natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the absence of Commission guidelines on the checks to be carried out by Member States and the supporting information to be kept, the beneficiary files examined on the spot were incomplete: in many cases slaughter certificates were missing, cross-checks of the number of cattle identified in the national databases against the number of cattle slaughtered had either not been carried out or revealed numerous discrepancies in most of the Member States audited. 
Ker Komisija ni podala smernic glede nadzorov, ki jih morajo opraviti države članice, in dokaznih dokumentov, ki jih morajo hraniti, so bili spisi upravičencev, ki so jih preučili na kraju samem, nepopolni: v številnih primerih so manjkala potrdila o zakolu, navzkrižno preverjanje med številom identificiranega goveda v nacionalnih bazah in številom zaklanega goveda ni bilo izvedeno ali pa je pokazalo številna neskladja v večini držav članic, kjer je bila opravljena revizija.
Even though many of these shortcomings can be attributed to the scale of the crisis, fuller contingency plans (see paragraphs 30 to 32) and more precise Commission criteria could have reduced the importance of them. 
Čeprav je mogoče številne od teh pomanjkljivosti pripisati razsežnosti krize, bi popolnejši načrti ukrepov ob nepredvidljivih dogodkih (glej odstavke 30–32) in natančnejša merila Komisije lahko zmanjšali njihovo število.
For the other categories of animals, which were not recorded because the Community regulations provided for individual identification only in the case of cattle (82), it was not possible to obtain assurance as to the reliability of the number declared. 
V zvezi z drugimi kategorijami živali, ki niso bile registrirane, ker predpisi Skupnosti predvidevajo individualno identifikacijo samo za govedo (82), se ni bilo mogoče prepričati o zanesljivosti prijavljenega števila.
After the crisis the Commission specified the eligibility criteria mentioned in Decision 90/424/EEC, together with the necessary documents for obtaining Community reimbursement (see Box 7). 
Komisija je po krizi v Odločbi 90/424/EGS natančno določila merila za pridobitev pomoči in dokumente, potrebne za pridobitev povračila Skupnosti (glej okvir 7).
As the Commission itself said, in its reply to this paragraph, it had not made any substantial changes to the eligibility rules contained in Decision 90/424/EEC since 1990. 
Komisija v odgovoru na ta odstavek sama navaja, da od leta 1990 ni veliko spreminjala pravil za pridobitev pomoči iz Odločbe 90/424/EGS.
The decision in question is not sufficiently precise and can be interpreted in various ways. 
Ta odločba ni dovolj natančna in omogoča različne razlage.
Box 7 Criteria and documents needed for reimbursement to take place were specified ex post facto Protective culling in the Member States that had imported sheep from the United Kingdom the month before the crisis: in France there was reimbursement for the animals slaughtered, even though there was no Commission decision on the reimbursement. 
Okvir 7 Kriteriji in dokumenti, ki so potrebni za izvedbo povračil, so bili natančno določeni naknadno Preventivni zakoli, opravljeni v državah članicah, ki so mesec dni pred krizo iz Združenega kraljestva uvozile ovce: v Franciji so bili izdatki za te zakole povrnjeni kljub odsotnosti odločbe Komisije o njihovem povračilu.
Partial protective culling around outbreaks in Ireland, France and the United Kingdom (3 km slaughter zone in Cumbria gave rise to expenditure to a sum total of some 112,3 million euro); reimbursement decisions were adopted by the Commission in July 2002 for France, in December 2003 for the United Kingdom and Ireland and, at the time when this report was being drafted, were still being finalised in the case of the Netherlands. 
Delni preventivni zakoli, opravljeni v okolici izbruhov na Irskem, v Franciji in Združenem kraljestvu (celotni znesek izdatkov za zakole v krogu 3 km od izbruha je v Cumbrii znašal 112,3 milijona EUR): Komisija je odločbe o povračilu sprejela julija 2002 za Francijo, decembra 2003 za Združeno kraljestvo in Irsko, medtem ko jih v primeru Nizozemske v času priprave tega poročila dokončuje.
(82) Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000. 
(82) Uredba (ES) št. 1760/2000.
Protective culling by Member States where there had been no outbreaks (Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal): the decision was not adopted by the Commission until August 2003, almost two years after the end of the crisis (83). 
Preventivni zakoli v državah članicah, kjer ni bilo izbruha bolezni (Belgija, Nemčija, Španija in Portugalska): Komisija je odločitev sprejela šele avgusta 2003 oziroma skoraj dve leti po koncu krize (83).
Decisions on the financing of associated costs, with details of the information to be supplied to the Commission (veterinary costs, destruction costs, disinfecting costs): were not adopted until 2003 (84). 
Odločbe glede financiranja spremljajočih stroškov z natančno navedbo podatkov, ki jih je treba predložiti Komisiji (stroški za veteri-narje, stroški za uničenje trupov in razkuževanje): sprejete so bile šele leta 2003 (84).
The Community contributes to Member StatesŐ expenditure on condition that they have immediately implemented Community measures such as isolating holdings as soon as disease is suspected, combined with slaughter of all animals, destruction of the carcases and cleansing and disinfecting of premises as soon as the disease has been confirmed officially (85). 
Skupnost prispeva k izdatkom držav članic, samo če so države članice izvedle ukrepe Skupnosti, kot so izolacija gospodarstva, takoj ko se pojavi sum bolezni, zakol vseh živali, njihovo uničenje ter čiščenje in razkuževanje, takoj ko je bolezen uradno potrjena (85).
However, the financial reports which, according to its decisions granting financial assistance to Member States, the Commission requires in order to determine the reimbursement due, only contain part of the information needed for assessing the eligibility of the expenditure mentioned in Council Decision 90/424/EEC (86). 
Vendar finančna poročila, ki jih je Komisija zahtevala v odločbah o dodelitvi finančne pomoči državam članicam, da bi določila dolgovani znesek povračila, vsebujejo samo del informacij, potrebnih za ocenitev upravičenosti njihovih izdatkov, opredeljenih v Odločbi Sveta 90/424/EGS (86).
Member States submitted numerous amendments to reimbursement claims. 
Države članice so predložile številne spremembe zahtevkov za povračilo.
(83) Commission Decisions 2003/619/EC (OJ L 216, 28.8.2003, p. 
(83) Odločbe Komisije 2003/619/ES (UL L 216, 28.8.2003, str.
42), 2003/620/EC (OJ L 216, 28.8.2003, p. 
42), 2003/620/ES (UL L 216, 28.8.2003, str.
45), 2003/621/EC (OJ L 216, 28.8.2003, p. 
45), 2003/621/ES (UL L 216, 28.8.2003, str.
48) and 2003/622/EC (OJ L 216, 28.8.2003, p. 
48) in 2003/622/ES (UL L 216, 28.8.2003, str.
53), concerning a financial contribution by the Community towards the precautionary measures against FMD taken by Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal. 
53) o finančnem prispevku Skupnosti k preventivnim ukrepom zoper slinavko in parkljevko, ki so jih sprejele Belgija, Nemčija, Španija in Portugalska.
(84) The Commission did not adopt the decisions on reimbursement of expenditure to Member States for related costs, destruction, disinfection and cleansing until 14 March 2003 for the Netherlands (Decision 2003/182/EC (OJ L 71, 15.3.2003, p. 
(84) Komisija je odločbe o povračilu izdatkov držav članic za spremljajoče stroške, uničenje, razkuževanje in čiščenje sprejela šele 14. marca 2003 za Nizozemsko (Odločba 2003/182/ES (UL L 71, 15.3.2003, str.
19)), France (Decision 2003/183/EC (OJ L 71, 15.3.2003, p. 
19)), Francijo (Odločba 2003/183/ES (UL L 71, 15.3.2003, str.
22)), Ireland (Decision 2003/184/EC (OJ L 71, 15.3.2003, p. 
22)) in Irsko (Odločba 2003/184/ES (UL L 71, 15.3.2003, str.
25)) and 24 September 2003 for the United Kingdom (Decision 2003/676/G (OJ L 249, 1.10.2003, p. 
25)) ter 24. septembra 2003 za Združeno kraljestvo (Odločba 2003/676/ES (UL L 249, 1.10.2003, str.
45)). 
45).
(85) Decision 90/424/EEC, Article 3(2). 
(85) Odločba 90/424/EGS, člen 3(2).
(86) The information required of Member States in the framework of either Council Directive 82/894/EEC (OJ L 378, 31.12.1982, p. 
(86) Podatki, zahtevani od držav članic bodisi v okviru Direktive Sveta 82/894/EGS (UL L 378, 31.12.1982, str.
3.3.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 54/23 Delays in reimbursing Member StatesŐ expenditure 82. 
3.3.2005 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 54/23 Roki za povračilo izdatkov držav članic 82.
Due to the variety of compensation systems adopted by the Member States (see paragraphs 62 to 73) and the amendments to reimbursement claims submitted by Member States, the CommissionŐs task of identifying within reimbursement claims the eligible value of each animal, or, at least, each category of animal, proved to be complex. 
Izkazalo se je, da je naloga Komisije, da v okviru zahtevkov za povračilo ugotovi vrednost vsake živali ali vsaj vsake kategorije živali, zapletena zaradi različnih sistemov nadomestil, ki so jih sprejele države članice (glej odstavke 62–73), in sprememb zahtevkov za povračilo, ki so jih države članice predložile.
This was why, as of 1 October 2003, more than two years after the end of the epidemic, neither Ireland, the Netherlands nor the United Kingdom had received any Community reimbursements, even though as a general rule farmers had received compensation within three months, after the culls in 2001. 
Zato do 1. oktobra 2003 oziroma več kot dve leti po koncu epidemije živalske bolezni niti Irska niti Nizozemska niti Združeno kraljestvo niso prejeli povračil Skupnosti, medtem ko so rejci na splošno prejeli nadomestila v treh mesecih po zakolih, opravljenih leta 2001.
Cofinancing rates aligned in the pig sector 84. 
Stopnja sofinanciranja usklajena le za prašiče 84.
Council Decision 90/424/EEC specifies that the Community contribution is equal to 60 % of the eligible costs incurred by the Member State in controlling FMD (see Table). 
Odločba Sveta 90/424/EGS določa, da prispevek Skupnosti znaša 60 % upravičenih stroškov, ki jih je država članica (glej tabelo) porabila za nadzor slinavke in parkljevke.
Management and specific regulations concerning reimbursement rates and compensation payable to farmers continue to be divided between the Directorate General for Health and Consumer Protection and the Directorate General for Agriculture: the Directorate General for Health and Consumer Protection handles the compensation for most animal diseases, with the exception of compensation for cattle slaughtered because of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE), which is still managed by the Directorate General for Agriculture. 
Upravljanje in posebne predpise glede stopenj povračila in nadomestil, ki se izplačajo rejcem, si še naprej delita Generalni direktorat za kmetijstvo in Generalni direktorat za zdravje in varstvo potrošnikov: Generalni direktorat za zdravje in varstvo potrošnikov upravlja nadomestila v zvezi z večino živalskih bolezni, razen nadomestil za govedo, zaklano zaradi transmisivne spongiformne encefalopatije (TSE), ki jih še naprej upravlja Generalni direktorat za kmetijstvo.
Even though the reimbursement rates applied by the Directorate General for Agriculture and the Directorate General for Health and Consumer Protection have been aligned for the pig sector, this does not apply for FMD and TSE: the rate is 60 % for FMD, while for TSE it is 70 %. 
Čeprav so bile stopnje povračila, ki sta jih uporabila Generalni direktorat za kmetijstvo in Generalni direktorat za zdravje in varstvo potrošnikov, usklajene za področje prašičereje, to ni bilo storjeno za slinavko in parkljevko ter TSE: stopnja za slinavko in parkljevko znaša 60 %, medtem ko je za TSE 70-odstotna.
For other animal diseases, including swine fever, it is 50 %. 
Stopnja za druge živalske bolezni, vključno s prašičjo kugo, znaša 50 %.
It follows that the reimbursement rates for the same categories of animal vary according to the disease that was the reason for slaughtering. 
Iz tega sledi, da se stopnje povračila za iste kategorije živali spreminjajo glede na bolezen, zaradi katere so zaklane.
The Court was unable to find the reason for these variations in the rates, which have been in force since 1996. 
Sodišče ni moglo odkriti razloga za te različne stopnje, ki veljajo od leta 1996.
Farmers do not contribute to Community financing of the control system 86. 
Kmetje niso prispevali k financiranju sistema nadzora Skupnosti 86.
In its reply to the CourtŐs Special report on classical swine fever (87), the Commission recognised that Ôproducers should share greater responsibility for the financial aspects of the eradication of animal diseasesŐ and said that it intended Ôto evaluate the possibility of supporting the Member States in establishing these schemes, in the framework of the revision of Community legislation on these issuesŐ. 
Komisija je v odgovor na posebno poročilo Sodišča o prašičji kugi (87) priznala, da „bi morali pridelovalci bolj sodelovati pri financiranju stroškov izkoreninjenja živalskih bolezni“, in zapisala, da namerava „preučiti možnosti pomoči državam članicam pri vzpostavitvi teh sistemov v okviru revizije zakonodaje Skupnosti na tem področju“.
No-one in this branch of agriculture (neither farmers affected by the epidemic nor those unaffected) contributes to Community eradication costs, although, as a study carried out by a university on behalf of the Ministry of Agriculture in Ireland shows (88), some of them, namely farmers who were unaffected by movement restrictions or slaughter measures, were able to benefit from price rises. 
Celotna živinorejska panoga (rejci, ki jih je ali ni prizadela epidemija živalske bolezni) ne prispeva k stroškom Skupnosti za izkoreninjenje bolezni, čeprav je imel lahko del rejcev, ki jih niso prizadeli niti ukrepi omejitve premikov niti zakoli, dobičke od zvišanja cen, kot kaže univerzitetna študija, opravljena za irsko ministrstvo za kmetijstvo (88).
The study quantified agriculture-related benefits in Ireland as some 107 million euro for 2001, essentially due to the increase in the volume and prices of exports to the United Kingdom. 
Ta študija je izmerila, da je imela podružnica na Irskem leta 2001 dobiček v višini približno 107 milijonov EUR predvsem zaradi povečanja količine in cene izvo-zov v Združeno kraljestvo.
However, some initiatives were taken in some Member States independently of the Commission, by either the public sector or the agricultural sector in question, partly with a view to reducing or supplementing the national expenditure on eradication. 
Vendar je v nekaterih državah članicah bodisi javni sektor bodisi kmetijski sektor neodvisno od Komisije sprejel pobude deloma zato, da bi zmanjšali ali dopolnili nacionalne izdatke za izkoreninjenje bolezni.
In the Netherlands, following the classical swine fever crisis, an animal health fund was set up, to pay compensation in the event of an epidemic. 
Na Nizozemskem so po krizi prašičje kuge ustanovili Sklad za zdravstveno varstvo živali, zadolžen za izplačevanje nadomestil v primeru epidemije.
It is funded from three sources: farmers, the European budget (where relevant) and the Dutch agriculture budget. 
Ta sklad se financira iz treh virov: s strani rejcev, iz evropskega proračuna (po potrebi) in nizozemskega kmetijskega proračuna.
A similar system is currently under study in the United Kingdom. 
V Združenem kraljestvu trenutno preučujejo podoben sistem.
In France farmers who are members of animal health associations (groupe-ments de dfense sanitaire) voluntarily set up equalisation funds to compensate members who, in times of crisis, incur losses as a result of measures restricting animal movements if there is no Community reimbursement to compensate for such losses (89). 
V Franciji rejci, včlanjeni v združenja za zdravstveno varstvo živali (groupements de défense sanitaire), prostovoljno oblikujejo izravnalne rezervacije, iz katerih se v primeru krize povrne škoda tistim, ki utrpijo izgube zaradi ukrepov omejitve premikov živali in za katere ni povračila Skupnosti (89).
(87) Special Report No 1/2000, paragraph 81. 
(87) Posebno poročilo št. 1/2000, odstavek 81.
(88) Economic evaluation of foot-and-mouth disease, Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Ireland, March 2002, carried out by Trinity College, University of Dublin. 
(88) Economic Evaluation of Foot and Mouth Disease, ki jo je opravil Trinity College Dublin, Department of Agriculture and Food, Irska, marec 2002.
(89) Systems of insurance have also been developed in Spain and Germany. 
(89) Sisteme zavarovanj so razvili tudi v Španiji in Nemčiji.
C 54/24 EN Official Journal of the European Union 3.3.2005 89. 
C 54/24 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 3.3.2005 89.
There are thus interesting initiatives of various kinds under development in the Member States. 
V državah članicah torej razvijajo zanimive, vendar različne pobude.
Moreover, although some of these initiatives may result in a reduction of Member StatesŐ contributions to the system for controlling disease, none of them offers any guarantee that the cost to the Community can be reduced. 
Brez okvira Skupnosti lahko nastane neenaka obravnava rejcev. Poleg tega, čeprav se lahko s temi pobudami zmanjša prispevek držav članic k sistemu nadzora, nobena med njimi ne zagotavlja zmanjšanja stroškov Skupnosti.
COMMISSION MANAGEMENT AFTER THE CRISIS Action in the veterinary field 90. 
KAKO JE KOMISIJA IZVAJALA UKREPE PO KRIZI Ukrepi na veterinarskem področju 90.
In December 2002 the Commission presented a new proposal for a directive. 
Komisija je decembra 2002 predložila nov predlog direktive.
It was adopted by the Council in September 2003 (90) and made important amendments to the incomplete measures of Directive 85/511/EEC, in particular: (a) without prejudicing the policy that has been in force since 1992, which gives priority to slaughtering animals contaminated by the virus, the new Directive puts forward emergency vaccination as an important means of controlling an epidemic of animal disease and lays down conditions for the possible marketing of meat from animals vaccinated on Union territory during an outbreak of animal disease; (b) it extends the Community requirements as regards contingency plans and requires Member States to review them every five years in the light of real-time alert exercises (91); for their part, most of the Member States had already revised their plans in the light of the experience gained during the crisis; (c) it gives five separate criteria, any of which may be used as the basis for declaring an outbreak of FMD on a holding (92); this should help to set preventive measures in motion more quickly; (d) it requires the Member States to introduce systems of penalties to be applied in cases of infringement of the national provisions adopted pursuant to Community directives (93); (e) it requires Member States to provide information about the dates on which the Community measures were implemented. 
Direktiva, ki jo je Svet sprejel septembra 2003 (90), pomembno spreminja nepopolne ukrepe Direktive 85/511/EGS, zlasti: (a) ne da bi vplivala na politiko, veljavno od leta 1992, ki daje prednost zakolu živali, okuženih z virusom, predstavlja cepljenje v nujnih primerih kot pomembno sredstvo za nadzor v primeru epidemije živalske bolezni in določa pogoje za morebitno trženje mesa živali, ki so bile med epidemijo cepljene na ozemlju Unije; (b) dopolnjuje zahteve Skupnosti na področju načrtov za ukrepe ob nepredvidljivih dogodkih in zahteva, da države članice vsakih pet let ponovno pregledajo te načrte s simulacijskimi vajami (91); večina držav članic je na podlagi izkušenj, dobljenih med krizo, svoje načrte že pregledala; (c) navaja pet posameznih meril, na podlagi katerih je mogoče razglasiti izbruh slinavke in parkljevke na gospodarstvu (92); to bi moralo prispevati k hitrejšemu začetku izvajanja varnostnih ukrepov; (d) obvezuje države članice k vzpostavitvi sistemov kazni za primere kršitev nacionalnih določb, sprejetih ob uporabi direktiv Skupnosti (93); (e) zahteva od držav članic informacije o datumih izvedbe ukrepov Skupnosti, kar bi moralo Komisiji omogočiti, da določi obseg povračila, ki ga dolguje Skupnost.
(90) Council Directive 2003/85/EC. 
(90) Direktiva Sveta 2003/85/ES.
(91) See Directive 2003/85/EC, Article 72(10). 
(91) Direktiva 2003/85/ES, člen 72(10).
(92) See Directive 2003/85/EC, Article 2 and Annex I. 
(92) Direktiva 2003/85/ES, člen 2 in Priloga I.
(93) Article 86 of Directive 2003/85/EC requires Member States to lay down rules on penalties. 
(93) Člen 86 Direktive 2003/85/ES od držav članic zahteva, da določijo pravila o kaznih.
Penalties must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. 
Kazni morajo biti učinkovite, sorazmerne in odvračilne.
Complementary measures were adopted at the same time, to reinforce the prevention and control measures: (a) as regards border controls, additional precautions were adopted by the Commission after the crisis, reinforcing checks on travellersŐ luggage and providing information to travellers (94); (b) on the basis of earlier Commission proposals, a ban on the warehousing in free zones of products that do not meet Community veterinary requirements was adopted after the crisis (95); (c) as regards animal feed, the Commission had already proposed a generalised ban on the use of kitchen waste and swill before the crisis (96); it succeeded in obtaining the adoption of its proposals at EU level; (d) after the crisis the Commission introduced a proposal for individual identification of sheep (97), which was adopted in December 2003 (98). 
Hkrati s tem so bili sprejeti dopolnilni ukrepi, ki bi morali okrepiti preventivne ukrepe in ukrepe nadzora: (a) Komisija je po krizi v zvezi z nadzorom na mejah sprejela dodatne varnostne ukrepe ter okrepila nadzor prtljage in obveščanje potnikov (94); (b) na podlagi prejšnjih predlogov Komisije je bila po krizi sprejeta prepoved skladiščenja proizvodov, ki ne izpolnjujejo veterinarskih zahtev Skupnosti, v prostih conah (95); (c) Komisiji je v zvezi z živalsko krmo uspelo na ravni EU sprejeti splošno prepoved uporabe odpadkov iz gostinstva in pomij (96), kar je predlagala že pred začetkom krize; (d) Komisija je po krizi predstavila predlog individualne identifikacije ovac (97), ki je bil sprejet decembra 2003 (98).
However, the measures adopted thus far have not taken some aspects sufficiently into account and remain minimal in these respects: (a) the desirability of farmersŐ notifying the disease quickly has not been reinforced by means of incentive measures or by imposing conditions on the payment of compensation to them; (b) the time allowed for Member States to notify the Commission of the first outbreak has not been reduced and is still 24 hours from confirmation of the disease, whereas experience showed that this time could be shortened; (c) slaughter of animals is compulsory as soon as an outbreak is confirmed. 
Vendar ukrepi, ki so bili sprejeti do sedaj, nekaterih vidikov ne upoštevajo dovolj in v tem pogledu ostajajo minimalni: (a) spodbujevalni ukrepi ali uporaba pogojev za izplačilo nadomestil niso okrepili pomembnosti hitre prijave bolezni s strani rejcev; (b) rok za prijavo 1. izbruha Komisiji s strani držav članic se ni skrajšal in še vedno traja 24 ur po potrditvi bolezni, medtem ko izkušnje dokazujejo, da ga je mogoče skrajšati; (c) zakol živali je obvezen, takoj ko se potrdi izbruh bolezni; potrditev bolezni je odslej hitrejša, vendar ni določeno, da mora do zakola priti takoj, in to pred zaključkom upravnih postopkov v zvezi z določitvijo vrednosti živali.
(94) Decision 2002/995/EC. 
(94) Odločba 2002/995/ES.
(95) Council Directive 2002/99/EC. 
(95) Direktiva Sveta 2002/99/ES.
(96) Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 . 
(96) Uredba (ES) št.
(97) COM (2002) 729 final of 13 December 2002. 
(97) COM(2002) 729 konč. z dne 13. decembra 2002.
(98) Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 2003 establishing a system for the identification and registration of ovine and caprine animals (OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 
21/2004 z dne 17. decembra 2003 o uvedbi sistema za identifikacijo in registracijo ovac in koz (UL L 5, 9.1.2004, str.