natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission regularly discusses the functioning of the aid scheme, including issues related to effectiveness, with Member States in the Management Committee meetings. 
Komisija o delovanju sheme pomoči, vključno z vprašanji, povezanimi z uspešnostjo, redno razpravlja z državami članicami na srečanjih upravljalnega odbora.
Furthermore, matters requiring clarification are dealt with in bilateral meetings between the Commission and Member States. 
Poleg tega se zadeve, ki zahtevajo pojasnila, obravnavajo tudi na dvostranskih srečanjih med Komisijo in državami članicami.
20.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/57 During its various Clearance of Accounts missions and desk audits, the Commission paid particular attention to ensuring that Member StatesŐ systems of management and control offer reasonable assurance that expenditure declared conforms to the regulatory requirements. 
20.11.2006 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 282/57 Med opravljanjem različnih potrditev obračunov in revizij v pisarni je Komisija posebno pozornost posvetila zagotavljanju, da sistemi upravljanja in nadzora držav članic nudijo razumno zagotovilo, da prijavljeni odhodki izpolnjujejo predpisane zahteve.
However, some progress towards the related objectives could either be clearly seen or assumed in over 70 % of cases the Court audited. 
Vendar je v več kot 70 odstotkih primerov, ki jih je Sodišče revidiralo, določen napredek pri uresničevanju ustreznih ciljev jasno viden ali nakazan.
Member States decide on their own detailed administrative arrangements and the Commission verifies that these are in compliance with the regulations, which fix the control rate at a reasonable level. 
Države članice si same določijo podrobna upravna določila, Komisija pa preveri, ali so ta v skladu z uredbami, ki določajo delež nadzora na razumni ravni.
The CommissionŐs observations arising from its 2005 audit missions indicate several cases where the Member States interpreted EU law very broadly. 
Opažanja Komisije, ki izhajajo iz revizijskih misij leta 2005, kažejo več primerov, ko so si države članice razlagale zakonodajo EU zelo široko.
The Commission is pleased to note that the CourtŐs findings give a positive global picture of progress made by producer organisations thanks to Community support. 
Komisija z zadovoljstvom ugotavlja, da zaradi podpore Skupnosti ugotovitve Sodišča dajejo pozitivno globalno sliko napredka organizacij proizvajalcev.
The Commission acknowledges that operational programmes effects cannot be seen as the only factor pushing producers towards the objectives set in the Council Regulation. 
Komisija priznava, da učinki operativnih programov ne morejo pomeniti edinega dejavnika, ki proizvajalce spodbuja k uresničevanju ciljev, ki jih določa Uredba Sveta.
However, they do contribute to a more market oriented approach. 
Vendar pa ti vseeno prispevajo k bolj tržno usmerjenemu pristopu.
Market forces, particularly recently, have put producers under enormous pressure, resulting in major crises for leading EU products (i.e. peaches, citrus, table grapes, tomatoes, tomatoes for processing). 
Tržne sile zlasti v zadnjem času zelo pritiskajo na proizvajalce, kar povzroča krizne razmere za vodilne izdelke EU (tj. breskve, agrume, namizno grozdje, paradižnik, paradižnik za predelavo).
As a result of these crises, in a struggle for economic survival and having cost reduction as a priority, producers may pay less attention to quality aspects and neglect environmental concerns. 
Zaradi teh razmer proizvajalci v boju za ekonomsko preživetje in z zmanjšanjem stroškov kot prednostno nalogo morda posvečajo manj pozornosti vidikom kakovosti in zanemarjajo okoljska vprašanja.
This risk makes the operational programmes an important element for keeping producers focussed on quality and environment issues in their actions. 
Zaradi tega tveganja so operativni programi pomemben dejavnik, ki pripomore k temu, da se proizvajalci pri svojih dejanjih še naprej osredotočajo na vprašanja kakovosti in okoljska vprašanja.
The Commission is aware of the shortcomings pointed out by the Court. 
Komisija se zaveda pomanjkljivosti, ki jih je izrazilo Sodišče.
However, this policy approach, having in mind the increased market access implied by the Doha Development Agenda and the increasing concentration of the demand side, is still the best instrument to try to achieve a better balanced chain (from producer to consumer). 
Vendar pa je ta pristop politike, ki upošteva povečan dostop do trga, kot ga navaja Razvojna agenda iz Dohe, in vse večjo koncentracijo povpraševanja, še vedno najboljši instrument za dosego bolj uravnotežene verige (od proizvajalca do potrošnika).
One of the aims of the incoming reform is to address the weaknesses and to reinforce the available instruments, in particular by favouring mergers between producer organisations, Associations of producer organisations, cooperation between producer organisations, and producer organisations with a transnational dimension. 
Eden od ciljev prihodnje reforme je odprava pomanjkljivosti in utrditev razpoložljivih instrumentov, zlasti s podpiranjem združitev organizacij proizvajalcev, združenj organizacij proizvajalcev, sodelovanja med organizacijami proizvajalcev ter organizacij proizvajalcev s transnacionalno razsežnostjo.
The Commission considers that the ex ante check made by its services on Member StatesŐ requests for exceptions under Article 37(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 were sufficient to ensure coherence between the two instruments. 
Komisija meni, da predhodni pregledi, ki so jih na podlagi zahtevkov držav članic za izjeme v skladu s členom 37(7) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1257/99 opravile njene službe, zadostujejo za zagotovitev skladnosti med tema dvema instrumentoma.
The reasons for the unsatisfactory participation of producers in the scheme will be assessed in future evaluations. 
Razlogi za nezadovoljivo udeležbo proizvajalcev v shemi bodo ocenjeni v prihodnjih ocenah.
This issue will be assessed and appropriately addressed in the forthcoming review of the CMO (end 2006), with the aim of making the aid scheme simpler and more effective in the future. 
To vprašanje bo ocenjeno in ustrezno obravnavano v prihodnjem pregledu SUT (konec leta 2006), in sicer z namenom, da bi bila shema pomoči v prihodnje preprostejša in učinkovitejša.
The results of the evaluation could lead to additional legislative initiatives from the Commission, if these are considered to help achieve the schemeŐs objectives. 
Na podlagi rezultatov ocenjevanja lahko Komisija predlaga dodatne zakonodajne pobude, če naj bi te pomagale doseči cilje sheme.
It agrees with the aims expressed in the CourtŐs recommendations and will, as part of the impact assessment, explore how best they can be achieved. 
Strinja se s cilji, navedenimi v priporočilu Sodišča, in bo v okviru ocene učinka raziskala, kako bi jih lahko najbolje dosegli.
The Commission will address in its forthcoming reform proposal the issue of lack of organisation in the main fruit and vegetable producing Member States by encouraging membership of producer organisations more effectively. 
Komisija bo v prihodnjem predlogu za reformo reševala vprašanje pomanjkanja organiziranosti v državah članicah, ki so glavne proizvajalke sadja in zelenjave, tako, da bo učinkoviteje spodbujala članstvo v organizacijah proizvajalcev.
C 282/58 EN Official Journal of the European Union 20.11.2006 99 and 100. 
C 282/58 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 20.11.2006 99. in 100.
In a sector where supply is facing ever stronger bargaining power from the demand side, the concentration of supply is, and will be, a valid tool for ensuring a more balanced market. 
V sektorju, v katerem se ponudba sooča z vse večjo pogajalsko močjo na strani povpraševanja, koncentracija ponudbe je in tudi bo veljavno sredstvo za zagotavljanje bolj uravnovešenega trga.
Background............................................................ 
UVOD....................................................................
TheEuropeanRefugeeFund ............................................... 
SintezaglavnihspremembmedESBIinESBII ................................
Auditscope,objectivesandapproach........................................ 
Razlikeprirazlagidržavčlanicizkrivljajoosnovo ..............................
Basisforthedistributionofamounts ........................................ 
Nizkaučinkovitostpostopkadodeljevanjasredstev .............................
PositiveexamplesofERFmanagement ....................................... Monitoring and remedial action by the Commission had insufficient results . . . . . . . . . . Paragraph I-VIII 1-16 1 2-9 10-13 14-16 17-25 17-19 20-22 23 24-25 26-39 26 27-33 34-36 37 38-39 Page 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 
Rezultati spremljanja in popravnih ukrepov Komisije niso bili zadostni . . . . . . . . . . . . . Odstavek I–VIII 1–16 1 2–9 10–13 14–16 17–25 17–19 20–22 23 24–25 26–39 26 27–33 34–36 37 38–39 Stran 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8
C 178/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union 31.7.2007 Paragraph Page WHAT WAS THE IMPACT OF THE ERF ON NATIONAL EFFORTS IN THE AREA OF ASY-LUM?..................................................................... 
ZAKLJUČEK ...............................................................
40-44 9 CONCLUSION ............................................................. 
PRIPOROČILA .............................................................
45-50 9 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................... 
Odstavek Stran 40–44 9 45–50 9 51–54 10 Priloga I – Primerjava predpisov Skupnosti glede Evropskega sklada za begunce za obdobje 2000–2004 (ESBI)inzaobdobje2005–2010(ESBII) .........................................
15 AnnexIII Ń ERFallocationprocedureofprovisionalamountstoMemberStates .................... 
15 PrilogaIII – PostopekESBzadodeljevanjezačasnihzneskovdržavamčlanicam .....................
19 31.7.2007 EN Official Journal of the European Union SUMMARY I. The European Refugee Fund (ERF or the Fund) was established in September 2000 for an initial five-year period ending in 2004, with a financial reference amount of 216 million euro. 
19 31.7.2007 SL Uradni list Evropske unije POVZETEK I. Evropski sklad za begunce (v nadaljnjem besedilu ESB ali Sklad) je bil ustanovljen septembra 2000 za začetno petletno obdobje do leta 2004 z referenčnim finančnim zneskom v višini 216 milijonov EUR.
The FundŐs creation occurred at a time of increased EU activity in the rapidly evolving field of asylum and immigration. 
Sklad je bil ustanovljen v obdobju okrepljene dejavnosti EU na hitro razvijajočem se področju azila in priseljevanja.
The aim of the ERF was to support and encourage the efforts made by the Member States in receiving and bearing the consequences of receiving refugees and displaced persons. 
Cilj ESB je bil podpirati in spodbujati prizadevanja držav članic pri sprejemanju beguncev in razseljenih oseb ter prevzemanju posledic v zvezi s tem.
The management of the Fund was shared between the Commission and the Member States. 
Vodenje Sklada so si delile Komisija in države članice.
The Commission had the overall responsibility for the correct implementation of the Fund, while the Member States were in charge of carrying out the actual measures. 
Komisija je bila splošno odgovorna za pravilno izvajanje sklada, države članice pa so bile pristojne za izvajanje dejanskih ukrepov.
Fundable measures were divided into three groups: conditions for the reception, integration, and repatriation of refugees and displaced persons. 
Ukrepi, ki jih je mogoče podpreti, so bili razdeljeni v tri skupine: sprejem, vključevanje ter vračanje beguncev in razseljenih oseb v izvorno državo.
The Court carried out an audit of the management of the first phase of the European Refugee Fund (2000 to 2004), focusing on the following: Ń was the distribution of funds to Member States sound? Ń was the management by the Commission and the Member States sound? Ń what was the impact of the ERF on national efforts in the area of asylum? 
Sodišče je opravilo revizijo vodenja prve faze Evropskega sklada za begunce (od leta 2000 do 2004), pri čemer se je osredotočilo na naslednje: — Je bilo razdeljevanje sredstev državam članicam ustrezno? — So Komisija in države članice dobro vodile Sklad? — Kakšen je bil vpliv ESB na nacionalna prizadevanja na področju azila?
The distribution of funds was mainly based on the number of third-country nationals and stateless persons, as defined by the ERF, that have entered the Member States. 
Sredstva so se večinoma razdeljevala na podlagi števila državljanov tretjih držav in oseb brez državljanstva, kot jih opredeljuje ESB, ki so vstopili v države članice.
The Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) was responsible for collecting statistical data on asylum figures from the Member States. 
Statistični urad Evropskih skupnosti (Eurostat) je bil odgovoren za zbiranje statističnih podatkov o azilu od držav članic.
No harmonised definitions of the target groups as defined in the ERF rules existed, and Member States applied different interpretations. 
Ni bilo usklajenih opredelitev ciljnih skupin, kot so določene v pravilih ESB, in države članice so uporabljale različne razlage.
Thus the basis used for the ERF allocations was not consistent, comparable and reliable. 
Zato osnova za dodeljevanje sredstev ESB ni bila dosledna, primerljiva in zanesljiva.
Serious discrepancies in the underlying statistical data were detected. 
Ugotovljena so bila huda neskladja v s tem povezanih statističnih podatkih.
In some cases, the data were changed due to the evolution of the Member StatesŐ legislation in the direction of greater harmonisation. 
V nekaterih primerih so bili podatki spremenjeni zaradi razvoja zakonodaje držav članic v smeri večje usklajenosti.
V. The entire annual allocation procedure was cumbersome and its efficiency questionable. 
V. Celoten postopek letnega dodeljevanja sredstev je bil okoren, njegova učinkovitost pa vprašljiva.
Member States had sole responsibility for the management and administration of projects, while the Commission had to ensure that Member States had smoothly functioning management and control systems. 
Države članice so nosile izključno odgovornost za vodenje in upravljanje projektov, Komisija pa je morala zagotoviti, da imajo države članice sisteme vodenja in kontroliranja, ki nemoteno delujejo.
Although shortcomings were detected and some corrective measures were taken by the Commission, not all problems detected in the Member States had yet been resolved. 
Čeprav so bile ugotovljene pomanjkljivosti in je Komisija sprejela nekatere popravne ukrepe, pa še niso rešene vse težave, ugotovljene v državah članicah.
The CourtŐs audit has shown that some of the provisions of ERF I, in particular the eligibility rules, were open to significant differences of interpretation. 
Revizija Sodišča je pokazala, da je bilo nekatere določbe ESB I, zlasti pravila o upravičenosti do sredstev, mogoče razlagati precej različno.
The Court recommends, taking account of its findings and the changes already made in ERF II, that appropriate measures be taken to ensure that the ERF is more clearly and precisely targeted for the future. 
Sodišče priporoča, da se ob upoštevanju njegovih ugotovitev in že opravljenih sprememb v ESB II sprejmejo primerni ukrepi, da se v prihodnosti zagotovi jasnejša in natančnejša ciljna usmerjenost ESB.
Regarding the question of the impact of the ERF on national funding, information was limited both in the Member States and at the Commission. 
Glede vpliva ESB na nacionalno financiranje so bile informacije omejene tako v državah članicah kot v Komisiji.
In the light of the projects visited, some positive changes in national efforts were noted, mainly with regard to testing innovatory projects and integrating their results into national strategies. 
Glede na obiskane projekte so bile opažene nekatere pozitivne spremembe pri nacionalnih prizadevanjih, zlasti glede preizkušanja inovacijskih projektov in integriranja njihovih rezultatov v nacionalne strategije.
C 178/3 INTRODUCTION Background 1. 
C 178/3 UVOD Ozadje 1.
The Treaty of Amsterdam envisages the progressive establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice (1). 
Amsterdamska pogodba predvideva postopno vzpostavitev območja svobode, varnosti in pravice (1).
Pursuant to this, the European Council agreed in October 1999 in (1) Article 61 of the Treaty establishing the European Communities, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam. Tampere (Finland) on a comprehensive programme, fixing political guidelines and operational objectives, including the establishment of a common European asylum system. 
Na podlagi tega se je Evropski svet oktobra 1999 v Tampereju (Finska) dogovoril (1) Člen61PogodbeoustanovitviEvropskeskupnosti,kakorjebilaspre-menjena z Amsterdamsko pogodbo. o celovitem programu ter določil politične smernice in operativne cilje, vključno z vzpostavitvijo skupnega evropskega azilnega sistema.
The European Refugee Fund 2. 
Evropski sklad za begunce 2.
The European Refugee Fund (ERF or the Fund) was established in September 2000 for an initial five-year period ending in 2004 (2). 
Evropski sklad za begunce (v nadaljnjem besedilu ESB ali Sklad) je bil ustanovljen septembra 2000 za začetno petletno obdobje do leta 2004 (2).
(2) Council Decision 2000/596/EC of 28 September 2000 establishing the European Refugee Fund (OJ L 252, 6.10.2000). 
(2) Odločba Sveta 2000/596/ES z dne 28. septembra 2000 o ustanovitvi Evropskega sklada za begunce (UL L 252, 6.10.2000).
C 178/4 EN Official Journal of the European Union 31.7.2007 3. 
C 178/4 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 31.7.2007 3.
The ERF was created Ôto promote a balance in the efforts made by Member States in receiving and bearing the consequences of receiving refugees and displaced personsŐ (1). 
ESB je bil ustanovljen za „spodbujanje uravnoteženih prizadevanj držav članic pri sprejemu beguncev ter razseljenih oseb in prevzemanju posledic za to“ (1).
It was to be based on the principle of solidarity between Member States, and it should ensure fair burden-sharing between them. 
Temeljil naj bi na načelu solidarnosti med državami članicami in zagotavljal pravično porazdelitev bremena med njimi.
The Fund was to support measures that aim to achieve appropriate reception conditions, as well as integrating refugees and displaced persons into the society of a Member State. 
Sklad naj bi podpiral ukrepe, katerih namen je doseči ustrezne pogoje za sprejem, prav tako pa vključevanje beguncev in razseljenih oseb v družbo posamezne države članice.
In addition, the ERF was to allocate resources to assist refugees and displaced persons with repatriation, including help in taking an informed decision to return to their country of origin. 
Poleg tega naj bi ESB dodeljeval sredstva za pomoč beguncem in razseljenim osebam pri vračanju v izvorno državo, vključno s pomočjo pri tem, da na podlagi prejetih informacij sprejmejo odločitev o vrnitvi v izvorno državo.
A financial reference amount of 216 million euro was allocated to the ERF. 
Skladu je bil dodeljen referenčni finančni znesek v višini 216 milijonov EUR.
The final appropriations amounted to 243 million euro, including 49 million euro provided for emergency measures but not used. 
Končna odobrena proračunska sredstva so znašala 243 milijonov EUR, vključno z 49 milijoni EUR, zagotovljenimi za izredne ukrepe, ki pa niso bili porabljeni.
As of the end of December 2006 the Commission estimates that 141 million euro had been paid. 
Po ocenah Komisije je bilo do konca decembra 2006 plačanih 141 milijonov EUR.
The following table shows the appropriations and commitments for the years 2000 to 2004. 
Naslednja preglednica prikazuje odobrena proračunska sredstva in obveznosti za obdobje 2000–2004.
Appropriations and commitments 2000 to 2004 (million euro) Administrative expenditure ERF Operational expenditure ERF Administrative expenditure emergency measures ERF Operational expenditure emergency measures ERF 2000 Appropriations 3,64 189,02 0,96 49,03 to 2004 Commitments 2,19 189,00 (*) (*) 2004 Appro-Commit- priations ments 0,66 0,12 42,27 42,27 0,16 (*) 9,82 (*) 2003 Appro-Commit- priations ments 0,73 0,65 42,27 42,27 0,18 (*) 9,82 (*) 2002 Appro-Commit- priations ments 0,73 0,53 45,08 44,99 0,18 (*) 9,82 (*) 2001 Appro-Commit- Appro-Commit- Total 242,65 191,19 52,91 42,39 53,00 42,92 55,81 45,52 45,00 34,40 36,01 25,95 2000 priations ments priations 0,81 0,21 0,72 0,67 34,19 34,19 25,28 25,28 0,20 (*) 0,23 (*) 9,80 (*) 9,78 (*) ments (*) Appropriations foreseen for emergency needs and not used between 2000 and 2004. 
2000–2004 2004 2003 2002 Odo-Odo- 2001 (v milijonih EUR) 2000 Odobrena Obvez-prora- nosti čunska sredstva 0,72 0,67 25,28 25,28 0,23 (*) 9,78 (*) Odobrena proračunska sredstva in obveznosti 2000–2004 Upravni odhodki ESB Operativni odhodki ESB Upravni odhodki izredni ukrepi ESB Operativni odhodki izredni ukrepi ESB Odo-Odo- brena Obvez-brena prora-nosti proračunska čunska sredstva sredstva 3,64 2,19 0,66 189,02 189,00 42,27 0,96 (*) 0,16 49,03 (*) 9,82 Odo-Obvez- brena nosti proračunska sredstva 0,12 0,73 42,27 42,27 (*) 0,18 (*) 9,82 Obvez-brena Obvez-brena nosti prora-nosti proračunska čunska sredstva sredstva 0,65 0,73 0,53 0,81 42,27 45,08 44,99 34,19 (*) 0,18 (*) 0,20 (*) 9,82 (*) 9,80 Obveznosti 0,21 34,19 (*) (*) (*) Vir: Skupaj 242,65 191,19 52,91 42,39 53,00 42,92 55,81 45,52 45,00 34,40 36,01 25,95 Odobrena proračunska sredstva, predvidena za nujne potrebe, ki med letoma 2000 in 2004 niso bila porabljena.
Source: European Commission accounting system. 
Računovodski sistem Evropske komisije.
According to DG JLS, the number of asylum applicants, refugees and persons under protection amounted to approximately 303 000 in 1996, which increased to 475 000 in 1999 and decreased to 374 000 in 2003. 
Po podatkih GD JLS je bilo leta 1996 število prosilcev za azil, beguncev in zaščitenih oseb približno 303 000, leta 1999 je število naraslo na 475 000, leta 2003 pa se je znižalo na 374 000.
Community aid was granted by the European Refugee Fund by means of co-financed actions. 
Evropski sklad za begunce je podeljeval pomoč Skupnosti s sofinanciranjem dejavnosti.
The co-financing was established at a maximum of 50 % of the total cost of the measure. 
Sofinanciranje je znašalo največ 50 % celotnih stroškov ukrepa.
This share was increased to a maximum of 75 % for countries covered by the Cohesion Fund. 
Ta delež se je povečal na največ 75 % za države, ki jih zajema Kohezijski sklad.
Commission payments to Member States were made in the form of pre-financing, interim and final payments. 
Komisijina plačila državam članicam so bila opravljena v obliki predplačil, vmesnih in končnih plačil.
Synthesis of main changes between ERF I and ERF II 10. 
Sinteza glavnih sprememb med ESB I in ESB II 10.
A second phase of the programme (ERF II) has since been launched, covering the period 2005 to 2010 (4). 
Medtem se je začela druga faza programa (ESB II), ki zajema obdobje od leta 2005 do 2010 (4).
The following comparison highlights only the main differences between ERF I and ERF II. 
V naslednji primerjavi so izpostavljene samo glavne razlike med ESB I in ESB II.
It is neither an analysis nor an evaluation of those changes. 
Ne gre za analizo ali vrednotenje teh sprememb.
A detailed comparison between ERF I and ERF II is given in Annex I. 
V Prilogi I je podrobna primerjava med ESB I in ESB II.
(4) Council Decision 2004/904/EC of 2 December 2004 establishing the European Refugee Fund for the period 2005 to 2010 (OJ L 381, 28.12.2004). 
(4) Odločba Sveta 2004/904/ES z dne 2. decembra 2004 o ustanovitvi Evropskega sklada za begunce za obdobje 2005–2010 (UL L 381, 28.12.2004).
Denmark is not participating in the ERF. 
Danska ne sodeluje pri ESB.