zakonodajni organ.
In addition, by early 2004, due to delays in setting up systems, the full range of measures that had been programmed (including agri-environment) has not been applied. 
Poleg tega se na začetku leta 2004 zaradi zamud pri vzpostavljanju sistemov ni izvajal širok razpon sprogramiranih ukrepov (vključno s kmetijskookol-jskimi).
The Commission under-estimated the problems that had to be faced by beneficiaries of financing their projects. 
Komisija je podcenjevala probleme, s katerimi so se morali spoprijeti upravičenci pri financiranju svojih projektov.
This problem should have been identified at an early stage and solutions found in order to ensure that the available aid had maximum effect across all target beneficiaries. 
Zaradi zagotavljanja, da bi imela razpoložljiva pomoč največji možni učinek pri vseh ciljnih upravičencih, bi bilo treba ta problem opredeliti in rešitve poiskati že v zgodnji fazi.
This report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 26 May 2004. 
To poročilo je Računsko sodišče v Luxembourgu sprejelo na svojem zasedanju dne 26. maja 2004.
C 295/18 EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.11.2004 Country EU contribution for the period 2000-2003 (1) Various Bulgaria Czech Republic Estonia Hungary Latvia Lithuania Poland Romania Slovakia 76,8 Slovenia 26,6 10,8 6,6 6,4 38,9 5,5 18,2 270,0 280,5 13,2 3,1 653,3 30 % 75,8 17,5 9,7 52,0 25,2 39,1 227,7 111,0 25,5 10,5 593,9 27 % 62,1 17,6 21,7 58,8 32,0 51,2 13,9 0,6 0,4 0,0 5,3 3,2 9,2 57,5 2,3 0,0 92,4 4% 56,3 50,3 12,7 10,1 23,7 13,5 75,1 Total 2 183,0 % 100% (1) Cumulative appropriations for commitment. 
C 295/18 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 30.11.2004 Država Prispevek EU za obdobje 2000-2003 (1) Lokalne skupnosti Kmetje Razno Bolgarija Češka Estonija Madžarska Latvija Litva Poljska Romunija Slovaška 76,8 Slovenija 26,6 10,8 6,6 6,4 38,9 5,5 18,2 270,0 280,5 13,2 3,1 653,3 75,8 17,5 9,7 52,0 25,2 39,1 227,7 111,0 25,5 10,5 593,9 62,1 17,6 21,7 58,8 32,0 51,2 13,9 0,6 0,4 0,0 5,3 3,2 9,2 57,5 2,3 0,0 92,4 56,3 50,3 12,7 10,1 23,7 13,5 75,1 % 100 % 30 % 27 % 22 % 4 % 17 % Skupaj 2 183,0 (1) Kumulativni znesek odobritev za prevzem obveznosti.
Source : European Court of Auditors, December 2003. 
Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče, december 2003.
218,8 92,6 50,9 159,8 91,7 125,2 708,2 632,4 126,2 74,6 21,0 9,2 474,4 22 % 108,9 14,8 3,8 369,1 17 % Local communities Processing plants Breakdown by main type of beneficiary and measure Farmers Various Measure: development and improvement of rural infrastructure Measure: improving the processing and marketing of agricultural and fishery products Measure: investments in agricultural holdings Measures: agri-environment, forestry, afforestation Measures: development and diversification of economic activities, technical assistance, training, and other ANNEX 1 EU contribution 2000-2003 by country and by main type of beneficiary and measure (in million euro) 
218,8 92,6 50,9 159,8 91,7 125,2 708,2 632,4 126,2 74,6 21,0 9,2 474,4 108,9 14,8 3,8 369,1 Ukrep: razvoj in izboljšanje podeželske infrastrukture Ukrep: izboljšanje predelave in trženja kmetijskih in ribiških proizvodov Ukrep: naložbe v kmetijska gospodarstva Ukrepi: kmetijsko okolje, gozdarstvo, pogozdovanje ukrepi: razvoj in diverzifikacija gospodarskih dejavnosti, strokovna pomoč, usposabljanje in ostalo PRILOGA 1 Razčlenitev prispevka EU za obdobje 2000-2003 po državah ter po glavnih vrstah upravičencev in ukrepov Predelovalni obrati Razno Razčlenitev po glavnih vrstah upravičencev in ukrepov (v milijonih eurov)
(2) File review to check general costs, key procurement rules, objective and other key issues relating to the project. (3) File review to check that the supervisory and control systems worked in practice. (4) Systems for the measure were not approved at the time of the audit. 
(2) Pregled dokumentacije z namenom, da se preveri splošne stroške, ključna pravila javnega naročanja, cilje in druge ključne zadeve v zvezi s projektom. (3) Pregled dokumentacije z namenom, da se preveri, ali so nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi delovali v praksi. (4) Sistemi za ukrepe niso bili odobreni v času revizije.
C 295/20 EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.11.2004 Sample No 1 v Measure M1M2M3 LITHUANIA Project description Modernisation works and purchase of new equipment for a dairy farm Purchase of new equipment for a cereal farm Purchase of new equipment for a cereal farm Purchase of new equipment for a pig farm Purchase of new equipment for a dairy farm Purchase of new equipment for a dairy farm Purchase of new equipment for a meat processing plant Reconstruction works and purchase of new equipment for a meat processing plant Visit on the spot (1) v v v v v Substantive test (2) v v v v v v v v v v v Compliance test (3) v v v v v v v v 2 v 3 v 4 v 5 v 6 v 7 8 9 10 11 12 v v v v v v Construction of water and sewage infrastructure Reconstruction of sewage infrastructure Construction of sewage infrastructure Construction of a slaughterhouse v (1) Visit on the spot to meet with the final beneficiary and to inspect the project. 
C 295/20 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 30.11.2004 Vzorec 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ukrep M1M2M3 LITVA Opis projekta Posodobitvena dela in nakup nove opreme za kmetijo z mlečno živinorejo Nakup nove opreme za kmetijo, ki prideluje žitarice Nakup nove opreme za kmetijo, ki prideluje žitarice Nakup nove opreme za prašičjo farmo Nakup nove opreme za kmetijo z mlečno živinorejo Nakup nove opreme za kmetijo z mlečno živinorejo Nakup nove opreme za obrat za predelavo mesa Obnovitvena dela in nakup nove opreme za obrat za predelavo mesa Obisk na kraju samem (1) v v v v v Preverjanje podatkov (2) v v v v v v v v v v v Preverjanje skladnosti (3) v v v v v v v v v v v v v v 9 10 v 11 v 12 v v v v Izgradnja vodovodne in kanalizacijske infrastrukture Obnova kanalizacijske infrastrukture Izgradnja kanalizacijske infrastrukture Izgradnja klavnice v v (1) Obisk na kraju samem za srečanje s končnim upravičencem in za fizični pregled projekta.
(2) File review to check general costs, key procurement rules, objective and other key issues relating to the project. 
(2) Pregled dokumentacije z namenom, da se preveri splošne stroške, ključna pravila javnega naročanja, cilje in druge ključne zadeve v zvezi s projektom.
(3) File review to check that the supervisory and control systems worked in practice. v 
(3) Pregled dokumentacije z namenom, da se preveri, ali so nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi delovali v praksi.
(3) File review to check that the supervisory and control systems worked in practice. 
(3) Pregled dokumentacije z namenom, da se preveri, ali so nadzorni in kontrolni sistemi delovali v praksi.