natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Court also observed that, in Hungary, tenant farmers could only sign or prolong land lease contracts under the condition that they transfer the payment entitlements to be allocated to them in the case of a future introduction of a new support scheme, free of charge, to the owner of the land. Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
Sodišče je na Madžarskem tudi opazilo, da so lahko kmetje, ki so najemniki, zakupne pogodbe sklenili ali po-daljšali, samo če so bili pripravljeni plačilne pravice, ki bi jim bile dodeljene v primeru uvedbe nove podporne sheme v prihodnosti, brezplačno prenesti na lastnika zemljišča. Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
LACK OF PREPARATION FOR A SUPPORT SCHEME BASED ON PAYMENT ENTITLEMENTS 61. 
NI PRIPRAV NA PODPORNO SHEMO NA PODLAGI PLAČILNIH PRAVIC 61.
This allowed the Member States to benefit from the advantages of a simple scheme but did not encourage them to prepare for an entitlement-based system. 
To je državam članicam omogočilo, da so izkoristile prednosti enostavne sheme, ni pa jih spodbudilo k pripravi na sistem na podlagi pravic.
Of the Member States visited during the audit only Hungary took concrete steps to replace the SAPS with the SPS as from 2009. However, following a ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court the specific national implementing model could not be put into effect. 
Od držav članic, ki so bile obiskane med revizijo, je od leta 2009 samo Madžarska sprejela konkretne ukrepe za zamenjavo SEPP s SEP, vendar zaradi razsodbe madžarskega ustavnega sodišča ni bilo mogoče uvesti specifičnega nacionalnega modela izvajanja.
Since then the national authorities have not taken any further initiatives to introduce the SPS. 
Odtlej nacionalni organi niso dali dodatnih pobud za uvedbo SEP.
In October 2011, the Commission proposed a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing new rules for direct payments to farmers40. According to this proposal, the SAPS as well as the SPS would be replaced by a basic payment scheme as from 2014. This scheme will continue to be based on payment entitlements. 
Komisija je oktobra 2011 predlagala uredbo Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o vzpostavitvi novih pravil za neposredna plačila kmetom.40 V skladu s tem predlogom bi od leta 2014 tako SEPP kot SEP nadomestila osnovna plačilna shema, ki bi še naprej temeljila na plačilnih pravicah.
Farmers would then have to own payment entitlements as well as declare eligible hectares at their disposal in order to receive payments. 
Kmetje bi potem morali za prejetje plačil imeti plačilne pravice in hkrati prijaviti upravičene hektare, ki jih imajo na voljo.
Under the shared management system, national administrations would be required to allocate the payment entitlements to farmers in 2014 and manage them in subsequent years. 
V okviru sistema deljenega upravljanja bi morale nacionalne uprave leta 2014 kmetom dodeliti plačilne pravice in jih v naslednjih letih upravljati.
39 Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2006 of 19 December 2006 amending and correcting Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ L 384, 29.12.2006 p. 
39 Uredba Sveta (EC) št. 2012/2006 z dne 19. decembra 2006 o spremembah in popravku Uredbe (ES) št.
30 40 19 October 2011. COM(2011) 625 final/2 of Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
40 COM(2011) 625 final/2 z dne 19. oktobra 2011. 30 Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
The Court found that, currently, knowledge of entitlement-based systems of direct payments was very poor both in national administrations and among farmers. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da so nacionalne uprave in kmetje doslej zelo slabo poznali sisteme neposrednih plačil na podlagi pravic.
Neither the Commission nor the national authorities have actively prepared administrations and farmers to change to an entitlement-based system. 
Niti Komisija niti nacionalni organi niso uprav in kmetov dejavno pripravili na prehod na sistem na podlagi pravic.
At the time of the audit, in 2011, the Polish authorities had only started at central level to gain some familiarity with entitlement-based aid (currently SPS) but had not taken steps towards a systematic identification of the technical requirements of the management of such a scheme after 2013. 
V času revizije leta 2011 so se poljski organi šele na centralni ravni začeli seznanjati s pomočjo na podlagi pravic (sedaj SEP), vendar niso storili še nič v zvezi s sistematično opredelitvijo tehničnih zahtev upravljanja take sheme po letu 2013.
The Bulgarian authorities were preparing an assessment of the impact of a changeover to SPS on the administration and farmers. 
Bolgarski organi so pripravljali oceno učinka prehoda na SEP na upravo in kmete.
In Romania the authorities had entered in March 2012 into bilateral discussions with representatives of the Commission and undertaken a consultation of farmers. 
Romunski organi so marca 2012 začeli dvostranske razprave s predstavniki Komisije in posvetovanja s kmeti.
In Slovakia since 2009 the authorities had only analysed the financial effects of the changeover to the SPS but decided to continue with the SAPS until 2013. 
Slovaški organi so od leta 2009 analizirali samo finančne učinke prehoda na SEP, vendar so se odločili uporabljati SEPP do leta 2013.
When the SPS was introduced in the EU-15 Member States, the national administrations had at least 20 months to prepare the transition from coupled aid to the new scheme. 
Ko je bila SEP uvedena v EU-15, so imele nacionalne uprave vsaj 20 mesecev za pripravo prehoda z vezane pomoči na novo shemo.
Nevertheless, in its Annual Reports on the financial years 2006 and 2007 the Court observed weaknesses in the implementation of an entitlement-based system which had sometimes resulted in significant delays of the payments to the farmers41. The Court sees therefore a risk that an insufficient preparation for the introduction of entitlement-based aid would result in similar difficulties in the SAPS Member States. 
Kljub temu je Sodišče v svojih letnih poročilih za proračunski leti 2006 in 2007 opozorilo na slabosti pri izvajanju sistema na podlagi pravic, ki so včasih povzročile precejšnje zamude pri plačilih kmetom.41 Sodišče zato meni, da obstaja tveganje, da bo zaradi nezadostne priprave na uvedbo pomoči na podlagi pravic v državah članicah, ki uporabljajo SEPP, prišlo do podobnih težav.
41 See Annual Reports concerning the financial year 2006, paragraphs 5.33 to 5.38, the financial year 2007, paragraphs 5.14, 5.21 to 5.25. 31 Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
41 Glej odstavke od 5.33 do 5.38 letnega poročila za proračunsko leto 2006 ter odstavke 5.14 in od 5.21 do 5.25 letnega poročila za proračunsko leto 2007. 31 Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
The SAPS is a simple to administer scheme which enabled the new Member States after they joined the EU in 2004 and 2007 to pay income support to their farmers. 
SEPP je shema, ki je enostavna za upravljanje in je novim državam članicam po pridružitvi EU leta 2004 in leta 2007 omogočila plačevanje dohodkovne podpore njihovim kmetom.
In being decoupled from agricultural production it has also anticipated the objectives of the 2003 reform of CAP which were to enhance the market orientation of farmers while making payments conditional on respecting cross-compliance requirements. 
Ker ni vezana na kmetijsko proizvodnjo, so v njej predvideni tudi cilji reforme SKP iz leta 2003, namenjeni okrepitvi tržne usmerjenosti kmetov, plačila pa so postala pogojena s spoštovanjem zahtev navzkrižne skladnosti.
The design and the detailed implementation of the SAPS by the Member States resulted however in a number of questionable features regarding the intended beneficiary of the aid, the identification of eligible areas and the distribution of the support across the farming population. 
Zasnova in izvajanje SEPP v državah članicah sta privedla do mnogih vprašljivih elementov v zvezi s predvidenimi upravičenci do pomoči, opredelitvijo upravičenih površin in razdelitvijo podpore med kmetijsko prebivalstvo.
As in the case of SPS, the distribution of the aid among farmers is based on the area of holdings and does neither reflect the specific regional characteristics of farming activity, nor the contribution of farmers to the production of public goods. 
Razdeljevanje pomoči med kmete kot pri SEP temelji na površini kmetijskega gospodarstva in ne odraža specifičnih regionalnih značilnosti kmetijskih dejavnosti niti prispevka kmetov k proizvodnji javnih dobrin.
The impact of SAPS on restructuring the agricultural sector has not yet been assessed and persisting structural weaknesses still negatively affect the income of many farmers. 
Učinek SEPP na prestrukturiranje kmetijskega sektorja še ni bil ocenjen in stalne strukturne slabosti še vedno negativno vplivajo na dohodke mnogih kmetov.
Finally, the Member States currently applying the SAPS were not yet prepared for the introduction of an entitlement-based income support scheme after 2013. 
In nazadnje, države članice, ki sedaj uporabljajo SEPP, še niso bile pripravljene na uvedbo sheme dohodkovne podpore na podlagi pravic po letu 2013.
Therefore, the Council and Parliament may wish to consider whether such features should be reviewed along the lines set out in the recommendations below, in the context of the preparation of the forthcoming reform of the CAP. 
Zato bi bilo dobro, če bi Svet in Parlament razmislila o ponovnem pregledu teh elementov pri pripravi skorajšnje reforme SKP v skladu s smernicami iz spodnjih priporočil.
BENEFICIARIES, ELIGIBLE LAND AND AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES 68. 
UPRAVIČENCI, UPRAVIČENA ZEMLJIŠČA IN KMETIJSKE DEJAVNOSTI 68.
In its report on the SPS the Court noted the inadequacy of the definition of ‘farmers’ and the payment of aid to beneficiaries not or only marginally involved in farming. 
Sodišče je v svojem poročilu o SEP opozorilo na neustreznost opredelitve „kmeta“ in na izplačevanje pomoči upravičencem, ki se ne ukvarjajo s kmetijstvom, ali pa se z njim ukvarjajo le kot z obrobno dejavnostjo.
The current audit allows the same conclusions to be drawn with respect to the SAPS. 
Ta revizija je prišla do enakih zaključkov glede SEPP.
In addition, in some of these Member States SAPS aid was also legally paid to (and supported the income of) public entities managing state land and not otherwise involved in farming. 
Poleg tega je bila pomoč iz SEPP v nekaterih zadevnih državah članicah zakonito izplačana javnim subjektom, ki upravljajo državna zemljišča in se sicer ne ukvarjajo s kmetijstvom (kar pomeni, da je bila zanje dohodkovna podpora).
SAPS Member States did not precisely identify eligible areas and payments were made in relation to unutilised parcels or land devoted to non-agricultural activities. Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
Države članice, ki uporabljajo SEPP, niso natančno opredelile upravičenih površin in izvršena so bila plačila za zemljišča, ki niso v uporabi, ali pa so namenjena nekmetijskim dejavnostim. Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
33 RECOMMENDATION 1 The Court reiterates its recommendation that income support should be directed to the active farmer who conducts concrete and regular agricultural activities. 
33 PRIPOROČILO 1 Sodišče ponavlja svoje priporočilo, naj bo dohodkovna podpora usmerjena v aktivne kmete, ki dejansko izvajajo redne kmetijske dejavnosti.
In particular, public entities managing state land and not otherwise involved in farming should be excluded from SAPS income support. 
Dohodkovne podpore iz SEPP predvsem ne bi smeli prejemati javni subjekti, ki upravljajo državna zemljišča in se sicer ne ukvarjajo s kmetijstvom.
RECOMMENDATION 2 The eligibility of land for aid should be clearly defined and limited to parcels on which GAEC standards require concrete and regular agricultural activities to be carried out. 
PRIPOROČILO 2 Upravičenost zemljišč do pomoči naj se jasno opredeli in omeji na parcele, na katerih je treba zaradi standardov v zvezi z dobrimi kmetijskimi in okoljskimi pogoji dejansko izvajati redne kmetijske dejavnosti.
In the event of the introduction of an entitlement-based aid scheme payment entitlements should be allocated only to such parcels. 
Če bo uvedena shema pomoči, ki bo temeljila na pravicah, naj se plačilne pravice dodelijo samo za take parcele.
DISTRIBUTION OF SAPS AID 70. The distribution of SAPS aid is essentially based on the area of agricultural parcels farmed at the disposal of farmers without taking into consideration neither the specific regional characteristics of farming activity, nor the contribution of farmers to the production of public goods. 
Razdeljevanje pomoči iz SEPP v bistvu temelji na površini kmetijskih parcel, na katerih se izvajajo kmetijske dejavnosti in ki jih imajo kmetje na voljo, brez upoštevanja specifičnih regionalnih značilnosti kmetijskih dejavnosti ali prispevka kmetov k proizvodnji javnih dobrin.
Due to the dual structure of agriculture in most of the new Member States, the large majority of farmers receive only very small amounts of aid while a small number of large beneficiaries absorb most of the aid. 
Zaradi dvodelne strukture kmetijstva v večini novih držav članic velika večina kmetov prejema samo zelo majhne zneske pomoči, večino pomoči pa prejme majhno število velikih upravičencev.
RECOMMENDATION 3 A more balanced distribution of aid between farmers should be sought either by capping higher individual payments or by taking into consideration the specific circumstances of the farms in the different regions. Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
PRIPOROČILO 3 Prizadevati si je treba za bolj uravnoteženo razdeljevanje pomoči med kmeti z določitvijo zgornje meje za posamezna plačila ali z upoštevanjem specifičnega položaja kmetij v različnih regijah. Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
Since the accession of the new Member States in 2004 and 2007 the level of support has been annually increasing and will continue to do so until 2013 or 2016 respectively. 
Raven pomoči se je od pristopa novih držav članic leta 2004 in 2007 letno večala, kar se bo nadaljevalo še do leta 2013 oziroma 2016.
The impact of the current level of aid and future increases on the restructuring of the farm sector and the efficiency of farms is however not yet known. 
Učinek sedanje ravni pomoči in prihodnjih zvišanj na prestrukturiranje kmetijskega sektorja in učinkovitost kmetij še ni znan.
STRUCTURAL WEAKNESSES AFFECTING FARM INCOME 73. 
STRUKTURNE SLABOSTI, KI VPLIVAJO NA DOHODKE KMETIJ 73.
Persisting structural weaknesses in the agricultural economy of SAPS Member States may impact the long-term effectiveness and efficiency of the direct payments. 
Stalne strukturne slabosti v kmetijstvu v državah članicah, ki uporabljajo SEPP, lahko vplivajo na dolgoročno uspešnost in učinkovitost neposrednih plačil.
CAPITALISATION OF PARTS OF THE AID IN LAND AND LAND LEASE PRICES 74. 
KAPITALIZACIJA DELOV POMOČI V CENAH IN ZAKUPNINAH ZEMLJIŠČ 74.
As a result of being strictly related to the area at the disposal of a farmer, SAPS aid may lead to an increase in land and land lease prices and thus reduce the effectiveness of the aid. 
Ker je pomoč iz SEPP strogo vezana na površino, ki jo ima kmet na voljo, lahko privede do zviševanja cen in zakupnin zemljišč ter tako zmanjša uspešnost pomoči.
34 RECOMMENDATION 4 The Commission should analyse the extent to which the effectiveness and efficiency of the direct payments is adversely affected by structural weaknesses and land prices. 
34 PRIPOROČILO 4 Komisija naj analizira, koliko strukturne slabosti in cene zemljišč negativno vplivajo na uspešnost in učinkovitost neposrednih plačil.
On the basis of such analysis the Commission should consider complementary measures aimed at restructuring the farm sector and making it more competitive. Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
Na podlagi take analize naj razmisli o dopolnilnih ukrepih za prestrukturiranje kmetijskega sektorja in povečanje njegove konkurenčnosti. Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
TRANSITIONAL CHARACTER OF THE SAPS AND THE PREPARATION FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF ENTITLEMENT-BASED AID 75. 
PREHODNOST SEPP IN PRIPRAVA NA UVEDBO POMOČI NA PODLAGI PRAVIC 75.
The SAPS is defined as a transitional system to be replaced by a new entitlement-based scheme. 
SEPP je opredeljena kot prehodni sistem, ki ga bo nadomestila nova shema na podlagi pravic.
However, most Member States applying the SAPS have not prepared for the introduction of a scheme of this type. 
Vendar se večina držav članic, ki uporabljajo SEPP, ni pripravila na uvedbo tovrstne sheme.
Experience from the introduction of the SPS in the EU-15 Member States shows that the implementation of entitlement-based aid resulted in significant delays in the payments to the farmers. 
Pri uvedbi SEP v državah članicah EU-15 se je pokazalo, da je zaradi izvajanja sheme na podlagi pravic prišlo do precejšnjih zamud pri plačilih kmetom.
35 RECOMMENDATION 5 The Commission should actively support the Member States and more closely monitor their preparations for the introduction of a future entitlement-based scheme. 
35 PRIPOROČILO 5 Komisija naj dejavno podpira države članice in natančno spremlja njihove priprave na uvedbo prihodnje sheme, ki bo temeljila na pravicah.
This Report was adopted by Chamber I, headed by Mr Ioannis SARMAS, Member of the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 10 October 2012. 
To poročilo je sprejel senat I, ki ga vodi Ioannis SARMAS, član Evropskega računskega sodišča, v Luxembourgu na zasedanju 10. oktobra 2012.
For the Court of Auditors Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA President Special Report No 16/2012 – The effectiveness of the Single Area Payment Scheme as a transitional system for supporting farmers in the new Member States 
Za Računsko sodišče Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA Predsednik Posebno poročilo št. 16/2012 – Uspešnost sheme enotnega plačila na površino kot prehodnega sistema za podporo kmetom v novih državah članicah
36 ANNEX I COMPARISON BETWEEN THE SAPS AND THE SINGLE PAYMENT SCHEME (SPS) Both SPS and SAPS are designed to provide income support to farmers. 
36 PRILOGA I PRIMERJAVA MED SEPP IN SHEMO ENOTNEGA PLAČILA (SEP) SEP in SEPP sta zasnovani za zagotavljanje dohodkovne podpore kmetom.
In both cases the areas of agricultural land on which the payment is based must be at the farmers’ disposal on a specific date in each application year and must be maintained in GAEC (as defined in Regulation (EC) No 73/2009). 
Pri obeh morajo biti površine kmetijskih zemljišč, na katerih temelji plačilo, kmetom na voljo na določen dan v vsakem letu oddaje zahtevkov, poleg tega pa je treba zemljišča ohranjati v dobrih kmetijskih in okoljskih pogojih (kot je določeno v Uredbi (ES) št.
However, there are two main differences between SPS and SAPS: (a) Payment entitlements Under the SPS, aid is determined by two sets of requirements (i) the number of eligible hectares one has at one’s disposal and (ii) the value of the payment entitlements held. 
Vendar sta med SEP in SEPP dve bistveni razliki: (a) Plačilne pravice V okviru SEP se pomoč določa z dvema sklopoma zahtev, in sicer (i) s številom upravičenih hektarov, ki jih ima posameznik na voljo, in (ii) z vrednostjo plačilnih pravic, ki jih ima.
Payment entitlements give right to a fixed amount of aid per hectare. 
Plačilne pravice dajo pravico do fiksnega zneska pomoči na hektar.
In most cases, the value of each payment entitlement reflects the value of direct aid granted during a historical reference period. 
V večini primerov vrednost vsake plačilne pravice odraža vrednost neposredne pomoči iz preteklega referenčnega obdobja.
Payment entitlements may be traded independently of the land. 
S plačilnimi pravicami se lahko trguje neodvisno od zemljišč.
By contrast, SAPS aid is determined as a flat rate payment per hectare calculated annually by dividing the national financial envelope by the utilised agricultural area in the Member State concerned and there are no payment entitlements. (b) Definition of eligible agricultural land: GAC and GAEC Under the SPS, payments are made in relation to any agricultural area of a holding that is used for an agricultural activity (which includes maintaining it in GAEC). 
Pomoč iz SEPP pa je za razliko od tega določena kot pavšalni znesek na hektar, ki se vsako leto izračuna z delitvijo nacionalnega finančnega okvira s kmetijskimi zemljišči v uporabi v zadevni državi članici, plačilne pravice pa ne obstajajo. (b) Opredelitev upravičenega kmetijskega zemljišča: GAC in GAEC Pri SEP se plačila izvršijo za katero koli kmetijsko površino gospodarstva, ki se uporablja za kmetijsko dejavnost (kar vključuje njeno ohranjanje v dobrih kmetijskih in okoljskih pogojih).
In contrast, under SAPS, the eligible agricultural area is that which is actually utilised and that was in good agricultural condition (GAC) as at 30 June 2003. 
Za razliko od tega pa je pri SEPP upravičena tista kmetijska površina, ki je dejansko v uporabi in je bila 30. junija 2003 v dobrem kmetijskem stanju.
The concept of GAC was not further defined in the regulation. 
Pojem dobrega kmetijskega stanja v uredbi ni dodatno opredeljen.
For all practical purposes it was only used at the time of accession as way of excluding from the UAA parcels that were abandoned as at June 2003 and preventing farmers from claiming aid in relation to such land that they would have brought back into cultivation after that date. 
Za vse praktične namene se je uporabljal samo v času pristopa zaradi izključitve parcel, ki so bile junija 2003 opuščene, iz KZU in da kmetje ne bi mogli zahtevati pomoči za taka zemljišča, ki bi jih znova kultivirali po tem datumu.
It is therefore merely a historical concept which no longer serves any practical purpose with the two exceptions mentioned hereafter. 
Zato ta pojem ni več relevanten in nima več praktičnega namena, razen pri dveh v nadaljevanju navedenih izjemah.
In the cases of Bulgaria and Romania, the Act of Accession did not mention the 30 June 2003 time limit and, in principle, GAC must be observed each year. 
V aktu o pristopu Bolgarije in Romunije rok 30. junij 2003 ni omenjen, dobro kmetijsko stanje pa je treba upoštevati vsako leto.
GAC standards have been defined only in Bulgaria. 
Standardi dobrega kmetijskega stanja so bili opredeljeni samo v Bolgariji.
In Romania, the authorities did not define GAC with the consequence that unutilised areas were not excluded from the agricultural area. 
Romunski organi tega niso opredelili, zato zemljišča, ki niso bila v uporabi, niso bila izključena iz kmetijskih površin.