natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It will be difficult for the Commission to monitor and report consistently on thematic objectives for all five ESI funds and, hence, on the contribution of these funds to Europe 2020. 
Komisija bo težko dosledno spremljala tematske cilje za vseh pet skladov ESI in njihov prispevek k strategiji Evropa 2020 ter poročala o njih.
High level Europe 2020 targets are not systematically translated into operational targets in partnership agreements and programmes. 
Ciljne vrednosti strategije Evropa 2020 na visoki ravni se ne prenašajo sistematično v operativne ciljne vrednosti v sporazumih o partnerstvu in programih.
In the case of two ESI funds (EARFD and EMFF), legislation does not require that they are structured around thematic objectives. 
Za dva sklada ESI (Evropski kmetijski sklad za razvoj podeželja (EKSRP) in Evropski sklad za pomorstvo in ribištvo) se v zakonodaji ne zahteva strukturiranosti okrog tematskih ciljev.
Furthermore, the intro‐ duction of common indicators for each fund is an important step but there are limitations in design which will have a knock‐on effect on the quality of reporting by the Commission. 
Poleg tega je uvedba skupnih kazalnikov za vsak sklad pomemben korak, vendar obstajajo omejitve v zvezi z njihovo zasnovo, ki bodo imele posredni učinek na kakovost poročanja Komisije.
We recommend that all partnership agreements and programmes include common result indicators, where possible shared by the different funds, and designed to monitor progress at the local, Member State and EU level. 
Sodišče priporoča, naj vsi sporazumi o partnerstvu in programi vključujejo skupne kazalnike rezultatov, ki se, kadar je mogoče, uporabljajo za vse sklade in so zasnovani za spremljanje napredka na lokalni ravni, ravni držav članic in na ravni EU.
The Commission should make proposals to the legislator to address these issues. 
Komisija naj da zakonodajalcu predloge za obravnavanje teh vprašanj.
Poor performance in terms of results achieved does not prevent Member States benefitting from the performance reserve. 
Države članice lahko kljub slabi smotrnosti v smislu doseženih rezultatov izkoristijo rezervo za smotrnost poslovanja.
The performance reserve should be the main incentive for the Member States to continue to focus on performance once the programmes have started. 
Rezerva za smotrnost poslovanja bi morala biti glavna spodbuda za to, da države članice ostanejo osredotočene na smotrnost tudi po začetku programov.
A small proportion of EU funding at programme level can be held back and only made available if certain targets are met. 
Majhen delež financiranja EU je mogoče na ravni programov zadržati in ga dati na voljo šele, če se dosežejo neki cilji.
However, there are flaws in the arrangements which weaken the performance framework in terms of use of indicators, incentives and focus on results. 
Toda v ureditvah obstajajo napake, zaradi katerih je okvir za smotrnost v zvezi z uporabo kazalnikov, spodbud in osredotočenosti na rezultate šibkejši.
We recommend that the Commission proposes to the legislator that the performance framework is based, as far as possible, on common result indicators. 
Sodišče priporoča, naj Komisija zakonodajalcu predlaga, naj okvir za smotrnost poslovanja temelji, kolikor je to mogoče, na skupnih kazalnikih rezultatov.
Overall results 23 Objectives need to be further adapted to a performance culture There have been improvements in the annual reporting on performance by individual Commission directorates-general (DGs). 
Skupni rezultati 23 Cilje je treba dodatno prilagoditi kulturi smotrnosti V letnih poročilih posameznih generalnih direktoratov Komisije o smotrnosti poslovanja je bilo uvedenih nekaj izboljšav.
This is notable in the central guidance provided for the preparation of programme statements, management plans and annual activity reports. 
To je zlasti opazno pri centraliziranih navodilih, ki se zagotavljajo za pripravo izjav o programih, načrtov upravljanja in letnih poročil o dejavnostih.
However, reporting is not fully adapted to the transition from the old to the new MFF. 
Toda poročanje ni v celoti prilagojeno prehodu s starega na novi večletni finančni okvir.
It is often not possible to identify which objectives and targets were kept or updated from the old MFF and which were discontinued. 
Pogosto ni mogoče ugotoviti, kateri cilji in ciljne vrednosti iz starega večletnega finančnega okvira so bili ohranjeni ali posodobljeni in kateri so bili opuščeni.
In the absence of comparable information there is a risk that it is not possible to assess whether previous objectives and targets have been achieved. 
Brez primerljivih informacij obstaja tveganje, da ne bo mogoče oceniti, ali so bili prejšnji cilji in ciljne vrednosti doseženi.
Weak focus on results and best value for money The 24 special reports we published in 2014 cover a wide range of performance audit subjects which assess whether the EU’s intervention was managed in accordance with the principles of sound financial management (economy, efficiency and effectiveness). 
Slaba osredotočenost na rezultate in stroškovno učinkovitost Evropsko računsko sodišče je v 24 posebnih poročilih, ki jih je objavilo leta 2014, obravnavalo zelo raznolike teme na področju revizije smotrnosti poslovanja in ocenilo, ali so bili ukrepi EU upravljani v skladu z načeli dobrega finančnega poslovodenja (gospodarnost, učinkovitost in uspešnost).
We have assessed these reports to highlight whether, in the examined areas, there was a focus on results and whether projects likely to deliver value for money were selected. 
Ta poročila je Sodišče ocenilo, da bi pokazalo, ali je na preučenih področjih obstajala osredotočenost na rezultate in ali so bili izbrani projekti, za katere je bilo verjetno, da bodo stroškovno učinkoviti.
The following are some examples. 
Spodaj je navedenih nekaj primerov.
Examples: Weak focus on results In our audit of EuropAid, we concluded that the monitoring and evaluation systems in place did not provide adequate information on results achieved (Special Report No 18/2014). 
Primera: Slaba osredotočenost na rezultate Pri reviziji EuropeAida je Sodišče na primer prišlo do zaključka, da vzpostavljeni sistemi spremljanja in vrednotenja ne zagotavljajo ustreznih informacij o doseženih rezultatih (Posebno poročilo št. 18/2014).
Similarly, in our report on the External Borders Fund, we found that the responsible authorities did not monitor the achievement of results or did so insufficiently (Special Report No 15/2014). 
Tudi v poročilu o Skladu za zunanje meje je prišlo do zaključka, da pristojni organi niso spremljali doseganja rezultatov ali pa so ga spremljali nezadostno (Posebno poročilo št. 15/2014).
Example: The projects likely to deliver the best value for money have not always been selected Poor project selection was found in our audit of EU-funded airport infrastructure. 
Primer: Projekti, za katere je bilo verjetno, da bodo najbolj stroškovno učinkoviti, niso bili vedno izbrani Slabo izbiro projektov je Sodišče ugotovilo v svojem posebnem poročilu o letališki infrastrukturi, financirani s sredstvi EU.
The need for such investments could only be demonstrated for around half of the projects examined. 
Potrebo po takih naložbah je bilo mogoče dokazati samo za približno polovico preučenih projektov.
Also, around a third of the airports were not profitable and ran the risk that they would be closed without continuous public support (Special Report 21/2014). Want to know more? 
Poleg tega približno tretjina letališč ni bila donosna in obstajalo je tveganje, da jih bo brez stalne javnofinančne podpore treba zapreti (Posebno poročilo št. 21/2014). Želite izvedeti več?
Full information on our assessment on performance can be found in Chapter 3, ‘Getting results from the EU budget’, of the 2014 annual report on the EU budget. 
Vse informacije o oceni smotrnosti poslovanja, ki jo je pripravilo Sodišče, so v poglavju 3 letnega poročila za leto 2014 – Doseganje rezultatov proračuna EU.
All special reports can be found on our website: http://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/AuditReportsOpinions.aspx 
Vsa posebna poročila so na voljo na spletni strani Sodišča http://www.eca.europa.eu/sl/Pages/AuditReportsOpinions.aspx.
A closer look at revenue 24 and spending areas Note on the naming of Member States in examples: Due to our sampling approach we do not audit transactions in every Member State, beneficiary state and/or region each year. 
Podrobneje o prihodkih 24 in področjih porabe Opomba o navajanju držav članic v primerih: Sodišče v skladu s svojim pristopom k vzorčenju ne revidira vsako leto transakcij v vseh državah članicah ter državah in/ali regijah upravičenkah.
The examples of errors given in this document are provided in order to illustrate the most frequent error types. 
Primeri napak so navedeni zaradi prikaza najpogostejših vrst napak in ne kot osnova za zaključke o posameznih državah članicah, državah in/ali regijah upravičenkah.
A closer look at revenue and spending areas 25 Revenue €143.9 billion What we audited The audit covered the EU’s revenue, through which it finances its budget. 
Podrobneje o prihodkih in področjih porabe 25 Prihodki 143,9 milijarde EUR Kaj je Sodišče revidiralo Revizija je zajela prihodke EU, s katerimi se financira njen proračun.
In 2014, revenue contributions calculated on the basis of Member States’ GNI and the VAT collected by them, provided 66 % and 12 % of the total respectively. 
Leta 2014 so proračunski prihodki, izračunani na podlagi BND držav članic in DDV, ki so ga zbrale, pomenili 66 % oziroma 12 % vseh prihodkov.
Traditional own resources, mainly customs duties collected on imports and the sugar production charge collected by Member State administrations on behalf of the EU, provided 12 % of the revenue, with the remaining 10 % being from other sources. 
Iz naslova tradicionalnih lastnih sredstev, večinoma uvoznih carinskih dajatev in proizvodnih dajatev za sladkor, so organi držav članic za račun EU zbrali 12 % prihodkov, preostalih 10 % pa je iz drugih virov.
Estimated level of error: No 0.0 % (2013: 0.0 %) Our audit of EU revenue GNI and VAT-based EU revenue is calculated on the basis of macroeconomic statistics and estimates provided by Member States. 
Ne 0,0 % (leta 2013: 0,0 %) Naša revizija prihodkov EU Prihodki EU iz naslova BND in DDV se izračunajo na podlagi makroekonomskih statističnih podatkov in ocen, ki jih zagotovijo države članice.
Our audit of the regularity of the underlying transactions covers the Commission’s systems for the processing of the data it receives but not the initial generation by the authorities in the Member States. 
Revizija pravilnosti z izkazi povezanih transakcij, ki jo je opravilo Sodišče, zajema sistem Komisije za obdelavo podatkov, ki jih prejme, ne pa njihove prvotne priprave, za katero so pristojni organi v državah članicah.
As a consequence, our audit conclusion addresses the impact of any errors by the Commission on overall revenue. 
Zato revizijski zaključki Sodišča obravnavajo vpliv katere koli napake Komisije na celotni znesek prihodkov.
For customs duties and sugar levies, we examine the Commission’s treatment of the statements submitted by the Member States and the controls in selected Member States, the receipts of the amounts by the Commission and their recording in the accounts. 
V zvezi s carinskimi dajatvami in prelevmani na sladkor Sodišče preuči, kako je Komisija obdelala izjave držav članic, kontrole v izbranih državah članicah, prejemke Komisije in njihovo evidentiranje v računovodskih izkazih.
Our overall audit evidence indicates that these systems were overall effective and we found no errors in the transactions we tested. 
Splošni revizijski dokazi Sodišča kažejo, da so bili ti sistemi na splošno uspešni, in Sodišče v preizkušenih transakcijah ni odkrilo napak.
We draw attention to the updates to GNI data in 2014 that led to adjustments to Member States’ contributions of an unprecedented size, in particular those addressing reservations and those revising Member States’ methods and sources. 
Sodišče opozarja na posodobitve podatkov o BND leta 2014, ki so privedle do največjih prilagoditev prispevkov držav članic doslej, zlasti tistih, ki obravnavajo pridržke, in tistih, do katerih je prišlo zaradi sprememb metod in virov držav članic.
A reservation is a means by which a doubtful element in GNI data submitted by a Member State is kept open for possible correction. 
Pridržek je sredstvo, ki omogoča, da se dvomljiv element v podatkih o BND, ki so jih predložile države članice, popravi tudi kasneje.
The verification cycles of the Commission for GNI cover a long period. 
Ciklusi preverjanja, ki jih Komisija uporablja za BND, zajemajo dolgo obdobje.
The resulting corrections can have a significant impact on some Member States’ contributions. 
Posledični popravki lahko bistveno vplivajo na prispevke nekaterih držav članic.
A closer look at revenue and spending areas 26 In parallel, we identified the need for the Commission to reduce the impact of major revisions made by Member States on methods and sources they use for the compilation of their GNI. 
Podrobneje o prihodkih in področjih porabe 26 Sodišče je hkrati ugotovilo, da mora Komisija zmanjšati učinek večjih sprememb metod in virov, ki jih države članice uporabljajo za pripravo svojih podatkov o BND.
For example, Cyprus and the Netherlands both experienced significant increases in their contributions due to such revisions. 
Zaradi teh sprememb sta se bistveno povečala na primer prispevka Cipra in Nizozemske.
The proposals put forward by the Commission in 2013 to manage this risk are still outstanding with no further action having been taken by the Commission to introduce a common EU revision policy. 
Predlogi Komisije iz leta 2013 za obvladovanje tega tveganja še vedno niso izvedeni, Komisija pa ni sprejela dodatnih ukrepov za uvedbo skupne politike EU za spremembe.
Regarding customs duties, the Member States’ customs authorities perform checks to verify whether tariff and import regulations are respected by importers. 
V zvezi s carinskimi dajatvami carinski organi držav članic preverjajo, ali uvozniki upoštevajo tarifne in uvozne predpise.
We found, as in previous years, that the quality of these checks varied across the Member States we audited. 
Sodišče je kot v prejšnjih letih ugotovilo, da se kakovost tega preverjanja močno razlikuje med obiskanimi državami članicami.
We also observed that the updated version of the Customs Audit Guide, issued by the Commission in 2014, does not cover some of the shortcomings we identified in our visits to Member States, such as issues related to how to deal with imports cleared in other Member States. 
Opazilo je tudi, da posodobljena različica Navodil za carinsko revizijo, ki jih je Komisija izdala leta 2014, ne zajema nekaterih pomanjkljivosti, ki jih je Sodišče ugotovilo med svojimi obiski v državah članicah, kot so na primer zadeve, povezane z načinom obravnave uvoza, carinjenega v drugih državah članicah.
What we recommend We recommend that the Commission: ο takes measures to reduce the number of years covered by reservations at the end of the next verification cycle for GNI-based contributions; ο puts in place arrangements to reduce the impact of revisions of methods and sources presented by Member States for the compilation of their GNI; ο improves the guidance given to Member States’ customs authorities for the checks they make; and ο ensures that Member States have the appropriate systems in place for preparing and managing their statements of customs duties and sugar levies. Want to know more? 
Kaj Sodišče priporoča Sodišče priporoča, naj Komisija: ο sprejme ukrepe za zmanjšanje števila let, ki jih zajemajo pridržki na koncu naslednjega ciklusa preverjanja za prispevke iz naslova BND, ο sprejme ukrepe za zmanjšanje učinka sprememb metod in virov, ki jih uvedejo države članice za zbiranje podatkov o BND, ο izboljša navodila carinskim organom držav članic za preglede, ki jih izvajajo, in ο zagotovi, da imajo države članice ustrezne sisteme za pripravo in upravljanje svojih izjav o carinskih dajatvah in prelevmanih na sladkor. Želite izvedeti več?
Full information on our audit of EU revenue can be found in Chapter 4 of the 2014 annual report on the EU budget. 
Vse informacije o naši reviziji prihodkov EU so v poglavju 4 letnega poročila o proračunu EU za leto 2014.
A closer look at revenue and spending areas 27 Competitiveness for growth and jobs €13.0 billion What we audited The objectives of this spending include improving research and innovation, enhancing education systems and promoting employment, ensuring a digital single market, promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency, modernising the transport sector and improving the business environment, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). 
Podrobneje o prihodkih in področjih porabe 27 Konkurenčnost za rast in delovna mesta 13,0 milijarde EUR Kaj je Sodišče revidiralo Ta poraba je namenjena izboljševanju raziskav in inovacij, krepitvi izobraževalnih sistemov in spodbujanju zaposlovanja, zagotavljanju enotnega trga digitalnih vsebin, spodbujanju energije iz obnovljivih virov in energetske učinkovitosti, posodabljanju prometnega sektorja ter izboljševanju poslovnih okolij, zlasti za mala in srednja podjetja (MSP).
Research and innovation accounts for about 60 % of spending. 
Raziskave in inovacije pomenijo približno 60 % porabe.
Expenditure is made through the seventh framework programme for research and development 2007-2013 (FP7) and Horizon 2020, the new framework programme covering the 2014-2020 period. 
Odhodki se izvršujejo preko 7. okvirnega programa za raziskave in razvoj 2007–2013 in Obzorja 2020, novega okvirnega programa za obdobje 2014–2020.
Other major spending instruments support education, training, youth and sport (the Lifelong Learning Programme — LLP and Erasmus+); the development of transport infrastructure (the Trans-European Networks Transport Programme — TEN-T and Connecting Europe Facility — CEF); projects in the energy sector (the European Energy Programme for Recovery — EEPR); and the Galileo satellite navigation programme. 
Drugi pomembni instrumenti porabe podpirajo izobraževanje, usposabljanje, mlade in šport (program vseživljenjsko učenje in Erasmus+), razvoj prometne infrastrukture (program vseevropsko prometno omrežje TEN-T in instrument za povezovanje Evrope), projekte v energetskem sektorju (evropski energetski program za oživitev) ter program Galileo za satelitski navigacijski sistem.
Almost 90 % of spending is in the form of grants to private and public beneficiaries, with the Commission reimbursing costs declared by the beneficiaries in project cost statements. 
Skoraj 90 % porabe pomenijo nepovratna sredstva zasebnim in javnim upravičencem, pri čemer Komisija povrne stroške, ki jih upravičenci prijavijo v izkazih stroškov.
In the area of research and innovation, we found the same type and range of errors that we have detected throughout the course of our audit of FP7: incorrectly calculated personnel costs; other ineligible direct costs such as unsubstantiated costs for travel or equipment; as well as ineligible indirect costs based on erroneous overhead rates or including costs categories not linked to the project. Affected by material error? 
Sodišče je na področju raziskav in inovacij ugotovilo isto vrsto in obseg napak, kot jih je ugotavljalo med celotno revizijo 7. okvirnega programa: nepravilno izračunane stroške dela, druge neupravičene neposredne stroške, kot so neutemeljeni stroški za potovanja ali opremo, neupravičene posredne stroške na podlagi napačnih stopenj režijskih stroškov ali vključitve kategorij stroškov, ki niso bili povezani s projektom.
Estimated level of error1: Yes 5.6 % (2013: 4.0 %) A closer look at revenue and spending areas 28 Example: Significant errors in research and innovation costs declared for reimbursement under FP7 by an SME We found that €764 000 of costs declared by an SME working with 16 partners on a renewable energy project financed through FP7 were almost entirely ineligible. 
Podrobneje o prihodkih in področjih porabe 28 Primer: Bistvene napake pri stroških za raziskave in inovacije, za katere je neko MSP zahtevalo povračilo v okviru 7. okvirnega programa Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je bilo 764 000 EUR stroškov, ki jih je prijavilo neko MSP, ki je s 16 partnerji sodelovalo pri projektu v zvezi z obnovljivimi viri energije, ki se je financiral preko 7. okvirnega programa, skoraj v celoti neupravičenih.
The SME owner had charged an hourly rate well above that set in the Commission’s guidelines. 
Lastnik MSP je zaračunaval urno postavko, ki je bila veliko višja od zneska, določenega v smernicah Komisije.
The declared indirect costs also included ineligible items, which were based on estimates and could not be reconciled with the beneficiary’s accounting records. 
Prijavljeni posredni stroški so vključevali tudi neupravičene postavke, ki so temeljile na ocenah in jih ni bilo mogoče uskladiti z računovodskimi evidencami upravičenca.
Horizon 2020 has simpler funding rules than FP7 and the Commission has invested considerable effort in reducing administrative complexity. 
Pravila za financiranje za program Obzorje 2020 so enostavnejša od tistih za 7. okvirni program, Komisija pa si je zelo prizadevala zmanjšati upravno zapletenost.
However, some elements in the new framework programme actually bring an increased risk of error. 
Toda zaradi nekaterih elementov novega okvirnega programa je tveganje napake celo večje.
For example, with the aim of supporting better research and innovation and generating growth and jobs, Horizon 2020 is designed to increase the participation of SMEs and new entrants, but these types of participants are especially prone to error. 
Na primer, zaradi podpiranja boljših raziskav in inovacij ter zagotavljanja rasti in ustvarjanja delovnih mest je program Obzorje 2020 zasnovan tako, da bi povečal sodelovanje malih in srednjih podjetij in novih udeležencev, vendar sta ti vrsti udeležencev še zlasti dovzetni za napake.
Horizon 2020 also introduces specific eligibility criteria in certain cases (for example, where researchers receive additional remuneration or where participants make use of a large research infrastructure). 
Program Obzorje 2020 uvaja tudi posebna merila za upravičenost v nekaterih primerih (npr. kadar raziskovalci prejmejo dodatne osebne prejemke ali kadar udeleženci uporabljajo veliko raziskovalno infrastrukturo).
We also detected errors in reimbursed costs in the other major spending instruments. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo tudi napake pri povrnjenih stroških v okviru drugih pomembnih instrumentov porabe.
These include unsubstantiated and ineligible costs, as well as cases of non-compliance with the rules on public procurement. 
Mednje spadajo neutemeljeni in neupravičeni stroški ter nespoštovanje pravil o javnem naročanju.
Examples: Errors in costs reimbursed in other programmes TEN‐T In one project, the beneficiary directly awarded a contract for IT consultancy services without following the required open international procedure. 
Primer: Napake pri stroških, povrnjenih v okviru drugih programov TEN‐T Pri enem projektu je upravičenec oddal naročilo za svetovalne storitve IT neposredno brez zahtevanega mednarodnega odprtega postopka oddaje javnega naročila.
In another project, the beneficiary incorrectly declared as eligible expenditure a legal settlement with a subcontractor over a breach of contract. 
Pri drugem projektu je upravičenec nepravilno kot upravičene prijavil stroške za sodno poravnavo, doseženo s podpogodbenikom v zvezi s kršitvijo pogodbe.
EEPR A beneficiary included ineligible non-statutory costs (bonuses based on the company’s profit) in its calculation of personnel costs and also claimed for indirect costs not linked to the project. 
EEPR Upravičenec je v svoj izračun stroškov dela vključil stroške, ki niso zakonsko predpisani (bonuse na podlagi dobička družbe), poleg tega pa je zahteval povračilo posrednih stroškov, ki niso bili povezani s projektom.