natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Zadeva: Patenti za programsko opremo
Subject: Software patents
Od prve obravnave v Evropskem parlamentu in iz razvoja določenih stališč na ravni Sveta se zdi, da predlog Komisije povzroča številne težave, ki onemogočajo sprejetje skupnega stališča Sveta in s tem nadaljnjega posredovanja Parlamentu.
Since Parliament's first reading, owing to various changes in position within the Council a large number of problems appear to have arisen in connection with the Commission proposal, preventing the Council from adopting a common position and forwarding it to Parliament.
Ali lahko Svet razloži, kako daleč je sprejetje tega besedila, kolikor ga zadeva?
What stage has been reached within the Council as regards the adoption of this text?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0061/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0061/04
Ali lahko Komisija pove, ali ima v luči zadnjih dogodkov namen umakniti oziroma v celoti ali delno spremeniti svoj predlog?
Can the Commission state whether, given the recent developments, it is contemplating withdrawing its proposal or amending it either wholly or in part?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0062/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0062/04
Zadeva: politični dogovor Sveta o predlogu direktive o patentiranju izumov, ki se uporabljajo v računalništvu
Subject: Political agreement of the Council on the proposal for a directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions
Predlog direktive o patentiranju izumov, ki se uporabljajo v računalništvu ne daje odgovora gospodarskim, znanstvenim in kulturnim izzivom sektorja programske opreme, kot tudi ne potrebi po spodbujanju inovacij in tehnološkega napredka ali posebnim potrebam malih in srednjih podjetij.
The proposal for a directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions does not answer the economic, scientific and cultural challenges of the software sector nor the need to promote innovation and tecnhonologic development or the particular needs of small and medium-sized enterprises.
Namen predloga te direktive je odpiranje možnosti patentom na področju znanja, ki služijo interesom prevlade na trgu in donosnosti velikih večnacionalnih družb v sektorju.
This proposal for a directive aims to open up the possibility of patents on human knowledge, serving the interests of market domination and the profitability of the big multinational corporations of the sector.
Svet za konkurenco je 18. maja 2004 dosegel politični dogovor o predlogu direktive o patentiranju izumov, ki se uporabljajo v računalništvu, kar odpira vrata patentom na področju programske opreme.
On 18 May 2004, the Competition Council reached a political agreement on the proposal for a directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions, that opens the door to software patents.
Politični dogovor je bil sprejet s kvalificirano večino, s tremi vzdržanimi glasovi (Belgija, Avstrija in Italija) in z enim glasom proti (Španija).
This political agreement was reached by qualified majority with three abstentions (Belgium, Austria and Italy) and one vote against (Spain).
Svet potem ni več formalno glasoval o dogovoru, ne le zaradi vse večjega nasprotovanja s strani gibanj, ki se zavzemajo za brezplačno programsko opremo, softverskih hiš, programerjev, znanstvenikov in celo nekaterih nacionalnih parlamentov, ampak tudi zaradi dejstva, da je nizozemski nacionalni parlament od svoje vlade zahteval, da umakne podporo predlogu direktive, tj. da glasuje proti doseženemu političnemu dogovoru.
The Council has not had a formal vote on the agreement since then, due not only to the growing opposition from the free software movement, software houses, programmers, scientists, small and medium-sized enterprises and even some national parliaments, but also to the fact that the Dutch national parliament has asked its government to withdraw its support for this proposal for a directive, i.e. to vote against the political agreement reached.
Glede na splošno nasprotovanje posledicam tega predloga direktive, ki bi ustvarila ovire inovacijam in tehnološkemu razvoju, zakaj Svet tega predloga ne zavrne in razveljavi politični dogovor z dne 18. maja 2004?
In view of the broad opposition to the consequences of this proposal for a directive that will create obstacles to innovation and technological development, why does the Council not reject this proposal for a directive and cancel its political agreement of 18 May 2004?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0063/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0063/04
Zadeva: politični dogovor Sveta o predlogu direktive o patentiranju izumov, ki se uporabljajo v računalništvu
Subject: Political agreement of the Council on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions
Predlog direktive o patentiranju izumov, ki se uporabljajo v računalništvu ne daje odgovora gospodarskim, znanstvenim in kulturnim izzivom sektorja programske opreme kot tudi ne potrebi po spodbujanju inovacij in tehnološkega napredka in posebnim potrebam malih in srednjih podjetij.
The proposal for a directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions does not answer the economic, scientific and cultural challenges of the software sector nor the need to promote innovation and tecnhonologic development or the particular needs of small and medium-sized enterprises.
Namen tega predloga direktive je odpiranje možnosti patentom na področju znanja, ki služijo interesom prevlade na trgu in donosnosti velikih večnacionalnih družb v sektorju.
This proposal for a directive aims to open up the possibility of patents on human knowledge, serving the interests of market domination and the profitability of the big multinational corporations of the sector.
Svet za konkurenco je 18. maja 2004 dosegel političen dogovor o predlogu direktive o patentiranju izumov, ki se uporabljajo v računalništvu, kar odpira vrata patentom na področju programske opreme.
On 18 May 2004, the Competition Council reached a political agreement on the proposal for a directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions, that opens the door to software patents.
Svet potem ni več formalno glasoval o dogovoru, ne le zaradi vse večjega nasprotovanja s strani gibanj, ki se zavzemajo za brezplačno programsko opremo, softverskih hiš, programerjev, znanstvenikov in celo nekaterih nacionalnih parlamentov, ampak tudi zaradi dejstva, da je nizozemski nacionalni parlament od svoje vlade zahteval, da umakne podporo predlogu direktive, tj. da glasuje proti doseženemu političnemu sporazumu.
The Council has not had a formal vote on the agreement since then, due not only to the growing opposition from the free software movement, software houses, programmers, scientists, small and medium-sized enterprises and even some national parliaments, but also to the fact that the Dutch national parliament has asked its government to withdraw its support for this proposal for a directive, i.e. to vote against the political agreement reached.
Glede na splošno nasprotovanje posledicam predloga direktive, ki bi ustvarila ovire inovacijam in tehnološkemu razvoju, zakaj Komisija tega predloga ne umakne?
In view of the broad opposition to the consequences of this proposal for a directive that will create obstacles to innovation and technological development, why does the Commission not withdraw this proposal for a directive?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0064/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0064/04
Zadeva: Sklep Sveta o pristopu Turčije
Subject: Council decision concerning the accession of Turkey
Evropski svet bo moral 17. decembra sprejeti sklep (na podlagi mnenja Komisije z dne 6. oktobra o izpolnjevanju kopenhagenskih meril) o tem, ali naj se s Turčijo pričnejo pogajanja o pristopu.
On 17 December 2004 the European Council will have to take a decision (based on the opinion issued by the Commission on 6 October concerning compliance with the Copenhagen criteria) on whether or not to open accession negotiations with Turkey.
Ali lahko Komisija v luči pričakovanj te odločitve presodi izpolnjevanja kopenhagenskih meril s strani Turčije?
Will the Commission carry out an assessment of Turkey's compliance with the Copenhagen criteria in preparation for the taking of the above decision?
Ali Komisija meni, da bo Svet upošteval njeno mnenje?
Does the Commission think that the Council will take the Commission's opinion into consideration?
Kako presojate nedavno delovanje Turčije v vlogi države kandidatke?
How are the most recent actions taken by Turkey in its capacity as an applicant country to be viewed?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0065/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0065/04
, v imenu Odbora za zunanje zadeve
, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Zadeva: Pomoč Evropske unije za obnovo balkanske regije
Subject: European Union's aid for reconstruction in the Balkan region
Katere (nove) pobude načrtuje Svet za zagotavljanje nadaljnje regionalne integracije znotraj držav Balkana (zlasti na področju infrastrukture, izobraževanja, problema beguncev, boja proti kriminalu, kulture)?
What (new) initiatives does the Council foresee with a view to ensuring further regional integration between the Balkan countries (with particular regard to infrastructure, education, the refugee problem, the fight against crime, and culture)?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0066/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0066/04
Katere nove pobude načrtuje Komisija za usmerjanje pomoči Evropske unije Balkanu in katere (nove) načrte ima za zagotavljanje nadaljnje regionalne integracije znotraj držav Balkana (zlasti na področju infrastrukture, izobraževanja, problema beguncev, boja proti kriminalu, kulture)?
What new measures is the Commission taking to streamline the European Union's aid for reconstruction in the Balkan region, and what (new) plans does it have to ensure further regional integration between the Balkan countries (with particular regard to infrastructure, education, the refugee problem, the fight against crime, and culture)?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0067/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0067/04
, v imenu Začasni odbor za politične izzive in proračunska sredstva razširjene Unije 2007-2013
, on behalf of the Temporary committee on policy challenges and budgetary means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013
Zadeva: Priprave naslednjega finančnega načrta
Subject: Preparation of the next financial perspective
Priprave naslednjega finančnega načrta so eden glavnih izzivov za Unijo v prihodnjih nekaj letih.
The preparation of the next financial perspective is one of the major challenges to be faced by the Union over the next few years.
Parlament je v svojem poročilu v 5. zakonodajnem obdobju spomnil, da "finančni načrt ne bo sprejet brez soglasja med Evropskim parlamentom in Svetom o finančnem svežnju ukrepov, saj v Pogodbi ni opredeljeno, da je finančni načrt nujen, ampak so omenjeni le letni proračuni ( A5-0268/04 )".
In the report that it adopted during its fifth parliamentary term, Parliament notes that ‘there will be no financial perspective without an agreement between the European Parliament and the Council on the financial package, as the existing Treaty foresees no obligation to have a financial perspective and only provides for annual budgets’ ( A5-0268/04 ).
Z začetkom veljavnosti Ustave za Evropo se vloga Evropskega parlamenta ne bo spremenila, večletni finančni okvir pa bo postal evropski zakon po sklepu Sveta in po pridobitvi soglasja oziroma po usklajevanju z Evropskim parlamentom.
The entry into force of the Constitution for Europe does not change the role of the European Parliament and provides for the multiannual framework to become a European law determined by the Council after obtaining the consent of, and following conciliation with, the European Parliament.
Na kakšen način namerava Svet sodelovati s Parlamentom znotraj sedanjega in bodočega institucionalnega okvirja?
Given the current and future institutional context, how does the Council intend to cooperate with Parliament?
Ali lahko Svet opiše ukrepe, ki jih namerava sprejeti za vzpostavitev strukturiranega političnega dialoga, predvidenega v skupni izjavi, ki jo je institucija sprejela julija 2004?
Can Council indicate the measures which it intends to put in place so as to guarantee the structured political dialogue provided for in the joint declaration adopted by the Institution in July 2004?
Ali lahko predsedstvo poda okvirni časovni razpored?
Can the Presidency outline the Council calendar?
Je Svet pripravljen pristati na vsakomesečni tristranski dialog treh predsedstev s pričetkom januarja 2005, ki bi zagotovil učinkovito izmenjavo informacij?
Is the Council ready to accept a monthly trialogue with the three presidencies, beginning in January 2005, so as to ensure an effective exchange of information?
Je "Prodijev paket" temelj za delovanje Sveta?
Does Council regard the ‘Prodi package’ as its working basis?
Kakšne povezave po mnenju Sveta obstajajo med predlogi Komisije za nov finančni okvir in težavami z lastnimi sredstvi?
In the Council's view, what connection exists between the Commission's proposals on the new financial perspective and the issue of own resources?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0068/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0068/04
Komisija je 10. februarja pričela s pripravo novega finančnega okvira s sprejetjem prvega sporočila, ki zastavlja politične cilje v razširjeni Uniji z namenom spoprijeti se političnimi izzivi ob danih proračunskih sredstvih do leta 2013.
On 10 February 2004, the Commission initiated the process for the preparation of the new financial perspective by adopting an initial communication which set out the political goals for the enlarged Union with the aim of matching policy challenges to budgetary resources between now and 2013.
Komisija je 14. julija sprejela vrsto sporočil, ki konkretnim predlogom načel omogoča, da so vključena v februarskem sporočilu.
On 14 July 2004, the Commission adopted a series of communications which put forward form proposals in connection with the principles set out in the February communication.
Da bi zagotovila kontinuiteto je Komisija sprejela tudi vrsto zakonodajnih predlogov, ker večina veljavne zakonodaje preneha veljati v letu 2006.
In order to ensure continuity, the Commission has also adopted a number of legislative proposals, since most current legislation expires in 2006.
Člen 26 Medinstitucionalnega sporazuma z dne 6. maja 1999 predvideva, da 'bo Komisija predstavila predloge novega srednjeročnega finančnega načrta do julija 2005'.
However, Article 26 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 provides that 'before 1 July 2005 the Commission will present proposals for a new medium term financial perspective'.
Upoštevaje navedeno, do kakšne mere lahko Komisija, ravnokar potrjena s strani Evropskega parlamenta, podpira:
Given the above, how far can the Commission recently confirmed by the European Parliament endorse:
strukturo novega finančnega okvira trajanje novega finančnega načrta, ki ga bosta prevzela prihodnja Komisija in prihodnji Evropski parlament vse predloge tako imenovanega 'Prodijevega paketa'
the structure of the new financial perspective the duration of the new financial programme which will commit the next Commission and the next European Parliament all the proposals in what is known as the 'Prodi package',
ali meni, da bi to morali ponovno prilagoditi in če, v katerih točkah?
or does it consider that it should be readjusted and, if so, on which issues?
Ali je Komisija pripravljena upoštevati prednostne naloge drugih institucij?
Is the Commission ready to take account of other institutions' priorities?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0069/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0069/04
Zadeva: Okvir za uravnotežen razvoj nogometa v EU
Subject: Framework for the balanced development of football in the EU
Parlament je v svoji resoluciji Komisijo pozval, da v športu podpre strukture samouprave, ki spodbujajo solidarnost ter trening in razvoj igralcev tako v manjših lokalnih kot velikih, mednarodno priznanih klubih.
In its resolution , Parliament called on the Commission to support structures of self-government within sport that promote solidarity and the training and development of players, as much in small local clubs as in the major internationally-recognised ones.
V več državah članicah razvoj mladih igralcev ni več optimalen, zaradi česar je vloga nogometa kot dejavnika socialne vključenosti ogrožena.
In several Member States, this development of young players is no longer optimal, as a result of which the function of football as a factor for social inclusion is threatened.
Katere ukrepe je Komisija sprejela ali namerava sprejeti glede na Helsinško poročilo?
What measures has the Commission already taken, or does it intend to take, as a follow-up to the Helsinki report?
Katere pobude bo Komisija ob koncu letošnjega evropskega leta izobraževanja skozi šport sprejela za okrepitev vloge nogometa v družbi in pri vključevanju v družbo (ki je sedaj močno ogrožena)?
At the end of this European Year of Education through Sport, what measures does the Commission intend to take in order to strengthen the social and integrating role of football (that is now severely under pressure)?
Kakšno je mnenje Komisije glede predlogov, katerih namen je od klubov zahtevati, da v svoje vrste sprejmejo določeno število igralcev, usposobljenih v državi, kjer ima klub svoj sedež, in na ta način prispevati k razvoju in motivaciji mladih igralcev ter okrepiti družbeno vlogo nogometnih klubov?
What is the Commission's opinion of proposals designed to force clubs to field a certain number of players who were trained in the country where the club is established in order to contribute to the development and the motivation of young players and, hence, strengthen the social role of football clubs?
Ali se Komisija strinja, da je treba dovoliti in celo spodbujati nacionalne subvencije za vadbene centre zasebnih nogometnih ekip, namenjene mladim igralcem?
Does the Commission agree that national subsidies for youth training centres belonging to private football teams has to be allowed and even encouraged?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0070/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0070/04
Zadeva: Razvoj nogometa v EU
Subject: Development of football in the EU
Komisija je v Helsinškem poročilu o športu napovedala ukrepe za okrepitev socialne in izobraževalne vloge športa v Evropski uniji.
In the Helsinki report on sport , the Commission announced measures to strengthen the social and educational role of sport in the European Union.
Eden od teh ukrepov je bil trening mladih športnikov.
One of these measures was the training of young sportsmen and women.
Šport, v tem primeru nogomet, ima na splošno pomembno vlogo pri razvoju socialne kohezije.
Sport in general - in this case, football - plays an important role in developing social cohesion.
V več državah članicah razvoj mladih igralcev ni več optimalen, zaradi česar je vloga nogometa kot dejavnika socialne vključenosti ogrožena.
In several Member States, development of young players is no longer optimal, as a result of which the function of football as a factor of social inclusion is threatened.
Kaj namerava Komisija storiti glede na Helsinško poročilo?
What does the Commission plan to do as a follow-up to the Helsinki report?
Kako Komisija gleda na prihodnost ključne vloge nogometa pri pospeševanju socialne kohezije?
How does the Commission see the future of football’s key role in the promotion of social cohesion?
Kakšno je mnenje Komisije glede nedavnih predlogov Evropske nogometne zveze (UEFA) o (a) morebitni kvoti za domače igralce (b) "Vlaganju v trening igralcev na lokalni ravni"?
What does the Commission think about the recent UEFA proposals on (a) a possible quota for locally developed players and (b) ‘Investing in Local Training of Players’?
Poročilo Komisije Evropskemu svetu o ohranitvi sedanjih športnih struktur in varstvu družbene vloge športa v okviru Skupnosti - Helsinško poročilo o športu - KOM(1999)0644 /končno
Commission report to the European Council with a view to safeguarding current sports structures and maintaining the social function of sport within the Community framework - the Helsinki Report on sport - COM(1999)644 /final.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0071/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0071/04
, v imenu Odbora za kmetijstvo
, on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture
Zadeva: Prihodnja reforma CTMO za sladkor
Subject: Forthcoming reform of the common organisation of the markets in sugar
Komisija je 14. julija 2004 predstavila poročilo z naslovom 'Izdelava trajnostnega evropskega modela kmetijstva z novo skupno kmetijsko politiko (SKP) - reforma sektorja za sladkor'.
On 14 July 2004, the Commission presented a communication entitled: 'Accomplishing a sustainable agricultural model for Europe through the reformed CAP - sugar sector reform'.
To poročilo je povzročilo veliko zaskrbljenost pri proizvajalcih sladkorne pese in sladkornega trsa znotraj Evropske unije, kot tudi v državah, ki so z Evropsko unijo povezane s protokolom SKP o sladkorju.
That communication has caused major uncertainties among sugar beet and sugar cane producers, not only in the European Union but also in countries associated with the European Union under the ACP Sugar Protocol.
Sicer pa je Evropska unija obsodila STO zaradi njenega sistema subvencij izvoznikom sladkorja in se je glede tega sklepa pritožila na prizivni organ te organizacije.
What is more, the European Union has been censured by the WTO because of its subsidies on sugar exports, and it has appealed against that decision before that organisation's arbitration body.
Ali Evropska Komisija lahko pove:
Can the new Commission indicate:
Ali podpira zgoraj omenjeno poročilo z dne 14. julija 2004?
1. whether it supports the communication dated 14 July 2004 referred to above,
Kdaj namerava predstaviti svoj predlog reforme CTMO za sladkor in katere naj bi bile njene glavne točke?
2. when it intends to present its proposal for a reform of the common organisation of the market in sugar and what the main thrust thereof might be,
Ali namerava ohranjati trajnostno proizvodnjo sladkorja v Evropski uniji in potrditi svoje sedanje obveznosti do AKP in Indije, kot tudi tiste v okviru pobude 'vse razen orožja'?
3. whether it intends to maintain sustainable sugar production in the European Union and confirm the Union's current commitments vis-à-vis the ACP States and India, as well as those given under the 'Everything But Arms' initiative?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0072/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0072/04
, v imenu skupine ALDE ,
, on behalf of the ALDE Group,
Zadeva: Predlog Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o pospeševanju prodaje na notranjem trgu - KOM(2001)0546 /končno, COD(2001)0227, KOM(2002)0585 /končno
Subject: Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation concerning sales promotions in the Internal Market - COM(2001)0546 /final, COD(2001)0227, COM(2002)0585 /final
Glede na velik pomen, ki ga ima predlog uredbe o pospeševanju prodaje za lizbonsko agendo, smo presenečeni nad neuspehom Sveta pri doseganju političnega sporazuma o skupnem stališču.
In view of the high relevance to the Lisbon Agenda of the proposal for a regulation on sales promotions, we are taken aback at the Council's failure to achieve political agreement on a common position.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0073/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0073/04
Zadeva: Predlog Uredbe Sveta in Evropskega parlamenta o pospeševanju prodaje na notranjem trgu - KOM(2001)0546 /končno, COD(2001)0227, KOM(2002)0585 /končno
Subject: Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation concerning sales promotions in the Internal Market - COM(2001)0546 /final, COD(2001)0227, COM(2002)0585 /final
Ali bi Komisija lahko razložila, katere korake bo naredila za rešitev težav in katere bi bile posledice neuspeha pri doseganju političnega sporazuma, zlasti v smislu obveznosti, ki jih imajo države članice do lizbonske strategije?
Could the Commission explain what steps it is taking to resolve the difficulties and what the implications of failure to reach political agreement would be, in particular in terms of the Member States' commitment to the Lisbon Strategy?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0074/04
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0074/04
Zadeva: Potrditev Komisije
Subject: Approval of Commission