natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ali bo Komisija izvedla oceno učinka odprtja trga poštnih storitev na podlagi člena 9 Lizbonske pogodbe, ki določa, da Unija pri določanju in izvajanju svojih politik upošteva zahteve v zvezi z zagotavljanjem ustrezne socialne varnosti?
Will the Commission carry out an impact assessment of the postal market opening based on Article 9 of the Lisbon Treaty, which stipulates that the Union shall take into account requirements related to the guarantee of adequate social protection when defining and implementing its policies?
Poleg tega bi morale države članice v skladu z direktivo izvesti študije o izračunu neto stroškov obveznosti univerzalne storitve in o izbranem načinu za zagotavljanje povrnitve financiranja teh neto stroškov.
Moreover, according to the Directive Member States should carry out studies concerning the calculation of net costs of the universal service obligation and the way chosen to ensure the recovery of the financing of such net costs.
Kdaj bodo države članice po mnenju Komisije pripravile te študije?
When does the Commission expect Member States to deliver these studies?
Ali Komisija lahko zajamči, da bodo države članice zagotovile, da se bo pošta pobirala pri strankah in dostavljala do njih povsod, tudi tistim na odmaknjenih podeželskih območjih, vsaj petkrat tedensko, v skladu z obveznostjo univerzalne storitve?
How can the Commission guarantee that Member States will ensure that mail will be collected from and delivered to customers everywhere, including those in remote rural areas, at least five days a week, in accordance with the universal service obligation?
Zaradi finančne krize se evropsko gospodarstvo še vedno sooča s številnimi težavami.
As a result of the financial crisis the European economy is still facing many difficulties.
Ali lahko Komisija pripravi poročilo o napredku pri izvajanju Direktive (pred 31. decembrom 2013, kot je določeno v členu 23), ki poudarja najbolj kritične dogodke v zvezi s krizo, zlasti glede gospodarskih in socialnih vprašanj?
Can the Commission prepare a progress report on the implementation of the Directive (before 31 December 2013 as set out in Article 23) which points out the most critical developments related to the crisis, especially as regards economic and social issues?
UL L 52, 27.2.2008, str.3.
OJ L 52, 27.2.2008, p.3.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0115/2010
Question for oral answer O-0115/2010
v imenu Odbora za promet in turizem Zadeva: Zabojniki, ki se izgubijo na morju, in odškodnina
on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism Subject: Containers lost at sea and compensation
Na nedavnem enajstem tristranskem ministrskem srečanju območja Wattenmeer je bilo izpostavljeno vprašanje o naraščajočem številu ladijskih zabojnikov, ki jih plovila izgubijo v tej regiji.
The recent 11th trilateral Wadden Sea Ministerial Conference highlighted the increased number of shipping containers lost overboard from vessels in the region.
Panoga ocenjuje, da se v evropskih vodah vsako leto izgubi več kot 2000 ladijskih zabojnikov.
Industry estimates suggest that more than 2 000 shipping containers are lost overboard in EU waters each year.
Oceno je potrdil tudi raziskovalni projekt Lashing@Sea, ki ga je izvedel nizozemski institut MARIN, v katerem je bilo ugotovljeno, da so glavni razlogi, zaradi katerih se tovor zabojnikov podre, slabo privezovanje, pretežki zabojniki in neprimerna razporeditev tovora.
This has been backed up by the Lashing@Sea research project, undertaken by the MARIN Institute in the Netherlands, which found that the main reasons for container stack collapses were faulty lashings, overweight containers and inaccurate stowage.
Posadke na večjih plovilih tudi težko ocenijo, kdaj se težki tovori premikajo proti premcu ali krmi zaradi vremena, kar na teh območjih lahko poveča vertikalni pospešek prek omejitev, predvidenih v zasnovi plovila.
In addition, crews on larger vessels have difficulty in assessing when severe loads are moving forward and aft owing to weather conditions, which can amplify vertical acceleration in these areas beyond the vessel’s design specifications.
Poleg tega za nestrupene snovi ni konvencije o odškodnini zaradi objektivne odgovornosti, velja zgolj konvencija LLMC iz leta 1996, kar za države članice in obalne skupnosti lahko pomeni velike stroške zaradi uveljavljanja zahtevkov za odškodnine za čistilne operacije prek sodnih postopkov.
Moreover, the absence of a strict liability compensation convention for non-toxic substances – only the 1996 Protocol to the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims is applicable – means that Member States and coastal communities face the potentially prohibitive cost of pursuing compensation for cleanup operations through the courts.
Ali namerava Komisija, glede na število zabojnikov, izgubljenih v vodah EU, pregledati ugotovitve projekta Lashing@Sea in v skladu z njimi sprejeti ukrepe, s katerimi se bodo postopki privezovanja zabojnikov in oprema izboljšali?
Given the number of containers lost overboard in EU waters, does the Commission intend to review the results of the Lashing@Sea project and act on its findings in order to improve container lashing procedures and equipment?
Ker sta dodatna faktorja pri izgubah zabojnikov prevelika teža in neprimerna razporeditev tovora, kako namerava Komisija urediti to področje, da bi zagotovila, da bodo vsi zabojniki stehtani in ustrezno naloženi, preden plovilo izpluje?
Given that overweight and inaccurately stowed containers are factors that contribute to container losses, how does the Commission intend to regulate in order to ensure that all containers are weighed in port and are correctly stowed before vessels head to sea?
Glede na dejstvo, da veliko zabojnikov ni nikoli najdenih in lahko vsebujejo nevarne snovi, ali se Komisija strinja, da je treba preučiti uporabo avtomatskih svetlobnih signalov, ki bi jih pomagali locirati?
Given that many lost containers are not retrieved and may contain hazardous substances, does the Commission agree that the use of automatically activated beacons to aid container location should be investigated?
Kako namerava Komisija zapolniti vrzel v sistemu odškodnin in zagotoviti, da bodo primeri onesnaževanja z nestrupenimi snovmi, ki ga povzročijo ladje za prevoz zabojnikov, vključeni v konvencijo o objektivni odgovornosti?
Finally, how does it plan to close the gap in the compensation regime and ensure that pollution incidents involving non-toxic pollution from container ships are covered by a strict liability convention?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0116/2010
Question for oral answer O-0116/2010
v imenu skupine ALDE Zadeva: Sporazumi Skupnosti s tretjimi državami o ponovnem sprejemu
on behalf of the ALDE Group Subject: EU readmission agreements with third countries
Od začetka veljavnosti Lizbonske pogodbe ima Evropski parlament večja pooblastila pri odobritvi mednarodnih sporazumov.
Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, Parliament has increased powers of consent in relation to international agreements.
Kot zakonodajni organ z novo odgovornostjo, Parlament upravičeno pričakuje, da se bo lahko ob temeljitem poznavanju vprašanj odločal o teh sporazumih.
Given its new legislative responsibilities, Parliament has every right to expect to be able to make fully informed decisions on such agreements.
Komisijo poziva, naj vzpostavi mehanizem vrednotenja sporazumov o ponovnem sprejemu, ki mu bo omogočil, da bo lahko dal utemeljeno odobritev.
It is therefore asking the Commission to introduce an evaluation mechanism for readmission agreements that will enable it to give its consent on proper grounds.
Ta splošni mehanizem naj odgovori na naslednja vprašanja:
This comprehensive mechanism should provide answers to the following questions:
Katera jamstva lahko Komisija nudi Evropskemu parlamentu glede preglednosti in pravice do obveščenosti pri pogajanjih o teh sporazumih?
What guarantees can the Commission give Parliament regarding the transparency of the negotiations on such agreements and the right to be informed thereon?
Ali se lahko Komisija zaveže, da bo Parlament redno in sistematično obveščala o razpravah o sporazumih, ki potekajo v skupnih odborih?
Will the Commission undertake to provide Parliament with regular reports on all ongoing discussions in joint committees on readmission agreements?
Katera jamstva lahko Komisija da glede spoštovanja človekovih pravic v primeru tretjih držav, ki niso podpisnice Ženevske konvencije?
What guarantees can the Commission provide that human rights will be respected in cases where third countries are not parties to the Geneva Convention?
Ali naj ne bi EU prenovila merila, ki se jih uporablja pri pogajanjih o sporazumih o poenostavitvi vizumskih postopkov tako, da bi med pogoje vključila zahtevo po podpisu Ženevske konvencije, pa tudi drugih konvencij o varovanju temeljnih pravic?
Should the EU not include the signing of the Geneva Convention and other conventions protecting fundamental rights among the criteria used in negotiations on visa facilitation agreements?
Ali je Komisija pripravljena podpreti vzpostavitev mehanizma spremljanja sporazumov o ponovnem sprejemu in vrednotenja posledic njihovega izvajanja za ponovno sprejete osebe?
Is the Commission prepared to commit itself to implementing this mechanism for monitoring readmission agreements and evaluating the consequences of their implementation for readmitted persons?
Tak mehanizem se mora osredotočiti na položaju ponovno sprejetih državljanov tretjih držav, zlasti oseb, ki so bile v tranzitu preko držav, ki so predmet pogodbe, pa tudi oseb brez državljanstva.
Such a mechanism should focus on the situation of readmitted third country nationals, particularly persons having transited through countries covered by the agreements and stateless persons.
Sistematično mora urediti tudi sodelovanje in izmenjavo podatkov z ustreznimi mednarodnimi organizacijami (nevladnimi organizacijami, Mednarodno organizacijo za migracije in drugimi), za zagotovitev zbiranja statističnih podatkov in kar natančnejše vrednotenje posledic teh sporazumov za ponovno sprejete osebe.
It should also institutionalise cooperation and the exchange of information with the relevant international organisations (NGOs, International Organisation for Migration, etc.), with a view to compiling statistics and evaluating as precisely as possible the impact of these readmission agreements on readmitted persons.
Skupina ALDE Komisijo na koncu tudi poziva k nadaljnjim prizadevanjem za oblikovanje usklajene skupne azilne politike, ki bo zagotavljala, da se sporazumi o ponovnem sprejemu s tretjimi državami ne bodo v nobenem primeru uporabljali za osebe, ki bi jim bilo treba priznati status begunca.
Finally, the ALDE Group calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to establish a coherent common asylum policy that will ensure that readmission agreements with third countries are never applied to persons who should be given refugee status.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0117/2010/rev.1
Question for oral answer O-0117/2010/rev.1
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Vzajemno priznavanje istospolnih zakonskih zvez in partnerskih skupnosti
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: Mutual recognition of marriages and civil partnerships contracted by same-sex couples
Pravica državljanov EU do prostega gibanja, zlasti znotraj okvira, opredeljenega z Direktivo 2004/38/ES , vključuje določbe o prostem gibanju njihovih zakoncev in je v pristojnosti Evropske unije.
EU citizens’ right to freedom of movement, within the framework defined by Directive 2004/38/EC in particular, includes provision for the freedom of movement of their legal spouses and is a clear competence of the European Union.
Poročilo Agencije za temeljne pravice z naslovom Homofobija in diskriminacija zaradi spolne usmerjenosti v državah članicah EU: prvi del - pravna analiza (2008) , pa tudi peticije volivcev in dokazi, ki jih je zbrala civilna družba, kažejo, da velika večina držav članic gostiteljic ne priznava zakonskih zvez ali partnerskih skupnosti, ki jih v skladu z zakonom sklenejo državljani istega spola.
The FRA (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights) report Homophobia and Discrimination on grounds of Sexual Orientation in the EU Member States: Part I - Legal Analysis (2008), constituents’ petitions and evidence gathered by civil society demonstrate that an overwhelming majority of host Member States fail to recognise the marriages or civil partnerships legally contracted by citizens of the same sex.
To pomeni neizvrševanje direktive 2004/38/ES v celoti in vodi do diskriminatornih situacij v zvezi s fiskalnimi, premoženjskimi in davčnimi zadevami, varstvom in vzgojo otrok, urejanjem stikov, pravico dedovanja in konzularnimi zadevami.
This constitutes a failure to fully implement Directive 2004/38/EC and leads to discriminatory situations with respect to financial, property and taxation affairs, custody, visiting and inheritance rights, and consular affairs.
Evropski parlament je v svoji resoluciji o Stockholmskem programu ( P7_TA(2009)0090 ) pozval države članice „naj brez poseganja v nacionalno družinsko zakonodajo zagotovijo svobodo gibanja državljanom EU in njihovim družinam, vključno z registriranimi partnerstvi in zakonskimi zvezami [...] pri tem pa naj se izognejo vsaki diskriminaciji na vseh podlagah, vključno z diskriminacijo na podlagi spolne usmerjenosti“.
In its resolution on the Stockholm programme ( P7_TA(2009)0090 ), the European Parliament called on Member States, ‘without prejudice to national legislation on family law, to ensure freedom of movement for EU citizens and their families, including both registered partnerships and marriages [...], and to avoid all kinds of discrimination on any ground, including sexual orientation’.
V nasprotju s tem sporočilo Komisije z naslovom Akcijski načrt izvajanja stockholmskega programa (KOM(2010)171 in z njim povezano obvestilo 10/139) ne gre tako daleč, da bi predlagalo ukrepe za olajšanje prostega gibanja istospolnih parov, ki so sklenili zakonske zveze ali partnerske skupnosti v skladu z zakonom in za katere bi moral veljati člen 2.2(a)(b) omenjene direktive.
By contrast, the Commission communication ‘Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme’ (COM(2010)0171 and the related Memo/10/139) stops short of proposing measures to facilitate the freedom of movement of same-sex couples in legally contracted marriages or civil partnerships, who should come under Article 2(2)(a) and (b) of the aforementioned Directive.
· Ali po mnenju Komisije velja za zakonce, ki sklenejo zakonske zveze v skladu z zakonom v Belgiji, na Nizozemskem, Portugalskem, v Španiji ali na Švedskem, člen 2.2(a) Direktive 2004/38/ES?
· According to the Commission, do spouses united by marriages legally contracted in Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain or Sweden come under Article 2.2(a) of Directive 2004/38/EC?
· Ali Komisija meni, da nepriznavanje v skladu z zakonom sklenjenih zakonskih zvez med partnerjema istega spola pomeni diskriminacijo zaradi spolne usmerjenosti?
· Does the Commission consider that failing to recognise legally contracted marriages between two spouses of the same sex constitutes discrimination based on sexual orientation?
· Ali Komisija ob upoštevanju člena 10 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije meni, da bi moral člen 2.2(a)(b) Direktive 2004/38/ES enako veljati za pare v pravno priznanih zakonskih zvezah in partnerskih skupnostih?
· In the light of Article 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, does the Commission consider that Article 2(2)(a) and (b) of Directive 2004/38/EC should apply both to couples in legally recognised marriages and those in legally recognised civil partnerships?
· Kaj bo Komisija naredila glede diskriminacije, s katero se spopadajo istospolni partnerji v pravno priznanih zvezah, ki želijo uveljavljati svojo pravico do svobode gibanja?
· How will the Commission address the discrimination encountered by same-sex couples in legally-recognised unions seeking to exercise their right to freedom of movement?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0118/2010
Question for oral answer O-0118/2010
v imenu skupine ALDE Zadeva: Diskriminacija istospolnih partnerjev, svoboda gibanja, pravice LGBT, časovni načrt EU
on behalf of the ALDE Group Subject: Discrimination against same-sex couples, freedom of movement, LGBT rights, EU Roadmap
Akcijski načrt Komisije za uresničitev Stockholmskega programa in drugi dokumenti načrtovanja Komisije ne vsebujejo nikakršnih posebnih in konkretnih novih pobud, povezanih s pravicami LGBT in bojem proti homofobiji.
The Commission Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme and other Commission planning documents do not include any specific and concrete new initiative on LGBT rights and the fight against homophobia.
Vzajemno priznavanje istospolnih parov bodisi poročenih, v civilnem partnerstvu, zunajzakonskih bodisi de facto, se ne omenja, ne glede na člen 67 (4) Pogodbe o Evropski uniji o uporabi načela vzajemnega priznavanja v civilnih zadevah, člen 81 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije o pravosodnem sodelovanju s čezmejnimi posledicami ali člen 19 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, ki Unijo obvezuje, „da sprejme ustrezne ukrepe za boj proti diskriminaciji na podlagi.. …spolne usmerjenosti.”
Mutual recognition of same-sex couples, either married, in a civil partnership, cohabiting or de facto, is not addressed, notwithstanding Article 67(4) TEU on the application of the principle of mutual recognition in civil matters, Article 81 TFEU on judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-borders implications, or Article 19 TFEU, mandating the Union to ‘take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on ... sexual orientation’.
To pomanjkanje vzajemnega priznavanja ima posledice tudi v povezavi z uporabo Direktive 2004/38/EC o pravici državljanov Unije in njihovih družinskih članov do prostega gibanja, saj si večina držav restriktivno in napačno tolmači člena 2 in 3 v povezavi z istospolnimi partnerji , kar strogo nasprotuje členoma 2 in 3(3) Pogodbe o Evropski uniji in členoma 10 in 19 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, zlasti pa členu 21 Listine o temeljnih človekovih pravicah.
Such lack of mutual recognition also has consequences in the context of the application of Directive 2004/38/EC on free movement of EU citizens and of their families, since most Member States apply a restrictive and incorrect interpretation of Articles 2 and 3 in relation to same-sex couples , which is in striking contrast with Articles 2 and 3(3) TEU and 10 and 19 TFEU, and notably with Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Evropski parlament je izrazil strogo kritiko in države članice pozval, naj ponovno pregledajo svojo zakonodajo, od Komisije pa zahteval, naj izda stroge smernice – na podlagi analize in sklepov iz poročila Agencije za človekove pravice o homofobiji–za zagotavljanje spoštovanja vzajemnega priznavanja, enakosti, nediskriminacije, dostojanstva in spoštovanja zasebnega in družinskega življenja.
The EP expressed strong criticism, urged Member States to review their laws and called on the Commission to issue strict guidelines – drawing on the analysis and conclusions contained in the Fundamental Rights Agency report on homophobia – to guarantee the application of mutual recognition, equality, non-discrimination, dignity, and respect for private and family life.
Prebivalci EU še vedno doživljajo diskriminacijo na podlagi spolne usmerjenosti in spolne identitete, ali pa ne dobivajo ustrezne zaščite ali podpore, kot na primer transseksualni in transspolni; nekatere države članice spolne usmerjenosti ne priznavajo kot zavezujoči razlog za priznavanje azila na podlagi kvalifikacijske direktive; okvirni sklep o boju proti rasizmu in ksenofobiji se ne nanaša na homofobijo; nekatere države članice imajo zakone, po katerih so informacije o istospolnih parih škodljive za mladoletne.
Within the EU, people continue to face discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity, or lack appropriate protection or support, as in the case of transsexual and transgender persons; some Member States do not recognise sexual orientation as a binding reason to recognise asylum on the basis of the qualification directive; the Framework Decision on racism and xenophobia does not apply to homophobia; some Member States have laws that consider information on same-sex couples as harmful to minors.
Na mednarodni ravni bi morali tudi pospešiti mednarodno ukrepanje EU proti kriminalizaciji in preganjanju oseb LGBT.
At international level, EU international action against the criminalisation and persecution of LGBT persons should be also stepped up.
Katere konkretne pobude, ukrepe in programe namerava izvesti Komisija v podporo zgoraj omenjenih zadev?
What concrete initiatives, actions and programmes will the Commission be taking and promoting on the abovementioned issues?
Ena od držav članic (Poljska) na primer svojim državljanom noče izdati dokumentov o civilnem statusu, ki so potrebni za registracijo istospolnega partnerstva v tujini.
For instance, a Member States (Poland) denies the civil status documents to its citizens which are needed to contract same-sex partnerships abroad.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0119/2010
Question for oral answer O-0119/2010
v imenu Odbora za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja Zadeva: Razmere na področju čebelarstva
on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development Subject: The situation in the beekeeping sector
V poročilu Komisije o uporabi člena 105 in naslednjih Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1234/2007, ki se nanašajo na ukrepe za izboljšanje pogojev za proizvodnjo in trženje čebelarskih proizvodov (KOM(2010)0267) z dne 28. maja 2010 sta poudarjena uporabnost nacionalnih čebelarskih programov, ki so sofinancirani iz proračuna EU, ter njihov ugoden učinek na evropski sektor čebelarstva.
The Commission report of 28 May 2010 on the implementation of Articles 105 et seq. of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 on measures improving the general conditions for the production and marketing of apiculture products (COM(2010)0267) highlights the usefulness of national apiculture programmes co-financed from the EU budget and their positive impact on the European beekeeping sector.
Vendar pa številni izzivi in težave, s katerimi se sooča evropsko čebelarstvo, vzbujajo zaskrbljenost.
Still, there are concerns about the numerous challenges and problems faced by the European apiculture sector.
Čebelarjem in drugim izvajalcem na tem področju v EU je treba omogočiti, da bodo lahko načrtovali svoje prihodnje dejavnosti, saj je prihodnost politike po letu 2013 negotova.
EU beekeepers and other operators in the sector need to be able to plan their future activities, as the future of the policy after 2013 is uncertain.
Komisijo poziva, naj odgovori na naslednja vprašanja:
The Commission is invited to answer the following questions:
Kako in kdaj se namerava ugodno odzvati na zahteve držav članic in izvajalcev iz poročila z maja 2010?
How and when does the Commission intend to respond positively to the requests from both Member States and operators which are contained in the May 2010 report?
Kako bodo namenska sredstva EU med letoma 2010 in 2012 razdeljena med države članice ?
How will the earmarked EU funding be distributed among Member States between 2010 and 2012?
Ali je Komisija pripravljena vključiti čebelje bolezni v veterinarsko politiko, kot je zahteval Parlament v svoji resoluciji z 20. novembra 2008?
Is the Commission prepared to include bee diseases in its veterinary policy, as requested by Parliament in its Resolution of 20 November 2008?
Ali namerava Komisija glede na to, da je opraševanje s čebelami nujno potrebno za orne pridelke, sadje in zelenjavo, oblikovati akcijski načrt za boj proti kolapsu čebeljega roja?
Given that Europe’s arable, fruit and vegetable crops depend on pollination by bees, will the Commission establish an action plan for tackling colony collapse disorder?